D. James Kennedy, founder of Evangelism Explosion, dies

[Steve Hayes]

D. James Kennedy, the minister of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida
USA, was widely known as the originator of the "Evangelism Explosion" method
of training people in evangelism.

I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a associated
with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had known, perhaps I
might not have been so accepting of his evangelism training method.

Obituary follows:

http://origin.mercurynews.com/religion/ci_6806668

The Rev. D. James Kennedy, a pioneering megachurch pastor who became
one of the nation's most prominent Christian broadcasters and a key
figure in the rise of the religious right, died Wednesday, a church
spokesman said. He was 76.
Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church spokesman John Aman said Kennedy died
at about 2:15 a.m. at his home in Fort Lauderdale. He had suffered a
heart attack in December and announced his retirement last month.

Kennedy took the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale
from a congregation of 45 in 1959 to a megachurch of nearly 10,000
members today.

He also founded the Center for Christian Statesmanship in Washington,
organizing Capitol Hill Bible studies and other events that attracted
top government officials and encouraged them "to embrace God's
providential purpose for this nation."

In 1974, Kennedy started Coral Ridge Ministries, his radio and TV
outreach arm, which now claims a weekly audience of 3.5 million.
Kennedy's TV show "The Coral Ridge Hour," airs on more than 400
stations and four cable networks and is broadcast to more than 150
countries on the Armed Forces Network, his ministry says. Last year,
the National Religious Broadcasters association inducted him into
their Hall of Fame.

"He was one of the early visionaries who saw that you could use
electronic media to extend the four walls of the church to reach a
broader audience," said Frank Wright, president and chief executive
officer of the NRB.

Kennedy was also a close colleague of the Rev. Pat Robertson, the Rev.
Jerry Falwell and other religious broadcasters and was an early board
member of the Moral Majority, which Falwell formed in 1979. But
Kennedy wasn't nearly as well-known as other conservative Christian
activists, preferring a behind-the-scenes role that helped maintain
his independence, said John Green, senior fellow at the Pew Forum for
Religion & Public Life.

"He was never in the front ranks of evangelical leaders that were also
political leaders, but he was active at every stage of the Christian
right," Green said. "He was certainly a very influential figure and
associate of all of the more prominent Christian right figures."

In 1996, Kennedy formed the Center for Reclaiming America for Christ,
to mobilize conservative Christians "on the key fronts of the modern-
day culture war," including marriage, pornography, creationism and
"judicial tyranny," according to the group's Web site. The center
closed earlier this year.

However, Green said the pastor did so only when older religious right
groups, such as the Christian Coalition, seemed to be losing
influence.

Kennedy, whose church is affiliated with the theologically
conservative Presbyterian Church in America, was much more out front
when it came to evangelism.

In the 1960s, when many conservative Christians were still debating
how much they should engage the broader culture, Kennedy jumped in. He
created Evangelism Explosion International, which trains lay
Christians to share their beliefs in every day life.

"That simple goal is now widely adopted in evangelical churches and
widely accepted, but at the time he started it, it wasn't," Wright
said.

Kennedy was raised in Chicago and earned a bachelor's degree from the
University of Tampa, master's degrees from Columbia Theological
Seminary and the Chicago Graduate School of Theology, and a doctorate
from New York University. He was the author of more than 50 books and
also founded two schools-Knox Theological Seminary and Westminster
Academy, a K-12 Christian school near his church.

Kennedy is survived by his wife of 51 years, Anne, and a daughter,
Jennifer Kennedy Cassidy. Funeral arrangements were not immediately
announced.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes
D. James Kennedy, the minister of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in
Florida USA, was widely known as the originator of the "Evangelism
Explosion" method of training people in evangelism.
I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a
associated with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had
known, perhaps I might not have been so accepting of his evangelism
training method.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._James_Kennedy#Criticism_and_controversy

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS, "Americans
United" or simply AU), a religious freedom advocacy group, has criticized
Kennedy's founding of Center for Reclaiming America for being "just another
Religious Right outfit obsessed with opposing legal abortion and gay rights
and bashing public education."[29] AUSCS also says that "Kennedy's ministry
has always promoted right-wing politics," and "it isn't uncommon to tune in
to "The Coral Ridge Hour" and hear him preach against legal abortion,
anti-discrimination protections for gays or the teaching of evolution in
public schools." AUSCS also criticized Kennedy and his ministry for that it
"frequently sends out fund-raising appeals." such as, "One recent letter
asked for funds to stop PBS stations from airing a 'homosexual-propaganda
program' called It's Elementary."

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has strongly criticized[30] the
neo-creationist documentary produced by the Coral Ridge Ministries Darwin's
Deadly Legacy,[31] which attempts to link evolution to Hitler: "This is an
outrageous and shoddy attempt by D. James Kennedy to trivialize the horrors
of the Holocaust. Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to
exterminate the Jewish people. Trivializing the Holocaust comes from either
ignorance at best or, at worst, a mendacious attempt to score political
points in the culture war on the backs of six million Jewish victims and
others who died at the hands of the Nazis." The ADL further denounced
Kennedy as "a leader among the distinct group of 'Christian Supremacists'
who seek to 'reclaim America for Christ' and turn the U.S. into a Christian
nation guided by their strange notions of biblical law." The ADL's response
also quotes scientist Francis Collins, who was cited in the show as
supporting its views, repudiating it, saying he was "absolutely appalled by
what Coral Ridge Ministries is doing. I had NO knowledge that Coral Ridge
Ministries was planning a TV special on Darwin and Hitler, and I find the
thesis of Dr. Kennedy's program utterly misguided and inflammatory,".[32]
Coral Ridge Ministries described the ADL's criticisms in a press
release[33] as "harsh" and "unfounded" while reiterating points made in the
documentary, along with citing Scottish anatomist and anthropologist Sir
Arthur Keith who the center cites as saying in the 1940s, "The German
F hrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist. He has
consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of
evolution". Furthermore, Daniel Lapin, a Jewish Orthodox rabbi, issued a
statement[34] criticizing the ADL for what he claims was a
miscategorization of Jewish opinion, and said "...the ADL, though filled
with good intent, is utterly, completely clueless." Also, the center
released a statement[35] concerning the ADL's quote of Dr. Francis Collins
saying he was misled in the documentary, saying that he signed a "Talent
release," giving the center rights to use his statements, and denying that
Collins had "NO knowledge that Coral Ridge Ministries was planning a TV
special on Darwin and Hitler" as the ADL put it.

Kennedy has also hosted Christian Reconstructionists Rousas John Rushdoony
and Gary North on his program. However, he denounced any attempts to link
him to Reconstructionist movement as a McCarthyist technique of guilt by
association, and that he does not approve of their theology.[36][37]
Dominionism represents the political theory which springs from Christian
Reconstructionism.[38] Frederick Clarkson argues that despite his denial,
Kennedy meets the criteria for being a dominionist.[39]

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
D. James Kennedy, the minister of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in
Florida USA, was widely known as the originator of the "Evangelism
Explosion" method of training people in evangelism.
I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a
associated with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had
known, perhaps I might not have been so accepting of his evangelism
training method.

...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._James_Kennedy#Criticism_and_controversy
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS, "Americans
United" or simply AU), a religious freedom advocacy group, has criticized
Kennedy's founding of Center for Reclaiming America for being "just another
Religious Right outfit obsessed with opposing legal abortion and gay rights
and bashing public education."[29] AUSCS also says that "Kennedy's ministry
has always promoted right-wing politics," and "it isn't uncommon to tune in
to "The Coral Ridge Hour" and hear him preach against legal abortion,
anti-discrimination protections for gays or the teaching of evolution in
public schools." AUSCS also criticized Kennedy and his ministry for that it
"frequently sends out fund-raising appeals." such as, "One recent letter
asked for funds to stop PBS stations from airing a 'homosexual-propaganda
program' called It's Elementary."

There is, however, nothing in the "Evangelism Explosion" materials to suggest
that, and Kennedy became know thoughout the world as the originator of
"Evangelism Explosion", those unsavoury bits simply weren't known.

Post by George
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has strongly criticized[30] the
neo-creationist documentary produced by the Coral Ridge Ministries Darwin's
Deadly Legacy,[31] which attempts to link evolution to Hitler: "This is an

I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source, however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its genocide
denial.

Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

[l***@hotmail.com]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a
associated with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had
known, perhaps I might not have been so accepting of his evangelism
training method.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS, "Americans
United" or simply AU), a religious freedom advocacy group, has criticized
Kennedy's founding of Center for Reclaiming America for being "just another
Religious Right outfit obsessed with opposing legal abortion and gay rights
and bashing public education."

Well, I think you two will soon have this place all to yourself and us
old conservatives who hold to Bible doctrine will be where we were
meant
to be from before the beginning -in heaven with Christ.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
D. James Kennedy, the minister of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in
Florida USA, was widely known as the originator of the "Evangelism
Explosion" method of training people in evangelism.
I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a
associated with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had
known, perhaps I might not have been so accepting of his evangelism
training method.

...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._James_Kennedy#Criticism_and_controversy
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS, "Americans
United" or simply AU), a religious freedom advocacy group, has criticized
Kennedy's founding of Center for Reclaiming America for being "just another
Religious Right outfit obsessed with opposing legal abortion and gay rights

...

Post by Steve Hayes
There is, however, nothing in the "Evangelism Explosion" materials to
suggest
that, and Kennedy became know thoughout the world as the originator of
"Evangelism Explosion", those unsavoury bits simply weren't known.

Post by George
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has strongly criticized[30] the
neo-creationist documentary produced by the Coral Ridge Ministries Darwin's
Deadly Legacy,[31] which attempts to link evolution to Hitler: "This is an

I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source,
however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its
genocide
denial.
Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

Then perhaps you could explain why Coral Ridge ministries misrepresented
Dr. Francis Collins in their anti-evolution 'documentary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins

A documentary titled "Darwin's Deadly Legacy" by the Coral Ridge Ministries
released in August 2006 originally advertised that it featured Collins and
claims to "show why evolution is a bad idea that should be discarded into
the dustbin of history." However, in email exchanged with science blogger
PZ Myers, Collins was "unambiguous in stating that he was interviewed about
his book, and that was then inserted into the video without his
knowledge."[4] When asked by the Anti-Defamation League why he agreed to
appear in such a production, Collins stated that he was "absolutely
appalled by what Coral Ridge Ministries is doing. I had NO knowledge that
Coral Ridge Ministries was planning a TV special on Darwin and Hitler, and
I find the thesis of Dr. Kennedy's program utterly misguided and
inflammatory."[5] Collins' name has since been removed from the Coral Ridge
Ministries' promotional site[6]; however, the interview segment was left in
place.

George

[George]

Post by l***@hotmail.com

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
I was not aware, until I read this obituary, that he was also a
associated with the notorious "religious right" in the USA. If I had
known, perhaps I might not have been so accepting of his evangelism
training method.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS, "Americans
United" or simply AU), a religious freedom advocacy group, has criticized
Kennedy's founding of Center for Reclaiming America for being "just another
Religious Right outfit obsessed with opposing legal abortion and gay rights
and bashing public education."

Well, I think you two will soon have this place all to yourself and us
old conservatives who hold to Bible doctrine will be where we were
meant
to be from before the beginning -in heaven with Christ.

That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell) and
gang for us. While you are at it, you could maybe say hi to Santa Claus
and the flying spaghetti monster for us. Maybe after all these old
conservatives pass away, the rest of us can continue to lead a normal life
without worrying about being accosted on the street and being accused of
being "evil satan spawn" because we haven't "repented our evil secular
ways". Good day to you.

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

Then perhaps you could explain why Coral Ridge ministries misrepresented

I'm not sure who you're addressing here -- your message appears in my reader
as a response to "George".

So who are you expecting to provide an explanation?

I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the "Evangelism
Explosion" materials.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell) and
gang for us. While you are at it, you could maybe say hi to Santa Claus
and the flying spaghetti monster for us. Maybe after all these old
conservatives pass away, the rest of us can continue to lead a normal life
without worrying about being accosted on the street and being accused of
being "evil satan spawn" because we haven't "repented our evil secular
ways". Good day to you.

Forry, I haven't a clue what you are on about>

Are you in the habit of talking gibberish in viva voce conversation as well as
in electronic forums.

If you intended what you wrote to convey any meaning, perhaps you could
restate it in plain English.

Bear in mind that these forums are international, and perhaps if you try
really hard you could overcome your ethnocentrism and chauvinism just enough
to realise that not everyone shares your cultural presuppositions, and not
everyone is capable of understanding your obscure allusions.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

Then perhaps you could explain why Coral Ridge ministries misrepresented

I'm not sure who you're addressing here -- your message appears in my
reader
as a response to "George".
So who are you expecting to provide an explanation?

I don't know why you would see it in your reader as a response to "George".
I see it in my reader as a response to "Steve Hayes", and my intention was
as a response to "Steve Hayes".

Post by Steve Hayes
I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins is, and,
as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the
"Evangelism
Explosion" materials.

Well, it wouldn't, would it. I mean, why would it advertize that Coral
Ridge ministries had been dishonest in their "expose" demonizing evolution?
That just wouldn't do, would it?\

Dr. Collins was the first researcher to sequence the human genome.

George

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell)
and
gang for us. While you are at it, you could maybe say hi to Santa Claus
and the flying spaghetti monster for us. Maybe after all these old
conservatives pass away, the rest of us can continue to lead a normal
life
without worrying about being accosted on the street and being accused of
being "evil satan spawn" because we haven't "repented our evil secular
ways". Good day to you.

Forry, I haven't a clue what you are on about>
Are you in the habit of talking gibberish in viva voce conversation as
well as
in electronic forums.
If you intended what you wrote to convey any meaning, perhaps you could
restate it in plain English.
Bear in mind that these forums are international, and perhaps if you try
really hard you could overcome your ethnocentrism and chauvinism just
enough
to realise that not everyone shares your cultural presuppositions, and
not
everyone is capable of understanding your obscure allusions.

Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism. That's most amusing.

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Dr. Collins was the first researcher to sequence the human genome.

Bully for him.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism. That's most amusing.

Wow, an ethnocentric chauvinist accusing me of being a Bible-thumper!

Where do we go next? Ad hominems?

Hmmm we seem to have arrived there already.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by George

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell)
and

[snip]

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism.

Steve H. is not a "Bible thumper" and you _are_ ethnocentric. Why, just the fact
that you call him a "Bible thumper" is evidence enough of your ethnocentricity,
yet your previous posts provide much more evidence.

[snip]

[Steve Hayes]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by George

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell)
and

[snip]

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism.

Steve H. is not a "Bible thumper" and you _are_ ethnocentric. Why, just the fact
that you call him a "Bible thumper" is evidence enough of your ethnocentricity,
yet your previous posts provide much more evidence.

"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little
of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and sabbath-breaking,
and from that to incivility and procrastination."

Thomas de Quincey

[George]

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by George

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell)
and

[snip]

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism.

Steve H. is not a "Bible thumper" and you _are_ ethnocentric. Why, just
the fact
that you call him a "Bible thumper" is evidence enough of your
ethnocentricity,
yet your previous posts provide much more evidence.

Is that a fact? And just what ethnic group do you believe I belong to,
Matt? Yeah. Steve Hayes is not a Bible thumper like I'm Carl Sagan.

George

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism. That's most amusing.

Wow, an ethnocentric chauvinist accusing me of being a Bible-thumper!
Where do we go next? Ad hominems?

That would be "ad Hominem" - singular.

Post by Steve Hayes
Hmmm we seem to have arrived there already.

Don't want to have an ad hominem thrown in your direction? Don't throw
them at me. (ethnocentrism and chauvinism, if I'm not mistaken, and I'm
not, were the words you chose in describing me in your last post). If you
don't understand the discussion (we were discussing Dr. Francis Collins and
what he actually said as opposed to what Coral Ridge ministries claimed
that he said), then don't bother responding. If you decide you want to
respond, don't come armed with a water pistol. The least you could do is
figure out what the discussion is all about. It's not my job to
internationalize your ability to comprehend what is posted in this or any
other forum.

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Don't want to have an ad hominem thrown in your direction? Don't throw
them at me. (ethnocentrism and chauvinism, if I'm not mistaken, and I'm
not, were the words you chose in describing me in your last post). If you
don't understand the discussion (we were discussing Dr. Francis Collins and
what he actually said as opposed to what Coral Ridge ministries claimed
that he said), then don't bother responding. If you decide you want to
respond, don't come armed with a water pistol. The least you could do is
figure out what the discussion is all about. It's not my job to
internationalize your ability to comprehend what is posted in this or any
other forum.

It must be emphasized, once again, that the notion of level of
grammaticalness can be defined in such a way as to impose a general
convention regarding the forms of the grammar. Clearly, a descriptively
adequate grammar is not subject to the requirement that branching is not
tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol. On our
assumptions, any associated supporting element is not quite equivalent to
the system of base rules exclusive of the lexicon. So far, the descriptive
power of the base component cannot be arbitrary in the levels of
acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d)).
Let us continue to suppose that a case of semigrammaticalness of a
different sort does not affect the structure of irrelevant intervening
contexts in selectional rules.

[b***@juno.com]

Post by Steve Hayes
I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the "Evangelism
Explosion" materials.

Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian who was the head of the
recently finished sequencing of the human genome.

I've read his book. He believes in evolution, and is an evangelical.
Thus, he gets everybody angry.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by George

Post by Matthew Johnson

Post by George

Post by George
That's just great. I'm happy for you. Say hi to uncle Jerry (Falwell)
and

[snip]

Post by George
Wow, a Bible thumper accusing me of ethnocentrism.

Steve H. is not a "Bible thumper" and you _are_ ethnocentric. Why, just
the fact
that you call him a "Bible thumper" is evidence enough of your
ethnocentricity,
yet your previous posts provide much more evidence.

Is that a fact?

Yes, it is.

Post by George
And just what ethnic group do you believe I belong to,
Matt?

Modernist dialectical materialist, or perhaps just logical positivist.

Post by George
Yeah. Steve Hayes is not a Bible thumper like I'm Carl Sagan.

Take the hint, George. Nobody else in this NG has _ever_ made the gross error
you made, that of calling Steve H. a "Bible thumper". Admit your mistake and
learn from it.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by Matthew Johnson
Take the hint, George. Nobody else in this NG has _ever_ made the gross error
you made, that of calling Steve H. a "Bible thumper". Admit your mistake and
learn from it.

Since George has said he feels under no obligation to explain any of his
obscure cultural references to people outside his own country (yet expresses
surprise at this behaviour being described as ethnocentric), perhap sme of his
fellow-countrymen could help to solve the mystery of his cryptic utterances.

Let me recap:

I posted an obituary of D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian minister who was well
known in various parts of the world for developing the "Evangelism Explosion"
method of exangelism training, and expressed surprise that he was described as
being associated with the "religious right".

George then posted something to explain this, but included in the material he
posted was something from the Anti-Defamation League, which itself appears to
be part of the religious right with strong neocon links, and has recently been
involved in some controversy over its denial of the Armenian genocide.

I therefore didn't find that perticularly helpful, except possibily on the
principle that "it takes one to know one" -- i.e. that it takes one member of
the religious right, the Anti-Defamation League, to recognise that D. James
Kennedy was also a member of the religious right, except that the material
posted suggested that they disagreed with each other, so its explanatory value
was limited. The ADL calling D. James Kennedy a member the religious right is
a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

George then demanded that I "explain" something to do with this Collins
fellow, whom (at that point) I had never heard of. It seemed to be a very
question-begging comment, since I was the one seeking explanations and I
failed to see how demanding that I "explain" something would help to answer my
question about D. James Kennedy's connection with the religious right.

So I pointed out that I was seeking explanations, and did not understand his
demand that I should "explain" things about people I had never heard of.

He then responded with something so full of obscure cultural references that
it was almost completely incomprehensible, and he has now said that he sees no
reason to say what it means (and yet is surprised that his refusal to do so
should be seen as ethnocentric).

Now apart from the fairly obvious inference that he is simply a troll, does
anyone from his culture and society have any clues about what he is talking
about? Is there any meaning that can be extracted from his utterances in this
thread? If so, perhaps they could pass them on if they are worth passing on.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by b***@juno.com

Post by Steve Hayes
I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the "Evangelism
Explosion" materials.

Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian who was the head of the
recently finished sequencing of the human genome.

Thanks for the info. I also just stumbled across a web page about him using
Stumble Upon.

Post by b***@juno.com
I've read his book. He believes in evolution, and is an evangelical.
Thus, he gets everybody angry.

Well, I can see that he might get anti-evolutionists and anti-evangelicals
angry -- but "everybody"?

I know that people who think those issues are really, really important are
quite vociferous in some newsgroups, but I suspect that the noise they make is
way out of proportion to their numbers.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

If you don't understand the discussion (we were discussing Dr. Francis
Collins and
what he actually said as opposed to what Coral Ridge ministries claimed
that he said), then don't bother responding. If you decide you want to
respond, don't come armed with a water pistol. The least you could do is
figure out what the discussion is all about. It's not my job to
internationalize your ability to comprehend what is posted in this or any
other forum.

It must be emphasized, once again, that the notion of level of
grammaticalness can be defined in such a way as to impose a general
convention regarding the forms of the grammar. Clearly, a descriptively
adequate grammar is not subject to the requirement that branching is not
tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol. On our
assumptions, any associated supporting element is not quite equivalent to
the system of base rules exclusive of the lexicon. So far, the
descriptive power of the base component cannot be arbitrary in the levels of
acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg
(98d)). Let us continue to suppose that a case of semigrammaticalness of a
different sort does not affect the structure of irrelevant intervening
contexts in selectional rules.

Word salad.

George

[Paul]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:37:47 GMT, Matthew Johnson
I posted an obituary of D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian minister who was
well
known in various parts of the world for developing the "Evangelism
Explosion"
method of exangelism training, and expressed surprise that he was
described as
being associated with the "religious right".
George then posted something to explain this, but included in the material
he
posted was something from the Anti-Defamation League, which itself appears
to
be part of the religious right with strong neocon links, and has recently
been
involved in some controversy over its denial of the Armenian genocide.

<snip>

Not trying to intervene, and definitely not trying to speak for George,
but....

The hopefully obvious explanation of this particular conundrum is that this
is an example of why catch-all terms like "religious right" are often more
misleading or confusing than enlightening..... (I also dislike the term
"conservative Christian" that is often used in the USA, for the same reason.
In fact, I dislike "conservative" and "liberal" in general, and especially
when applied in religious or theological discussions. Hmm, perhaps I just
dislike categorization on the whole..... ;-)

Anyway, back to the debate.......

In Christ,
Paul

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Word salad.

Exactly.

If you post word salad and refuse to explain it, then the only possible
response is more of the same.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by b***@juno.com

Post by Steve Hayes
I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins is, and,
as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the
"Evangelism
Explosion" materials.

Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian who was the head of the
recently finished sequencing of the human genome.

Thanks for the info. I also just stumbled across a web page about him
using
Stumble Upon.

Umm, I pointed this out earlier in the thread, and you accused me of being
"ethnocentric" and questioned why I brought him into the conversation.
Biff points out the exact same facts, and you thank him for the info. Are
you always this disingenuous?

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by b***@juno.com
I've read his book. He believes in evolution, and is an evangelical.
Thus, he gets everybody angry.

Well, I can see that he might get anti-evolutionists and
anti-evangelicals
angry -- but "everybody"?

You do realize, of course, that the term "evolutionist" is a derogatory
term used by radical evangelicals to demonize anyone who subscribes to the
theory of evolution, right? That that term is not used in scientific
circles, right?

Post by Steve Hayes
I know that people who think those issues are really, really important
are
quite vociferous in some newsgroups, but I suspect that the noise they
make is
way out of proportion to their numbers.

As opposed to the rather small minority who take the Bible literally and
think that somehow that it can be used as a science textbook?

George

[George]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:37:47 GMT, Matthew Johnson

Post by Matthew Johnson
Take the hint, George. Nobody else in this NG has _ever_ made the gross
error
you made, that of calling Steve H. a "Bible thumper". Admit your mistake
and
learn from it.

Since George has said he feels under no obligation to explain any of his
obscure cultural references to people outside his own country (yet
expresses
surprise at this behaviour being described as ethnocentric), perhap sme
of his
fellow-countrymen could help to solve the mystery of his cryptic
utterances.
I posted an obituary of D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian minister who was
well
known in various parts of the world for developing the "Evangelism
Explosion"
method of exangelism training, and expressed surprise that he was
described as
being associated with the "religious right".

Except that D. James Kennedy WAS associated with the religious right in the
United States - very heavily asssociated with it. He just wasn't as
visible as others (such as Jerry Falwell and company). Perhaps you just
didn't know his politics that well. He was known in some circles as the
"Godfather" of the Dominionists. If you don't know what that is, perhaps
you should look it up as well.

George then posted something to explain this, but included in the
material he
posted was something from the Anti-Defamation League, which itself
appears to
be part of the religious right with strong neocon links, and has recently
been
involved in some controversy over its denial of the Armenian genocide.

ADL? Part of the Religious Right? In the United States? Hahahaha.
That's kind of like saying that the KKK is associated with the democratic
party (which, of course, it is not). The material I posted came from
Wikipedia, not the ADL, although they were referred in the article.
Perhaps you need to read up on Kennedy's long history of racial, religious
and ethnic bigotry, and his stance on Dominionism.

I therefore didn't find that perticularly helpful, except possibily on
the
principle that "it takes one to know one" -- i.e. that it takes one
member of
the religious right, the Anti-Defamation League, to recognise that D.
James
Kennedy was also a member of the religious right, except that the
material
posted suggested that they disagreed with each other, so its explanatory
value
was limited. The ADL calling D. James Kennedy a member the religious
right is
a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I take it that you are not from the United States. That would explain your
confusion about 'rightwing' and 'leftwing' political movements in the U.S.
Clue: They are not quite the same as they are in the UK. The ADL is
certainly not affiliated with the religious right in the United States, nor
with the Republican party. The goal of the ADL is to fight bigotry,
anti-Semitism, and extremism. Kennedy was nothing if not an extremist and
a bigot.

George then demanded that I "explain" something to do with this Collins
fellow, whom (at that point) I had never heard of. It seemed to be a very
question-begging comment, since I was the one seeking explanations and I
failed to see how demanding that I "explain" something would help to
answer my
question about D. James Kennedy's connection with the religious right.

I figured you would have enough intelligence to do a web seach and figure
out the connection. I even provided you with a starting point. Obviously I
was mistaken in my assuption.

So I pointed out that I was seeking explanations, and did not understand
his
demand that I should "explain" things about people I had never heard of.

You brought up Kennedy, did you not? You appear to have an infatuation
with the guy, so I thought I'd best point out why that might not be such a
good idea. Obviously, you don't know as much about Kennedy as you thought
you did.

He then responded with something so full of obscure cultural references
that
it was almost completely incomprehensible, and he has now said that he
sees no
reason to say what it means (and yet is surprised that his refusal to do
so
should be seen as ethnocentric).

And you made the statement:

"I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source,
however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its genocide
denial"

Without substantiating the claim. What part of the religious right do you
consider the ADL to be a part of? And what act of genocide do you think
the ADL denies?

Now apart from the fairly obvious inference that he is simply a troll,
does
anyone from his culture and society have any clues about what he is
talking
about? Is there any meaning that can be extracted from his utterances in
this
thread? If so, perhaps they could pass them on if they are worth passing
on.

Steve, speaking of trolls...

George

[George]

Post by Paul

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:37:47 GMT, Matthew Johnson
I posted an obituary of D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian minister who

..

Post by Paul

method of exangelism training, and expressed surprise that he was
described as being associated with the "religious right".

...

Post by Paul
The hopefully obvious explanation of this particular conundrum is
that this is an example of why catch-all terms like "religious
right" are often more misleading or confusing than enlightening.....
(I also dislike the term "conservative Christian" that is often used
in the USA, for the same reason. In fact, I dislike "conservative"
and "liberal" in general, and especially when applied in religious
or theological discussions. Hmm, perhaps I just dislike
categorization on the whole..... ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right
The Christian Right is a movement of social and political advocacy by
Christian fundamentalists.[1] The term originated in the United States and
has been subsequently used by scholars and journalists to refer to a
spectrum of right-wing Christian political and social movements and
organizations characterized by their strong support of conservative social
and political values. The "Christian Right" is not a united or unitary
movement, containing persons and groups a wide variety of theological
beliefs, with different agendas or focuses. Among those who might be
considered to part of the Christian Right are those from moderately
traditional movements within Lutheranism and Catholicism to theologically
more conservative movements such as Evangelicalism, Pentecostalism and
Fundamentalist Christianity.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
I posted an obituary of D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian minister who was
well
known in various parts of the world for developing the "Evangelism
Explosion"
method of exangelism training, and expressed surprise that he was
described as
being associated with the "religious right".

Except that D. James Kennedy WAS associated with the religious right in the
United States - very heavily asssociated with it. He just wasn't as
visible as others (such as Jerry Falwell and company). Perhaps you just
didn't know his politics that well. He was known in some circles as the
"Godfather" of the Dominionists. If you don't know what that is, perhaps
you should look it up as well.

As I said, I didn't know his politics at all -- that's why I was asking.

"Dominionists" - is that associated with a bloke called Rushdoony and
"theonomy"?

I've heard of it, but don't know much about it. I gather it has nothing to do
with Roland Allen and the World Dominion movement.

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
George then posted something to explain this, but included in the
material he
posted was something from the Anti-Defamation League, which itself
appears to
be part of the religious right with strong neocon links, and has recently
been
involved in some controversy over its denial of the Armenian genocide.

ADL? Part of the Religious Right? In the United States? Hahahaha.
That's kind of like saying that the KKK is associated with the democratic
party (which, of course, it is not). The material I posted came from
Wikipedia, not the ADL, although they were referred in the article.
Perhaps you need to read up on Kennedy's long history of racial, religious
and ethnic bigotry, and his stance on Dominionism.

I beg to differ on the question of the ADL. Everything I've read about it
places it pretty firmly on the "religious right", as a political tendency
rather than as an actual organisation.

Or is it known, for example, for taking a public stand against George Bush's
warmongering in the Middle East (which seems to be generally supported by the
"religious right")?

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
I therefore didn't find that perticularly helpful, except possibily on
the
principle that "it takes one to know one" -- i.e. that it takes one
member of
the religious right, the Anti-Defamation League, to recognise that D.
James
Kennedy was also a member of the religious right, except that the
material
posted suggested that they disagreed with each other, so its explanatory
value
was limited. The ADL calling D. James Kennedy a member the religious
right is
a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I take it that you are not from the United States. That would explain your
confusion about 'rightwing' and 'leftwing' political movements in the U.S.

A glance at my signature in most of my previous messages would have shown
that.

Post by George
Clue: They are not quite the same as they are in the UK. The ADL is
certainly not affiliated with the religious right in the United States, nor
with the Republican party. The goal of the ADL is to fight bigotry,
anti-Semitism, and extremism. Kennedy was nothing if not an extremist and
a bigot.

OK, I didn't know that the Religious Right was an actual organisation with
members, that one could affiliate with. I thought it was a somewhat amorphous
tendency rather than an actual organisation, and that it consisted of
religious groups that supported right-wing political causes.

Post by George
From what I've seen, though, the ADL *promotes* bigotry and racism.

See, for example:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/20/83355/9506

Post by George
You brought up Kennedy, did you not? You appear to have an infatuation
with the guy, so I thought I'd best point out why that might not be such a
good idea. Obviously, you don't know as much about Kennedy as you thought
you did.

Um, yes, obviously I didn't know as much about him as I thought I did so it
should be pretty obvious why I was asking.

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
He then responded with something so full of obscure cultural references
that
it was almost completely incomprehensible, and he has now said that he
sees no
reason to say what it means (and yet is surprised that his refusal to do
so
should be seen as ethnocentric).

"I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source,
however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its genocide
denial"
Without substantiating the claim. What part of the religious right do you
consider the ADL to be a part of? And what act of genocide do you think
the ADL denies?

The Turkish genocide of the Armenians.

See reference above.

And while we're on the subject of substantiating claims, perhaps you could
substantiate your claim about Kennedy being the "godfather" of the
Dominionists. Also a bit of substantiation of his "long history" of racial and
ethnic bigotry. I'm not denying it; I would just like to know.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by b***@juno.com
Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian who was the head of the
recently finished sequencing of the human genome.

Thanks for the info. I also just stumbled across a web page about him
using
Stumble Upon.

Umm, I pointed this out earlier in the thread, and you accused me of being
"ethnocentric" and questioned why I brought him into the conversation.
Biff points out the exact same facts, and you thank him for the info. Are
you always this disingenuous?

Are YOU always this disingenuous?

Biff gave a straightforward answer to a question.

It was informative, and as a result I knew something that I didn't know
before.

You responded to something I wrote with a non-sequitur, issuing a peremptory
demand that I "explainj" something about something I had never heard of.

Follow the syllogism:

Me: The ADL denies genocide.
You: THEN explain something about this Collins bloke.

Biff provided useful information. You made demands, like an SB interrogator,
for an explanation of something that was a complete non-sequitur.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/non%20sequitur

Or can you substantiate the connection you allege between Collins and the ADL
denial of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians?

If so, please would you help me to join the dots, because I'm finding the
argument very difficult to follow.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by Paul
The hopefully obvious explanation of this particular conundrum is that this
is an example of why catch-all terms like "religious right" are often more
misleading or confusing than enlightening..... (I also dislike the term
"conservative Christian" that is often used in the USA, for the same reason.
In fact, I dislike "conservative" and "liberal" in general, and especially
when applied in religious or theological discussions. Hmm, perhaps I just
dislike categorization on the whole..... ;-)

I agree that such terms are often used in a vague or misleading way. While it
is not directly relevant to the question wherther D. James Kennedy was
associated with the "religious right", I've been engaged in a discussion of
the meaning of "liberal" here:

http://tinyurl.com/2p32uw

because the word is used in so many different ways.

I've also seen "left" and "right" used in purely theological contexts, where i
haven't a clue what they mean, because I see them as priumarily political
terms, though even there they are often used vaguely.

But in general I understand "religious right" to encompass those who adduce
religious reasons for supporting right-wing political causes, which usually
include authoritarian government control at home and an aggressive foreign
policy.

The "Evangelism Explosion" materials gave no indication of Kennedy's political
views.

Post by Paul
Anyway, back to the debate.......
In Christ,
Paul

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by b***@juno.com
Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian who was the head of the
recently finished sequencing of the human genome.

Thanks for the info. I also just stumbled across a web page about him
using
Stumble Upon.

Umm, I pointed this out earlier in the thread, and you accused me of
being
"ethnocentric" and questioned why I brought him into the conversation.
Biff points out the exact same facts, and you thank him for the info.
Are
you always this disingenuous?

Are YOU always this disingenuous?
Biff gave a straightforward answer to a question.
It was informative, and as a result I knew something that I didn't know
before.
You responded to something I wrote with a non-sequitur, issuing a
peremptory
demand that I "explainj" something about something I had never heard of.
Me: The ADL denies genocide.
You: THEN explain something about this Collins bloke.
Biff provided useful information. You made demands, like an SB
interrogator,
for an explanation of something that was a complete non-sequitur.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/non%20sequitur
Or can you substantiate the connection you allege between Collins and the
ADL
denial of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians?
If so, please would you help me to join the dots, because I'm finding the
argument very difficult to follow.

You said: "I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins
is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the "Evangelism
Explosion" materials."

I responded: "Dr. Collins was the first researcher to sequence the human
genome." And that should have clued you in to what my earlier post was
about, and who Dr. Collins is. I don't think it could have been made any
plainer than that.

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
You said: "I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis Collins
is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the "Evangelism
Explosion" materials."
I responded: "Dr. Collins was the first researcher to sequence the human
genome." And that should have clued you in to what my earlier post was
about, and who Dr. Collins is. I don't think it could have been made any
plainer than that.

It didn't make it any less of a non sequitur, though.

You failed to make clear what Dr Francis Collins had to do with the ADL denial
of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.

Post by George
I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source,
however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its
genocide
denial.
Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

And you responded:

"Then perhaps you could explain why Coral Ridge ministries misrepresented
Dr. Francis Collins in their anti-evolution 'documentary:"

Does the spat between Dr Francis Collins and Coral Ridge Ministries prove that
the Turks didn't massacre the Armenians, or that the ADL didn't deny that they
had (and fire people for failing to deny it), or what?

Even knowing who Dr Francis Collins is doesn't answer *that* question.

But to get back to the main topic: can you provide some examples of D. James
Kennedy's "long history" of racial and ethnic bigotry?

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
You said: "I certainly can't, since I have no idea who Dr Francis
Collins
is, and, as
I've *already* pointed out, I've seen nothing about that in the
"Evangelism
Explosion" materials."
I responded: "Dr. Collins was the first researcher to sequence the human
genome." And that should have clued you in to what my earlier post was
about, and who Dr. Collins is. I don't think it could have been made any
plainer than that.

It didn't make it any less of a non sequitur, though.
You failed to make clear what Dr Francis Collins had to do with the ADL
denial
of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.

Of course I didn't. I wasn't talking about Turkish genocide, and in fact,
neither was anyone else at the time I posted the comments about Dr.
Collins. We were discussing Kennedy.

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
I wouldn't regard the "Anti-Defamation League" as a reliable source,
however,
since it is one KNOWN to be on the religious right because of its
genocide
denial.
Perhaps "it takes one to know one", however.

"Then perhaps you could explain why Coral Ridge ministries misrepresented
Dr. Francis Collins in their anti-evolution 'documentary:"
Does the spat between Dr Francis Collins and Coral Ridge Ministries prove
that
the Turks didn't massacre the Armenians, or that the ADL didn't deny that
they
had (and fire people for failing to deny it), or what?

Steve, my response was in response to your claim that the anti-defamation
league was not a reliable source (and then you gave a reason that had
nothing to do with either my point nor the ADL's complaint, but was simply
an attempt by you to "shoot the messenger", so to speak). Whether or not
the ADL denied that Armenian genocide occurred is irrelevant to the fact
that they complained about the documentary Coral Ridge ministries made
which attempted to link evolution to Hitler. In that documentary, they
cited quotes from Dr. Collins and included an interview with him. The
documentary made it look as if Dr. Collins was agreeing with their claims,
when in fact he wasn't. The point here is that Dr. Collin's complaint
backs up the accusations made by the ADL (of which Dr. Collins is certainly
NOT a member). Now, care to again explain what the Armenian genocide has
to do with this issue?

Post by Steve Hayes
Even knowing who Dr Francis Collins is doesn't answer *that* question.
But to get back to the main topic: can you provide some examples of D.
James
Kennedy's "long history" of racial and ethnic bigotry?

Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/7235393/the_crusaders/

http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/groups/center_for_recl/index.html

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Steve, my response was in response to your claim that the anti-defamation
league was not a reliable source (and then you gave a reason that had
nothing to do with either my point nor the ADL's complaint, but was simply
an attempt by you to "shoot the messenger", so to speak). Whether or not
the ADL denied that Armenian genocide occurred is irrelevant to the fact
that they complained about the documentary Coral Ridge ministries made
which attempted to link evolution to Hitler. In that documentary, they
cited quotes from Dr. Collins and included an interview with him. The
documentary made it look as if Dr. Collins was agreeing with their claims,
when in fact he wasn't. The point here is that Dr. Collin's complaint
backs up the accusations made by the ADL (of which Dr. Collins is certainly
NOT a member). Now, care to again explain what the Armenian genocide has
to do with this issue?

My point was that the genocide denial showed that the ADL was part of the
"religious right", and thus the mere fact that they disagreed with Kennedy on
some issues did not necessarily show that he was on the religious right, or it
could be that the religious right disagreed among themselves on some issues
(as no doubt they do).

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/7235393/the_crusaders/
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

That article is very interesting, several reasons.

For one thing it does show that Kennedy was on the religious right, and the
following links him to the "Dominionists":

"This dogma is virtually the same as R.J. Rushdoony and Gary North's radical
Christian Reconstructionism. In fact, Kennedy has called the Bible
commentaries by those men "essential" works."

It is also interesting in that we had someone who propounded similar views in
South Africa, one Francis Grim. He touted evangelism as a weapon in the fight
against communism, and propounded an ideology to "Save South Africa", and
founded a mission and evangelism organisation that I kept clear of because
it's basic motivation was political. It blatantly attempted to coopt God for
its own political agenda.

But there is not a hint of this kind of political agenda in the "Evangelism
explosion" materials. As I said, if there were I wouldn't have touched them
with a bargepole.

Of course Skipp Porteous, the author of the article, is a biased witness, and,
dare one say it, a religious bigot.

For example:

=3D=3D=3D quote =3D=3D=3D

Christian evangelism offends many, yet, it is perfectly legal. For Kennedy =97
and thousands of his ardent followers =97 it is the means by which Christians
can take over the country.

"You cannot force a Christian ethic on a non-Christian culture," Kennedy said.
"There is something very obvious _ though Christianity is growing in this
country, it is still far from being the controlling force. I am sure that only
a Christian-controlled country is going to be able to stand up to the
impending threat and avert the approaching disaster that our nation is
facing."

=3D=3D=3D quote =3D=3D=3D

"Christian evangelism offends many, yet, it is perfectly legal."

Skipp Porteous's religious bigotry likewise probably offends many, yet is
likewise perfectly legal.

On one point I would tend to agree with Kennedy -- that you cannot force a
Christian ethic on a non-Christian culture. Christian evangelism is
proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ; it is not moralising and telling
people how bad they are.

Where I would disagree is on the goal of "a Christian-controlled country" --
that seems too much like a power trip.

I didn't, however, see any examples of Kennedy's "long history" racial and
ethnic bigotry.

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

I've already thanked you for those links in another message, but for what it's
worth I've blogged about "Evangelism and the religiopus right" here:

http://khanya.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/evangelism-and-the-religious-right/

as a more general topic, though relating to the Porteus article in particular.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Steve, my response was in response to your claim that the anti-defamation
league was not a reliable source (and then you gave a reason that had
nothing to do with either my point nor the ADL's complaint, but was
simply
an attempt by you to "shoot the messenger", so to speak). Whether or not
the ADL denied that Armenian genocide occurred is irrelevant to the fact
that they complained about the documentary Coral Ridge ministries made
which attempted to link evolution to Hitler. In that documentary, they
cited quotes from Dr. Collins and included an interview with him. The
documentary made it look as if Dr. Collins was agreeing with their
claims,
when in fact he wasn't. The point here is that Dr. Collin's complaint
backs up the accusations made by the ADL (of which Dr. Collins is
certainly
NOT a member). Now, care to again explain what the Armenian genocide has
to do with this issue?

My point was that the genocide denial showed that the ADL was part of the
"religious right", and thus the mere fact that they disagreed with
Kennedy on
some issues did not necessarily show that he was on the religious right,
or it
could be that the religious right disagreed among themselves on some
issues
(as no doubt they do).

What denial? You have yet to provide evidence that they denied it.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/22/no_room_to_deny_genocide/

"Particularly deplorable has been the longtime reluctance (note the term
that is used here) of some leading Jewish organizations, including the
Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee, to call the first genocide of the 20th
century by its proper name. When Andrew Tarsy, the New England director of
the ADL, came out last week in support of a congressional resolution
recognizing the Armenian genocide, he was promptly fired by the national
organization. Shaken by the uproar that followed, the ADL finally backed
down. The murder of a million Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman Turks
in 1915, it acknowledged yesterday, was "indeed tantamount to genocide.""

Any questions.

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing
project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/7235393/the_crusaders/
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

That article is very interesting, several reasons.
For one thing it does show that Kennedy was on the religious right, and
the
"This dogma is virtually the same as R.J. Rushdoony and Gary North's
radical
Christian Reconstructionism. In fact, Kennedy has called the Bible
commentaries by those men "essential" works."
It is also interesting in that we had someone who propounded similar
views in
South Africa, one Francis Grim. He touted evangelism as a weapon in the
fight
against communism, and propounded an ideology to "Save South Africa", and
founded a mission and evangelism organisation that I kept clear of
because
it's basic motivation was political. It blatantly attempted to coopt God
for
its own political agenda.
But there is not a hint of this kind of political agenda in the
"Evangelism
explosion" materials. As I said, if there were I wouldn't have touched
them
with a bargepole.

I never said that it was. I was only pointing out Kennedy's political
agenda, which certainly is far more radical than most people realize.

Post by Steve Hayes
Of course Skipp Porteous, the author of the article, is a biased witness,
and,
dare one say it, a religious bigot.
=3D=3D=3D quote =3D=3D=3D
Christian evangelism offends many, yet, it is perfectly legal. For
Kennedy =97
and thousands of his ardent followers =97 it is the means by which
Christians
can take over the country.
"You cannot force a Christian ethic on a non-Christian culture," Kennedy
said.
"There is something very obvious _ though Christianity is growing in this
country, it is still far from being the controlling force. I am sure that
only
a Christian-controlled country is going to be able to stand up to the
impending threat and avert the approaching disaster that our nation is
facing."
=3D=3D=3D quote =3D=3D=3D
"Christian evangelism offends many, yet, it is perfectly legal."
Skipp Porteous's religious bigotry likewise probably offends many, yet is
likewise perfectly legal.

Umm, since Kennedy was a pundent who supported dominionism (the idea that
Christians should take over the country and make it "safe for Christianity"
only), I fail to see how pointing out the facts makes Skipp a bigot.

Post by Steve Hayes
On one point I would tend to agree with Kennedy -- that you cannot force
a
Christian ethic on a non-Christian culture. Christian evangelism is
proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ; it is not moralising and
telling
people how bad they are.

Yet Evangelicals do this all the time. Many evangelicals rail against gays
and gay lifestyles (some do this while secretly living the life of a gay -
Tedd Haggert, for instance). I can't tell you how many times evangelical
Christian have told me that if I am not 'saved' that I will go to hell.
Now, if that isn't moralizing and telling people how bad they are, I don't
know what is.

Post by Steve Hayes
Where I would disagree is on the goal of "a Christian-controlled
country" --
that seems too much like a power trip.

Yet they are deadly serious about it.

Post by Steve Hayes
I didn't, however, see any examples of Kennedy's "long history" racial
and
ethnic bigotry.

http://www.mediatransparency.org/storyprinterfriendly.php?storyID=146

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=192

"Coral Ridge Ministries shuts down two projects aimed at influencing the
political process"
"CRM spokesperson claims closing the Center for Reclaiming America for
Christ and the Center for Christian Statesmanship is not tied to founder D.
James Kennedy's ill health"

Now, I have to ask you, if these projects aimed to "reclaim America for
Christ" (which, of course, assumes that America ever belonged to Christ to
begin with), how do you think that makes Coral Ridge ministries look in the
eyes of many non-Christians? Answer: It makes them appear to be bigots.
Perhaps noticing the backlash, they've cancelled these projects. That they
promoted them in the first place says a lot about where their heads are at.

"One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to
abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize
pedophiles as the 'prophets' of a new sexual order." - the Family Research
Council, an organization that gets much of its funding from the same
organizations that fund Coral Ridge Ministries - namely the Orville D. and
Ruth A. Merillat Foundation, and others. These are all ultra-conservative
evangelical political/religious organizations which promote turning the
U.S. into a Christian theocracy, and are all admitted gay bashers. In
2006, Family Research Council spent more than a half million dollars to
promote a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in its home
state of Colorado.

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=1

And finally, Kennedy and others of his ilk have been quoted as saying that
they believe that the U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not
freedom "from" religion, which, of course, is a out and out lie.

George

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
Skipp Porteous's religious bigotry likewise probably offends many, yet is
likewise perfectly legal.

Umm, since Kennedy was a pundent who supported dominionism (the idea that
Christians should take over the country and make it "safe for Christianity"
only), I fail to see how pointing out the facts makes Skipp a bigot.

I'm not sure what a "pundent" is, it's not in my dictionary. The nearest word
to it was "pungent", which doesn't make sense in the context.

But it's not pointing out the facts that makes Porteous a bigot; it's the spin
he puts on them.

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
On one point I would tend to agree with Kennedy -- that you cannot force
a
Christian ethic on a non-Christian culture. Christian evangelism is
proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ; it is not moralising and
telling
people how bad they are.

Yet Evangelicals do this all the time. Many evangelicals rail against gays
and gay lifestyles (some do this while secretly living the life of a gay -
Tedd Haggert, for instance).

Indeed, lots of people do it. Perhaps Kennedy himself did it sometimes. I
nevertheless agree with his saying that one cannot force a Christian ethic on
a non-Christian culture.

Better examples of trying to force Christian ethics on non-Christian cultures
would be the Natural Foot Society, founded by Christian missionaries in China
to counter the Chinese custom of binding the feet of young girls so that they
would grow up with fashionably small feet.

Or the attempts by Christian missionaries in Kenya to get state support in
prohibiting the custom of female circumcision, and firing teachers at church
schools (at a time when *all* schools in the country were church schools) for
failing to take an oath against female circumcision. That one backfired on
them, when the Mau Mau movement adopted the practice of oath-taking, and
suddenly the Western Christian missionaries and the colonial givernment began
preaching against oath-taking as evil.

But when members of the Kikuyu tribe became Christian, they gradually
abandoned the practice of female circumcision. It was the attempt to force
Christian ethics on a non-Christian culture that got their backs up.

Post by George
I can't tell you how many times evangelical
Christian have told me that if I am not 'saved' that I will go to hell.
Now, if that isn't moralizing and telling people how bad they are, I don't
know what is.

That's a moot point.

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes
I didn't, however, see any examples of Kennedy's "long history" racial
and
ethnic bigotry.

http://www.mediatransparency.org/storyprinterfriendly.php?storyID=146
http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=192
"Coral Ridge Ministries shuts down two projects aimed at influencing the
political process"
"CRM spokesperson claims closing the Center for Reclaiming America for
Christ and the Center for Christian Statesmanship is not tied to founder D.
James Kennedy's ill health"
Now, I have to ask you, if these projects aimed to "reclaim America for
Christ" (which, of course, assumes that America ever belonged to Christ to
begin with), how do you think that makes Coral Ridge ministries look in the
eyes of many non-Christians? Answer: It makes them appear to be bigots.

That they supported right-wing political projects is clear enough. But I see
no evidence there of Kennedy's "long history" of racial and ethnic bigotry.
I'm not asking about *any* kind of bigotry. I'm asking for evidence of
specifically racial and ethnic bigotry.

Post by George
Perhaps noticing the backlash, they've cancelled these projects. That they
promoted them in the first place says a lot about where their heads are at.

And of course the same could be said about the ADL's denial of the Armenian
genocide. I'm glad if they have backed off, but that they denied it in the
first place says a lot about where their heads are at.

But that's neither here nor there now, because there seems to be enough
evidence from other quarters that Kennedy supported right-wing political
causes and was therefore a member of the religious right.

Post by George
"One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to
abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize
pedophiles as the 'prophets' of a new sexual order." - the Family Research
Council, an organization that gets much of its funding from the same
organizations that fund Coral Ridge Ministries - namely the Orville D. and
Ruth A. Merillat Foundation, and others. These are all ultra-conservative
evangelical political/religious organizations which promote turning the
U.S. into a Christian theocracy, and are all admitted gay bashers. In
2006, Family Research Council spent more than a half million dollars to
promote a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in its home
state of Colorado.
http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=1

Are gays a racial or ethnic group, then? Did Kennedy ever claim that they
were?

To my knowledge homosexuality and paedophilia are sexual orientations, not
races, and are found among all racial and ethnic groups. Did Kennedy ever say
otherwise?

Post by George
And finally, Kennedy and others of his ilk have been quoted as saying that
they believe that the U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not
freedom "from" religion, which, of course, is a out and out lie.

I fail to see any connection there with racial and ethnic bigotry.

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing
project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

I've already thanked you for those links in another message, but for what
it's
http://khanya.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/evangelism-and-the-religious-right/
as a more general topic, though relating to the Porteus article in
particular.

As that article points out, The Evangelism Explosion method of training
people is just that, a method of training people to be evangelists (or
whatever). Methods can be used for good or bad regardless of stated
intentions. I don't think it has much to do with Kennedy's overall
political agenda other than that he used it to further that agenda. For
him, it was another tool, maybe a critical tool. Your author says that
people like Kennedy corrupt evangelism. I think evangelism by its very
nature is corrupt, so to me that begs the question of whether there are
degrees of corruption that are acceptable to Christian evangelicals, and if
so, why? But that is just my own opinion. What gets under my skin is how
so many of these so-called religious leaders are all to fast to bear false
witness on others (I call it lying for Jesus). I was always taught that
that was one of the big ten commandments we weren't supposed to do. But
then, I'm an atheist now, so what do I know, eh?

George

[Paul]

<snip>

Post by George
And finally, Kennedy and others of his ilk have been quoted as saying that
they believe that the U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of religion,
not
freedom "from" religion, which, of course, is a out and out lie.

(Replying to George, not to Steve)

No, it is not a lie. The Constitution says that Congress shall make no law
respecting an "establishment of religion". Which is to say, the US shall
have no state religion. Which it does not, Kennedy nothwithstanding; nobody
is forced to go to church or make a religious profession of any kind. It
most definitely does NOT mean that US society shall not have any religions
in it, which is the only way in which freedom "from" religion would make
sense in the scope of the Constitution.

On the other hand if you are interpreting freedom "from" religion as meaning
you should never have to be aware that religion exists, then you're just as
bigoted as the folks you're railing against (only in the opposite
direction), because the only way to accomplish THAT would be to ban
religious expression of any kind. However, that interpretation has no
connection to the meaning of the Constitution, in any case -- thank God.

(One could also point out that you personally would be more free "from"
religion if you didn't make yourself read and post to this newsgroup. If
you put yourself into contact with evangelicals and other Christians by
choice -- and I strongly suspect nobody is forcing you to spend time here
:-) -- then it's disingenuous to complain when they state their beliefs in
your presence. )

In Christ,
Paul

[Steve Hayes]

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing
project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

I've already thanked you for those links in another message, but for what
it's
http://khanya.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/evangelism-and-the-religious-right/
as a more general topic, though relating to the Porteus article in
particular.

As that article points out, The Evangelism Explosion method of training
people is just that, a method of training people to be evangelists (or
whatever). Methods can be used for good or bad regardless of stated
intentions. I don't think it has much to do with Kennedy's overall
political agenda other than that he used it to further that agenda. For
him, it was another tool, maybe a critical tool. Your author says that
people like Kennedy corrupt evangelism. I think evangelism by its very
nature is corrupt, so to me that begs the question of whether there are
degrees of corruption that are acceptable to Christian evangelicals, and if
so, why? But that is just my own opinion. What gets under my skin is how
so many of these so-called religious leaders are all to fast to bear false
witness on others (I call it lying for Jesus). I was always taught that
that was one of the big ten commandments we weren't supposed to do. But
then, I'm an atheist now, so what do I know, eh?

I have the impression that at the time Kennedy developed Evangelism Explosion,
he was more interested in evangelism than in political causes. This would
explain why there is no evidence of "religious right" elements in the
Evangelism Explosion (EE III) materials.

Again, my impression is that the rise of the religious right took place in the
1980s, which was after Kennedy developed EE III. I don't expect you to be able
to answer this, but if there is anyone who has information about this, I would
be interested in hearing it -- both the general rise of the religious right,
and Kennedy's involvement in it.

[George]

Post by Paul
<snip>

Post by George
And finally, Kennedy and others of his ilk have been quoted as saying
that
they believe that the U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of religion,
not
freedom "from" religion, which, of course, is a out and out lie.

(Replying to George, not to Steve)
No, it is not a lie. The Constitution says that Congress shall make no
law
respecting an "establishment of religion". Which is to say, the US shall
have no state religion. Which it does not, Kennedy nothwithstanding;
nobody
is forced to go to church or make a religious profession of any kind. It
most definitely does NOT mean that US society shall not have any
religions
in it, which is the only way in which freedom "from" religion would make
sense in the scope of the Constitution.
On the other hand if you are interpreting freedom "from" religion as
meaning
you should never have to be aware that religion exists, then you're just
as
bigoted as the folks you're railing against (only in the opposite
direction), because the only way to accomplish THAT would be to ban
religious expression of any kind. However, that interpretation has no
connection to the meaning of the Constitution, in any case -- thank God.
(One could also point out that you personally would be more free "from"
religion if you didn't make yourself read and post to this newsgroup. If
you put yourself into contact with evangelicals and other Christians by
choice -- and I strongly suspect nobody is forcing you to spend time here
:-) -- then it's disingenuous to complain when they state their beliefs
in
your presence. )
In Christ,
Paul

Umm, Paul, Freedom of religion is a guarantee by our government for freedom
of belief for individuals and freedom of worship for individuals and
groups. It is generally recognized to also include the freedom not to
follow any religion. Your statement that assumes that I think it means
that we "should never have to be aware that religion exists" is not only
not true in my case, it is a red herring, since in the information age, it
would be nary impossible for anyone to live out their entire lives and not
be exposed to religion in some form or other. The point is that the
government is banned from promoting or encouraging (or forcing) such
exposure, and individuals aren't allowed to force it on others as well.

Your second paragraph is also a red herring, since I am certainly not being
coerced into posting in this newsgroup. I am here of my own free will.
And do point out where I have complained about anyone expressing their
beliefs in this newsgroup. We are all entitled to express our beliefs, as
long as doing so doesn't infringe on the constitutional rights of our
fellow citizens. That would be a hard thing to do here in this newsgroup,
wouldn't you say?

George

[George]

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George

Post by Steve Hayes

Post by George
Well, at least since 1994 Coral Ridge Ministries has had an ongoing
project
entitled "Reclaiming America for Christ". Perhaps you should read more
about it.
http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9703/kennedy.html

I've already thanked you for those links in another message, but for
what
it's
http://khanya.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/evangelism-and-the-religious-right/
as a more general topic, though relating to the Porteus article in
particular.

As that article points out, The Evangelism Explosion method of training
people is just that, a method of training people to be evangelists (or
whatever). Methods can be used for good or bad regardless of stated
intentions. I don't think it has much to do with Kennedy's overall
political agenda other than that he used it to further that agenda. For
him, it was another tool, maybe a critical tool. Your author says that
people like Kennedy corrupt evangelism. I think evangelism by its very
nature is corrupt, so to me that begs the question of whether there are
degrees of corruption that are acceptable to Christian evangelicals, and
if
so, why? But that is just my own opinion. What gets under my skin is
how
so many of these so-called religious leaders are all to fast to bear
false
witness on others (I call it lying for Jesus). I was always taught that
that was one of the big ten commandments we weren't supposed to do. But
then, I'm an atheist now, so what do I know, eh?

I have the impression that at the time Kennedy developed Evangelism
Explosion,
he was more interested in evangelism than in political causes. This would
explain why there is no evidence of "religious right" elements in the
Evangelism Explosion (EE III) materials.
Again, my impression is that the rise of the religious right took place
in the
1980s, which was after Kennedy developed EE III. I don't expect you to be
able
to answer this, but if there is anyone who has information about this, I
would
be interested in hearing it -- both the general rise of the religious
right,
and Kennedy's involvement in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._James_Kennedy#Ministry_and_theology

Kennedy was an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church in America,
having transferred his membership there in the late 1970s from the
Presbyterian Church in the United States. He was considered a conservative
evangelical minister who was often involved in political activities within
the Christian right and has been identified as a leader of the Dominionism
movement.[5][6][7][8] He wrote and coauthored several political works such
as What if America Were a Christian Nation Again? and The Rewriting of
America's History, arguing that the United States was founded as a
Christian nation. Critics contend that he was excessively conservative on
certain politically charged topics such as abortion and homosexuality.
Kennedy started the Center for Christian Statesmanship, an evangelical
ministry on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. The Center awards a
"Distinguished Christian Statesman Award" annually to high profile
Christian political leaders. Past recipients include Tom DeLay, Sam
Brownback and John Ashcroft. In April 2007, the Center shut down and was
reopened two weeks later as "Evangelism Explosion International."[9][10]
He espoused a traditional Calvinist theology. His theological works include
Why I Believe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born, Skeptics Answered, and
Truths That Transform.

Kennedy developed the "Evangelism Explosion" ("EE") method of evangelism in
the 1960s, which emphasizes the training of church laypeople to share their
faith.

In 1971, he founded the Westminster Academy in Ft. Lauderdale and, in 1989,
Knox Theological Seminary.

In 2006, the National Religious Broadcasters association inducted Kennedy
into its Hall of Fame.