I Found Him: A Response to "Stealing Jesus" - Part 1

Stealing Jesus: How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity
By Bruce Bawer
Publisher: Three Rivers Press; 1997

Why this review and response
Tom Lander, a fellow graduate of SEBC now SU (Southeastern University in Lakeland, Florida, an Assemblies of God institution) and facebook friend, challenged me to read Stealing Jesus. But, it wasn’t just a recommendation. This was the book that would most represent to some degree Tom’s philosophy and take on politics and religion. I had asked him to read Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin, promising to mail him a copy if he would. Tom’s challenge to me was in response to my request of him.

Tom has stated that Jesus would be a liberal if he were here today. When you stop and think about it, that’s an astounding statement coming from a Pentecostal perspective or from the viewing point of an experiential (verses creedal only) Christian. It's astounding not because Jesus would be a liberal; it's astounding that Tom presumes that Jesus is NOT here. As an experiential Christian myself, I was under the impression (obviously a mistaken one if Tom’s underlying assumption is correct) that Jesus IS here . . . now . . . in me and in His people. You live and learn. Sometimes the lessons are unbearable and I’m not really ready to accept that one just yet.

Let’s be clear
Let’s be upfront about who Bruce Bawer is and what he believes. This is not to argue for or against, for the time being, the merits of his character, conduct or philosophy. It is to state it plainly so that we know the author.

Bruce Bawer has argued for 2 decades now for acceptance of homosexuality within Christianity. (See A Place At The Table: The Gay Individual in American Society and other articles by the author). This is not the same as arguing for the acceptance of homosexuals which most of us already practice in our “fundamentalist” churches (the significance of the word “fundamentalist” will be clear soon enough but take it from me – it’s an awkward irony for the author who . . . well, I’m getting ahead of myself). But, it’s an argument for the acceptance of homosexual sex as not to be condemned as sin or unnatural or wrong.

Let me be more graphic and if you are easily offended, turn away or go to the next paragraph. Bawer argues that there is nothing unnatural, unholy or unrighteous if one man inserts his penis into another man’s anus and ejaculates inside that other man’s rectum. I argue that Barney Frank needs as much blood in his brain as possible and can scarcely afford the slightest drainage from his cranium to his genitals. But that only means that homosexual sex is unwise in the case of Barney. I would also argue that it is unnatural and unrighteous and very unhealthy (both physically and psychologically). Hold on a sec . . . my agent just called. Oprah just cancelled my appearance on her show next week. Maybe I can get booked on The View.

Bawer also disbelieves the virgin birth which he says was "plainly . . . cooked up by ancient men who idealized female virginity." (page 43) Neither has he any room for the bodily resurrection of Jesus. In fact, when he finally forsook any attempt at believing it, he felt as if "a weight had fallen from me." (page 45) He insists that if you believe in those things you are a fundamentalist. In case you’re wondering, that’s a bad thing - a very bad thing. It’s perhaps the worst thing Bawer might say about someone. As we shall see, to be a fundamentalist Christian is to not be Christian at all and means that one worships evil. I lie not. (page 10).

Neither does he see the need in being born again. Salvation is not found by a personal spiritual experience or by personal faith in the risen Lord. Rather, it’s found by reaching out to the needy with social programs. Forgive the redundancy but, I lie not.

Lest some of you think you might escape Bawer's condemnation because you're not a member of a Fundamentalist Baptist church, think again. If you're Southern Baptist, Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, Church of Christ, Evangelical . . . if you're anything but a liberal of his branding and if you believe the aforementioned teachings (virgin birth, resurrection, being "born again,"et al) then you are a "fundamentalist." He has a few other descriptors like "legalistic Protestant" and "legalistic Christian" and "hater" but I'll get into that later.

Believe what you will about homosexual sex, the virgin birth, the resurrection and the new (spiritual) birth, it’s clear to me that these issues are both important and divisive. In other words, you can believe in whatever Jesus you want to believe in – I believe in the one who was born of a virgin, lived a sinless and holy life, died on a cross by the hands of the Jews and Pilate/Romans, rose again on the third day and sent his Spirit whereby I can be made one with Christ through simple faith in His finished work on the cross.

But, that’s just so much preaching and pontificating on my part thinks Lander/Bawer. But worse, it measures me out as a worshiper of evil and a hate-mongering fundamentalist. I’m getting ahead of myself again.

Other than that Bawer’s a damn fine person.

A brief word to Tom and other Christian liberals
I gave Tom plenty occassion to withdraw his statement of fidelity to Bawer's philosophy. He was pretty persistent and proud of his affinity to Bawer if not to the book. But, I fight bad ideas. And a bad idea is just as bad if it comes from an affable 55 year old phlegmatic or if it comes from a 23 year old Trotskyite on a literary rampage. You might be my best friend or my worst enemy – it changes not one whit the harm of your bad idea. Perhaps bad ideas coming from the more congenial amongst us are even more sinister than the same bad ideas coming from obvious schemers. We tend to have our guard down, to give our friends the benefit of the doubt, to be accommodating where possible . . . and the pernicious ideas find their entry into our thinking having bypassed our critical and otherwise skeptical filters.

So, to Tom and every other liberal Christian I say, don’t call yourself my brother out of one side of your mouth and countenance a man who says that I am not Christian “at all” and that I worship evil from the other side. You may fool yourself. You may fool others. But I am not fooled.

If you really do not subscribe to Bawer and his philosophy, admit it. Apologize for wasting my time. Read some good books. Turn off the socialist-democrat noise machine. Pull your head out of Obama’s ass. Grow a damn brain and start thinking critically.

Otherwise, lets’ be clear – we’re not on the same side. I’m good with that. But, I’m not good with pretending that we are.