Matt Sutton Strikes Again; and More on Religion Dispatches and Texas History Textbook Shenanigans

Paul Harvey

Our contributing editors are busy at work in the blogosphere. At Religion Dispatches, Matt Sutton is having too much fun in his amusing and insightful post Is Obama the AntiChrist: Why Armageddon Stands between the President and the Evangelical Vote, based in part on research for his book American Evangelicals and the Politics of Apocalypse. Matt's conclusion:

So what can we do? Pray for the rapture. If evangelicals vanish, the rest of us might finally get better medical care, a healthier environment, a more just international community, and full civil rights for gays and lesbians. But short of this miracle, we can at least begin to understand that before Obama is able to penetrate the evangelical heart, evangelicals themselves will need to do some serious soul-searching. Rick Warren and Joel Osteen’s shallow, positive-thinking, feel-good sermonizing is not going to help them do this. Instead, it is up to the younger evangelicals to engage in serious intellectual debate and a rigorous rethinking of the theology at the root of their politics. Anything less and the doomsayers will turn fears of Obama-as-Antichrist into big business. But hell, maybe that’s just the spark the economy needs.

Jesse Lava takes some issue with Matt's views here.

And speaking of those evangelicals in D.C., see the group free-for-all on Jeff Sharlet's The Family also at Religion Dispatches -- an online group conversation betweeen Sharlet and Randall Balmer, Anthea Butler, and Diane Winston. Sharlet had the great good fortune of having his book come out just as the Mark Sanford and Jon Ensign scandals broke -- both conservative Republicans associated with The Family while in D.C.

Finally, our contributor John Fea is going through the Texas history school text controversy line by line, analyzing David Barton's views and countering those with his own, in a multipart series on his blog -- start here and follow down from there. I still have no idea why Barton (and even more so Peter Marshall) would be on any state textbook committee for any state for any reason. But they are, so good to have some more detailed analysis from someone who has more patience and less snark than I do. Next time, maybe Texans will think to ask John or some other thoughtful and knowledgeable Christian scholar to work through their history standards; that would be a change for the better.


Pain said…
You seem to have a firm grasp on this issue. The family is a good read. Those on terra who can think for themselves will see that Coe's organization is anti-Faith and pro religious power aka Theocracy.
Brad Hart said…
I am in complete agreement with sgsdgsdg. He took the words right out of my mouth.
John Fea said…
Thanks for the plug, Paul. I should probably be doing something more productive (like finishing the book I am under contract to write!), but analyzing Barton and Marshall is a good form of procrastination.
Tom Van Dyke said…
As far as I know, Daniel Dreisbach is the 3rd scholar on the conservative side. Oooops---let's stipulate that Dreisbach is the only scholar on the conservative side. Google him for yourself.

I dunno if the panel votes, but if they do, that would make Dreisbach its Anthony Kennedy.

If we can reframe the debate as a thought experiment, Barton and Marshall are the radicals, the advocates, the 3 "liberals" are the fair-minded "establishment." The "conservatives," if you will, eh?

Hehe. This stuff kills me sometimes.

So let's see what happens.
Rebecca said…

John Fea takes the wind out of David Barton and Peter Marshall's sails in today's Houston Chronicle. I've been having some interesting conversations with my state representative over the mechanisms for selecting "expert reviewers." My conclusion? we have to vote the lunatics off the board.

Popular Posts