The Westborean Hypocrisy

As I said in my last post, I've got a bit of a problem calling Westboro a church. The church is, by definition, a gathering called together by Christ, and I question whether Westboro can make that claim. 

But let's get past the realm of sound bites and picket signs, and into the arena of dialogue. Specifically, let me offer a refutation of the common theme that runs through Westboro's signs that draws, word for word, from the very scripture that Westboro claims for inspiration. 

"Pray for More Dead Soldiers" 

So Westboro's reasoning here is that US soldiers are dying before their time because the US tolerates homosexuality. This sign is representative of Westboro's other signs and slogans (including their famous: "God Hates Fags") because it draws on their fundamental argument: that tragedy strikes a nation when it tolerates behavior that he hates.

Therefore, Westboro argues, we should actually ask God for more soldiers to die, and more young people to die tragic deaths, so that the nation repents of its sin and follows God faithfully once again. This leads to two questions. First, does scripture indicate that if God is displeased with the stance a nation or people take on an issue, will he then kill that nation's young men and women before their time? Second, does scripture indicate that the followers of God should pray for more to die in order that the nation might repent and follow God? 

I'll deal with each question separately: 

1: Westboro argues that if God is displeased with the stance a nation or people take on an issue, will he then kill that nation's young men and women in the battlefield. Does scripture actually indicate this?

It's possible to begin to make this argument when you look at how God dealt with the Israelites. Often they would be given time to repent, but told that if they failed to repent they would face disaster on the battlefield. The destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the many exiles were considered punishment by God for Israel's failure to repent and follow him. 

But this line of reasoning (that God is killing US soldiers because of the nation's toleration of homosexuality) falters when you look at the nations that conquered and exiled Israel. If God killed soldiers because he was displeased with a nation, then what about every nation in the world? Every nation tolerates some form of sin. And even if you want to restrict this argument to homosexuality, then what about all the nations that are even more permissive and accepting of homosexuality than the US? How come they aren't in the middle of a war right now, losing soldiers? 

What's more, if you go to the New Testament, NONE of the leaders of the church connect the tragedy of a nation to that nation's toleration of any particular sin. To be fair, there are verses that indicate that sin leads to consequences here and now for individuals, but none of the first followers of Jesus said anything to indicate that they believed that God punished nations based on their toleration of any particular sin. 

2: Does scripture indicate that the followers of God should pray for more of a nation's soldiers to die in order that the nation might repent and follow God? 

Take a look at this passage from Isaiah 12: "You will say in that day: 'I will gave thanks to you, O Lord, for though you were angry with me, your anger turned away, that you might comfort me. Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for the Lord God is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation'

"With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation. And you will say in that day: 'Give thanks to the Lord, call upon his name, make known his deeds among the peoples, proclaim that his name is exalted.'" 

Isaiah is actually filled with passages that seem to indicate that God does in fact inflict punishment on nations in the form of disaster and military loss. Disaster is prophesied for Assyria, Babylon, and Israel, among others. But nowhere in Isaiah do we hear that God desires more loss of life, or that we should pray for more to die. In fact, as the passage above indicates, God intends for his name to be proclaimed as savior, that he would be known as the one to be trusted. 

So if God wants to be known as savior, if he intends for his name to be exalted, then why would you believe that he wants his people to pray for more disaster? Even if you believed that he punishes nations in order to lead them to repentance, there is no scriptural evidence that God wants us to pray for more punishment or death. This is wrong not only because God clearly self-identifies as savior, not bringer of destruction, but also because of a lapse in logic. It's a lapse in logic to say just because someone punishes someone, the punished should ask for more punishment. In fact, both the punished and the punisher generally want the opposite: they want repentance and reform.

Let me make it extremely simple: why in the world would anyone pray for the consequence/punishment and not the cause of the problem? That's like an environmentalist praying for more global warming so that we can reform our environmental policies, or a parent praying for more groundings so that their child will stop getting into fights. Obviously you would pray for REFORM and transformation, not consequences and punishments.  

Finally, if you go to the New Testament, NONE of the leaders of the church encourage followers of Christ to pray for the demise of Rome or Israel. In fact, 1 Timothy 2 indicates just the opposite:

"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."  

Also Romans 13:7, "Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed."

***

Alright, this post has definitely gotten too long, so I'll stop things here. I think, though, the point has been made. Westboro's fundamental argument and guiding vision statement is standing on smoke. Their entire philosophy is a house of cards waiting to fall, because the very scripture that they claim as inspiration condemns their very argument.  

The Westboro Baptist Law Firm: Part One

So Westboro Baptist Church came back into the limelight last week after the US Supreme Court ruled in their favor, upholding the church's right to protest at funerals. Specifically, they ruled that the church was protected by the First Amendment protecting free speech when they protested at the funeral of 20 year old Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder in 2006. These protests typically include signs and chants such as (excuse the language), "Thank God for IEDs", "God hates fags", "God hates America", and "God hates fat enablers". Westboro's stated goal is to warn people about God's anger towards homosexuality, and any society, organization, country, or person that supports homosexuality. They argue that the deaths of soldiers, mine workers, and any other non-natural causes of death are God's punishment of America for tolerating homosexuality. They made a statement after the 2008 earthquakes in China killed thousands thanking God for the heavy loss of life and said that they were praying for many more such earthquakes, and for many more people to die. 

I wanted to bring them up this week for two reasons. One, although I had seen and heard a lot about Westboro over the past few years (especially since they made their national media splash protesting at the 1998 funeral of 21 year old Matthew Sheppard, who was tortured and beaten to death near Laramie, WY because he was gay), after doing a small amount of research I discovered that I didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did. I had always assumed that it was a denomination or a large group of people that was behind this. I'm probably not the only one either. Because this group claims to come in the name of God, and because their signs all reference God, it's easy to make the jump to assume that they represent at least a branch of Christianity. 

But did you know that Westboro is basically made up of one family, the Phelps? The head pastor of the church is Fred Phelps, a former lawyer and civil rights activist (no kidding: he was actually awarded two civil rights awards) known for taking on cases other lawyers wouldn't, and for taking on big business. Nine of his thirteen children have remained a part of Westboro, and his daughter (also a lawyer) is the main spokesperson for the church. Many of their grandchildren are also a part of the church, and are a part of the church's many protests.  

In other words, I think you could make a fair case for calling Westboro not a Baptist church but a Phelpsist Group (I'd leave the church part out of it). Westboro Phelpsists. 

Why is this an important thing to know? Well, for starters, let's stop associating what the Phelpsists say and write and do with other Christians. Your church down the street is not going to march to your funeral and protest. That's what the Phelpsists do, not followers of Jesus Christ. What's more, the Phelpsists refuse dialog, protesting and shouting hurtful and hateful things with closed minds. This doesn't mean that all followers of Christ do. In fact, as I'll discuss in my next post, it's practically the total opposite of what followers of Christ should do. 

In short, Westboro isn't a church. The church, as Christ himself describes it, is a gathering called together by him. Westboro, on the other hand, is a group of people that has been called together by one man, Fred Phelps, who shaped and dominated it with his skillful speaking and strong, oppressive, manipulating leadership (his estranged son, Nate, has testified to the fact that his father beat each of his children, a claim that is supported even by Phelpses still a part of Westboro). 

One more fruit of research to share with you: Did you know that the Phelpses claim to receive little outside funding, and their protests and activities are funded mostly by themselves, as well as cases their law firm wins in court? They especially benefit when people disrupt their protests, because then the Phelpses can sue those people for infringing on their First Amendment rights. Some people argue that their protests go so over the top exactly in order to bait others to attack them for this reason. 

Say what you want, the Phelpses know how to play the court game pretty well. 

The other reason I wanted to bring Westboro up is because I wanted to show once and for all exactly how what the Phelpses are doing is NOT what God desires of them, using nothing but their own epistemology. I'll tackle that in the next post.