Karen you are conscinetious. BUT this is big busines, big bucks.  The real question is how and why a form of Evangelical culture has fed into the mass culture of death & hate ? Far from being counter-cultural they are revealed as (at) one at this point. This morphing.

So much of what passes for Christianity is really some form of Churchianity.  It is not counter-cultural, but materialistic, militaristic, imperialistic, & in radical oppostion to the message of Jesus, as we have it in the gospels.   When do we hear Jesus' teaching taught in the mainstream american and  UK Churches ?  The radical pacifism, anti-materialism, anti-establishment (religious and secular),anti-family,  pro-poor, pro-woman, message of the Beatitudes and Sermon on the Mount / Plain; and his parables is just an embarrassment to right-wing 'Christians' as they practice materialism, war, 'family values' and militarism in the US and the UK.

That is why so many conscientious seekers of spirtuality, truth and an ethical and responsible life have turned away from 'the mainstream' Churches. 

CG Jung said, many years ago, that 'the Spirit has left the Churches never to return.'      Was he wrong ?

Perhaps we could ask people not to buy the game and instead to donate the price of the game to something else like a peace project.

Although I have expressed some interest in the Rapture theology, I'm certainly aware that the way this has morphed into the Republican/US war on terror is really dangerous. I was told by an American recently that some Christians in the USA are wearing T-shirts which have slogans reading WWJB - Who Would Jesus Bomb - not in an ironic way {as I think some peace campaigners have produced T-shirts in the UK} but meaning Jesus really would bomb certain people. I'm sure we can guess who the wearers think should be the recipients of such bombs!?!

American Christian fundamentalism can be dangerous. For an example, see Ruth Gledhill's article in yesterday's edition of The Times, 6 Dec 2006, entitled, "Christian video game 'is a force for evil'". It begins:

'A video game that depicts a crusade of violence by Christians could be heading for the bestseller charts this Christmas, even though it has been condemned by Muslims and secularists.

The game, Left Behind: Eternal Forces, is set in post-apocalyptic New York and features God's army battling the Antichrist.

Based on Left Behind, the bestselling Christian fantasy book series created by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, it puts players in command of brainwashed legions fighting for Christianity.

Players are ordered to convert or kill to advance to the next level and remodel America as a Christian-controlled state, and establish its world vision of Christ's dominion.

They pit battles between the paramilitary Christian Tribulation Force and the grey, faceless, Global Community Peacekeepers of the Antichrist, said to be modelled on the United Nations. The fantasy is based on what might happen if the events of the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible, happened today.

Critics accuse its creators of mixing religion and violence to appeal to teenage fans of violent games such as Grand Theft Auto.

The game was sold originally in the US. British outlets are releasing the game for the Christmas market. The Left Behind books have sold more than 63 million'.

For the rest of the article, see:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,23569-2488931.html

How should fulcrumesque Christians protest about such dangerous fantasies which claim biblical support?

I'm going to have to agree with David on this one

but then....is the Son with us mediated by the Spirit?

Is it the Son who holds the very universe together and without whom....no universe?

blessed Trinity

Jody

'..Crist gwyn nid oes ynialedd'

Karen -thanks so much !  -- wish we could chat by email off line, but there we are !

May i share a lovely 13th century Welsh verse that came my way today ?  It is so lovely in its simplicity.......

Ym myrn yn nhyno  yn ynysedd   mor ymhob ffordd ydd eler Rhag  Crist gwyn nid oes ynialedd..

Dear Karen,

Prosperity Teaching comes from the teaching of Kenneth Kenyon and Kenneth Haagin and originated in the earlier part of the 20th century. Dipensationalism originated with the Bretheren around 1830. So dispensationalism and creationism were two aspects of literal interpretation of the Bible which went into the start of Fundamentalism around say 1920. PT grew in this soil so that these strands are often found together.

The rapture comes from 1 Thess 4:11-18 and is  a restatement of the ressurection of the dead as far as it applies to believers and this passage does not have a substantial time interval. The tribulation period as 7 years comes from Daniel 9:20-27. The first 69 years fit with history upto the birth of Christ. Jesus warnings of tributlation and persecution appear to refer as much to the run up to AD 70 and the periodic persecutions upto AD 316. At the moment I believe in the possibly imminent return of Jesus. We should consider how much the Jews misinterpreted the signs of his first comming. It is unlikely that we will do any better.

David

Hi David I been trawling the threads and realised I had missed this one because I was camping in Wales. No internet hook-ups in camping fields - yet. This Rapture thing is is quite interesting and I had thought of bringing it up on the Unorthodox Theology Thread instead of Prosperity Teaching. But I have to own up that I am less comfortable with critiquing Dispensationalism or should I say outright dismissal than say critiques of PT.Although Rapture and PT are often taught in the same breath by some minsiters I am not convinced that these two doctrines are from the same root.

I first heard of the Rapture c.1994 from another church member. I have to admit that I thought it was completely bonkers. Especially because this person described it as 'all the Church will rise into the air'. I had an image of my 14th Century parish church floating up into space with the fellowship inside it - like a Saturn moon rocket. So I put that one to bed and forgot about. A few years later I noticed people in my congregation were reading Left Behind books. I didn't bother reading them as I am wary of fictionalised christian novels partly becuase they are often too polemical or crass or boring. Later, I mentioned this Rapture thingy to my husband who is from a Pentecostal background. He told me that he had heard about the Rapture in his old fellowship during the late 1970s. Subsequently, when talking to older christians (60yrs+), Anglicans with a Free Church background or lifelong Free Church members, I have found that the belief in the Rapture is fairly common. These people I have spoken to have believed in the Rapture ( in various ways - pre, mid or post trib) - before the 'Left Behind' publications and before the rise of the George W Bush/ Pat Robinson/ Tim la Haye milieu and before the arrival of the God Channel in the UK. They also had different degrees of emphasis as to pre, mid or post trib. and to the degree of importance they gave it within their own christian life. These people simply say that they heard it in church from other fellowship members or from their pastor. Others have learnt it 'themselves' via bible study.I think that the "top-shop" of Anglicanism has only just noticed The Rapture because of what is going on in the USA and feel that they should warn against it. Well too late, and too bad, I know Anglicans and other Christians who are believing in the Rapture already and they aren't fundies or Creationists either.

It's too easy to look at the current politics of the USA and it's foreign policy; too easy to see the blending of right-wing conservative christianity, Creationism, Six-dayism, Intelligent Design and PT with the Rapture. Afterall the RC church has had a doctrine called Purgatory which they can 'prove' is scriptural for quite some time now. Moreover I think there is a slight similarity between Rapture and Purgatory in that they both explain what happens to the believer who dies before the Second Coming. If the "heaven" is not established until the Second Coming and I die now where do I go? Purgatory or perhaps a pre-Rapture sleep? Look at old gravestones in our own churchyards that have lines like "asleep in the Lord...." etc.

Also just for arguments sake lets say the Rapture is true - and I have to admit at this point in my walk I think aspects of it are true - does that mean people must assume that other end-time Theology is wrong. WHAT IF IN THE BOOK OF REVELATIONS, JOHN WAS SEEING ALL OUR VARIOUS INTERPRETATIONS AT ONCE? So for instance personally I find no discomfort or contradiction in considering the Rapture ( I am pre-Trib - at the moment?!?!LOL)to be true, whilst at the same time understanding Revelatation within it's socio-political context of the life of Jews/Christians in the Roman empire and it's relevance to us today with regard to Freedom of speech and social responsibility and the behaviour of fellowships.Why should I be told to just believe one thing. I once heard a Rabbi on TV say that scripture had seven layers of meaning. I mentioned this to friend and she said "Is that all?" Prophecy, history and today's needs can sit side by side.

Karen Armstrong implies that Fundamentalism is the route of all the ills of the world. I am sorry for this exageration but I am following her style. She links the "Christian Right". "the moral majority", fundamentalism with the policies of the Rpublican party. A similar line has been argued by three Anglican bishops in Countering terrorism: Power, violence and democracy post9/11 She derives har understanding of Fundamentalism from Islamist extremists and then seeks to apply it to like named christians. She illustrates this by reference to the tele-evangelist scndals of yester-year but ignores the far more significant contribution of Billy Graham. She conflates the "moral majority" which has substantial Catholic support for family values issues with the "Christian Right" of Pat Robinson and the impies that it is united on a particularly unsophisticated presentation of pre-millenialism. There are many American theologians who hold to a dispenstaionalis scheme who distance themselves from the wilder speculations of Hal Lindsay and La Haye/Jenkins. This is part of the power base of the Republican party but to say that it is the source of its policies is surely a case of claiming that the tail is wagging the dog. America has been consistently pro-Israel since the founding of the state of Israel. This is not some new policy brought about by fundamentalist influence. The pro-life stand comes as much from Catholic infvluence as fundamentalism.

I do see the link between creationism and dispensationalism. They both come from a polemic interpretation of scripture as literal truth. As evangelicals we believe that scripture is true as opposed to false, literaly true as opposed to only spiritually true. The trouble is that literal then becomes the hermanutical principle of the movement although some common sense is allowed back in to allow for metaphor.

A quick look at the Left Behind series may tempt us to dismiss dispensationalism. However they were talking confidentaly of the restoration of Israel before 1850, a remarkable prediction. The argument of the  early chapters of Matthew is that Jesus did literally fulfll prophesy. The prophesies in Daniel do seem to work on a literal basis for the period upto the comming of Christ. Thhe Olivet prophesy of the destruction of Jerusalem was fulfilled in A.D.70. There may be more to prophesy than a liberal mind set allows.

The ideas of Intelligent Design have arisen in the scientific community as the "Wonder of Creation" is dicovered in greater detail. I see no reason to doubt the integrity of the scientists who originally put these ideas forward. They may have been misrepresented by Christian Apologists but then Christian Apologists still quote F F Bruce on New Testament documents thus ignoring nearly 50 years of research and pluck dates out of John Robinson when it suits them. Second hand apolagetics often uses oveplays its hand. I do not believe that we are called to finesse people into the Kingdom. I belive that evolution implies a non christian anthropology which does not account for the seriousness of sin. The Intelligent Design approach does not do the job that Fundamentalists want it to do i.e defend Genesis as a historical document but it does give a new presentation of the old design argument.