Critiquing the Christian Fundamentalist Viewpoint

Back to the Secularism Is Evil section.

This is the last content chapter, but don't worry: we still have the conclusion to get through! I may need to split that into two parts as my spork of it is 9000 words and change long and I'm thinking of going back and adding a bit. Anyway, for this chapter there's going to be a lot of Islamophobia again and of course Noebel's definition of "history" is not going to have much of a lot to do with the academic discipline. 

Or: Gay Marriage and Premarital Sex Are Bad. 

Also the Islam chapter is going to talk a lot about polygamy, I remember that very well. Brace yourselves; this is one of the more lengthily Islamophobic chapters in the book. (Law, I think, is another.) 

Also, I minored in sociology in undergrad, so I'm going to have a lot of thoughts about all this, I expect.

In short, gird your loins for a humdinger of a chapter.

This one is going to be a doozy. If you're not familiar with the creationist project, you're about to be. This chapter is almost exclusively going to be about how creationism is right and evolution is fake, and it's also going to be doing a lot of ascribing claims about "biology" (biological evolution, really) to scholarly viewpoints that really don't make any statements about them. There will also be a lot of false creationist arguments, which I will do my best to debunk. Strap in.

Before I get started on the chapter, I actually googled the author, which I obviously should have done at the beginning of the project. But I honestly just assumed he was some rando with no particular publication past who decided he was going to write a book. Not so, and I should have investigated more.

He's an Evangelical pastor and writer who got his degree at the evangelical college Grace Christian University. He studied philosophy in grad school, so you'd think he'd have a better sense of what is and isn't philosophy. Then he founded Summit Ministries -- a "a nondenominational evangelical Christian training ministry for young adults". This is, in essence, a Christian nonprofit dedicated to teaching fundamentalist apologetics. They're pretty big in the homeschool circles -- I remember my mom talking about them a lot. 

They were also favorably reviewed by James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, which is one of THE leading lights in fundamentalist Christianity. It's hard to express how inescapable Focus on the Family is in this community. Dobson is prominently involved in activism around anti-porn movements, abstinence-only sex ed, spanking, and conversion therapy. 

So this guy is endorsing Noebel's work. What else has Noebel written before Understanding the Times?

•    Communism, Hypnotism and The Beatles, 1965

•     Rhythm, riots, and revolution: An analysis of the Communist use of music, the Communist master music plan, 1966

•     Does the National Council of Churches speak for you?, 1969

•     The Beatles: A Study in Drugs, Sex, & Revolution, 1969 (pamphlet)

•     The Marxist Minstrels: A Handbook on Communist Subversion of Music, 1974

•     The Homosexual Revolution: End Time Abomination, 1977

•     The Slaughter of the Innocent, 1979

•     The Legacy of John Lennon: Charming or Harming a Generation?, 1982

•     AIDS: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, 1986 (with Wayne C. Lutton and Paul Cameron)

•     Clergy in the Classroom: The Religion of Secular Humanism, 1995 (with J. F. Baldwin and Kevin J. Bywater)

•     Mind Siege: The Battle for Truth in the New Millennium, 2000 (with Timothy LaHaye)

This dude wrote MULTIPLE pieces of nonfiction that claimed the Beatles, rock music, and folk music were hypnotising children into becoming communists. I'd like to ask him how that worked out for him sixty years down the road.

One reviewer says that Rhythm, Riots, and Revolution contains this passage on page 87: "The full truth is that it goes still deeper--the heart of Africa, where it was used to incite warriors to such a frenzy that by nightfall neighbors were cooked to carnage in pots! The music is a designed reversion to savagery!" 

Now, I haven't got access to the book, but assuming that this reviewer has no reason to lie, let's really think about that in the context of Noebel's assertion that some cultures are Better Than Others. What does he really mean by that, when in 1966 he was talking about "savagery" and cannibalism in "the heart of Africa"? Why might he be taking offense to the claim that someone might view a text as racist even when the author claims not to be racist?

What can we infer about his claim that pop culture is indoctrinating children into atheism based on the fact that he spent the 60s writing books about his conspiracy theory that rock and folk music were communist propaganda that would hypnotise children into communism? (For that matter, how does that conspiracy theory reflect on his supposedly unbiased opinions of Marxism?)

What are we to make of his claims that certain views are suppressed by the scientific institution even though they're clearly true because they're "to dangerous" when he's written books in company with Paul Cameron, a recognized anti-gay extremist whose work has been rejected by serious scientific journals because it's poorly-researched and extremely biased?

Also, he's on Twitter endorsing the idea that Trump's failure to win reelection was voter fraud. So there's that. You can read his blog which he's linked there if you want more information about his worldview.

I don't want to make this whole blog about Noebel's particular failings, because the views he's putting forth are very common in the Christian fundamentalist community. My parents saw this textbook and I talked about my assignments, and they didn't think it was extreme at all. I would characterize his views as presented in Understanding the Times as pretty "moderate" in fundie terms, because as far as I can remember he's not currently involved in the things that unaffiliated people find extreme about fundamentalist Christianity. There's no Quiverfull shilling, no suggestion that you should never expose your children to the news, no sense that women shouldn't wear trousers, or anything else that people usually find visibly "weird" and "backward". Whether or not Noebel believes those things, he has the sense to recognize that they won't play so well in a book intended for large audiences with diverse views on those more controversial topics. The fundamentalist community is quite diverse, and there are many "side issues" that people don't agree on.

What he's presenting in Understanding the Times is normal, not his own personal extremist views. It avoids the "side issues" to focus on things that are safe -- things most of the broader fundamentalist and even much of the general evangelical community will agree on. And that's why it's so scary.

Nevertheless, I think understanding where he's coming from is important. And so is understanding that, in the Christian fundamentalist community, writing multiple books on how the communists are taking over America through rock music doesn't discredit you. And writing a book about how gay people are a sign of the end times certainly doesn't; it makes you more trustworthy. Being extremely racist, but in specific ways that require a couple of extra steps to fully process, is lauded.

So, I hope knowing this context, the perspective he's working from will be clearer.

In which I spend half the post analyzing the very last section, because Noebel thinks he understand postmodernism much better than he actually does.

Starting off early early again.