Washington Post, Your Attacks on Evangelicals are Getting Dangerous

By Michael Brown Published on December 10, 2016

On December 8, religion reporter Sarah Pulliam Bailey wrote an opinion column for The Washington Post titled, “Evangelicals, your attacks on ‘the media’ are getting dangerous.” The reverse is actually true, and it is the secular media’s attacks on evangelicals that are getting dangerous, including Bailey’s article.

Her fundamental argument is that because evangelicals talk about “the mainstream media” as “Satan’s newspaper,” they are now buying today’s “fake news” as if it were gospel truth, as evidenced by the fact that the Washington pizza shooter said that “he has been influenced by the book Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge about faith and masculinity.”

Based on this ridiculously-thin, completely-unsupported line of reasoning, Bailey sounds the alarm: “The jokes aren’t funny anymore. We are living in a post-truth time of fake news and misinformation, something that should be deeply troubling to people of faith who claim to seek truth in their everyday lives.”

With all respect to Bailey’s call for truthful reporting, including a good number of mea culpas for the mainstream media, it is reporting like this that is misinformed, misleading and potentially dangerous, since it fits with the stereotypical demonization of American evangelicals as uneducated, angry, gun-toting, religious supremacists.

The Demonization of American Evangelicals is Nothing New

In May, 2005, John McCandlish Phillips, formerly a Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporter, pointed out how newspapers like the Washington Post and the Times told their readers that evangelicals and traditional Catholics were engaging in a “jihad” against America — and his article ran as an op-ed piece in The Washington Post.

I share with the Post’s Sarah Pulliam Bailey a disdain for “fake news,” and I deplore the destructive results of such “news.” In the name, then, of truthful journalism, I appeal to Bailey either to support her claims in detail or to retract her charges.

Since then, the rhetoric has only intensified, to the point that not a few Americans believe that evangelical Christians want to take over the culture by force and impose their faith on the nation, by violence if needs be. (Just search for “dominionist” and “Ted Cruz” if you don’t believe me.)

And this rhetoric is not just coming far-left sites like Daily Kos, whose founder Markos Moulitsas wrote a 2010 book titled American Taliban: How War, Sex, Sin, and Power Bind Jihadists and the Radical Right. (Yes, conservative Christians are the “American Taliban.”) It is being stoked by the mainstream media on a regular basis.

For example, during the 2012 presidential debates, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched a tirade against Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan, calling Ryan’s pro-life position “extremism” and claiming it was “almost like Sharia.” (He was referring to Ryan’s “personhood” argument, which would grant 14th Amendment rights to the baby in the womb.)

Calling the Post’s Evidence “Specious” is Giving It Too Much Credit

Bailey’s article is just the latest in this steady stream of attacks by the mainstream media against evangelicals, but what makes her article especially insidious is the absolutely specious nature of the evidence she presents (to call it “specious” might actually be giving it too much credit).

She begins her article addressing evangelicals directly (starting with the words “Dear evangelicals”) stating immediately, “You tease about the mainstream media being ‘Satan’s newspaper.’”

Her source for this sweeping statement, which will certainly come as a surprise to countless evangelical readers who never heard the term before, is a Christian blogger named Jonathan Acuff who made the comment, “It’s true, we Christians sometimes treat secular media as if it’s Satan’s newspaper.”

It is from this one, quite generic (“we Christians”), fairly lighthearted, hardly comprehensive comment, that Bailey now has her working premise.

From here, she comes to the heart of her concerns:

For many conservatives, the phrase ‘fake news’ is now being used to describe ‘liberal bias,’ but fake news has real consequences. A man who was investigating a conspiracy theory about a secret child sex ring showed up at a Washington pizza place on Sunday with a rifle and fired at least one shot. Gunman Edgar Welch says he has been influenced by the book Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge about faith and masculinity, a popular one for some evangelicals.

This paragraph is absolutely stunning.

To begin with, to turn her argument on its head, for many liberals, the phrase “fake news” is also being used to describe “conservative bias,” to the point that The Washington Post recently alleged that it was Russia feeding fake news to sites like Drudge that helped shape recent election news.

The Sword Cuts Both Ways

The sword cuts both ways, but Bailey seems to think that it is only conservatives who are accusing liberals of fake news and that it is evangelicals in particular who are prone to believing this fake news. Again, the flawed reasoning and wrong assumptions are striking.

Remarkably, Bailey makes the blanket statement, “Fake news has taken hold in religious circles,” citing this as proof: “Ahead of the election, a widely circulated website insinuated that famed evangelist Billy Graham endorsed Donald Trump.”

Seriously? This is proof that “Fake news has taken hold in religious circles”? One example of one false report that was believed by some people (who knows how many) justifies her sweeping indictment?

Perhaps we should say, “Fake news has taken hold in movie-goer circles,” since many movie-goers believed the false report that Denzel Washington had endorsed Donald Trump.

Or maybe we should say, “Fake news has taken hold in black circles,” since many blacks believed the false report that Ferguson’s Michael Brown was shot by police while saying, “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!”  (And what of the fact that this fake news, circulated widely by the mainstream media, led to violence against police?)

Or maybe we should say, “Fake news has taken hold in government circles,” since the Obama administration actively disseminated the lie that the deadly Benghazi riots were provoked by an obscure anti-Islam video.

And speaking of “fake news” being spread aggressively by the mainstream media, according to The Intercept’s Gary Greenwald, “Back in October, when WikiLeaks was releasing emails from the John Podesta archive, Clinton campaign officials and their media spokespeople adopted a strategy of outright lying to the public, claiming — with no basis whatsoever — that the emails were doctored or fabricated and thus should be ignored. That lie — and that is what it was: a claim made with knowledge of its falsity or reckless disregard for its truth — was most aggressively amplified by MSNBC personalities such as Joy Ann Reid and Malcolm NanceThe Atlantic’s David Frum, and Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald.”

It is highly irresponsible, then, for Bailey to paint such a one-sided picture, as if evangelicals in particular were prone to believe “fake news.” But it is even worse to connect evangelicals in general with acts of violence, based on this incredibly tenuous line of reason: 1) the gunman at the pizzeria believed fake news; 2) he mentioned in an interview that he had been  “influenced by the book Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge about faith and masculinity, a popular one for some evangelicals”; 3) evangelical attacks on mainstream media are getting dangerous.

I mean no insult to Bailey, who describes herself as a Christian, but this is not sound reporting.

Sound Reporting? Try Again.

First, there is not a syllable in Eldredge’s book (or, for that matter, in any of his preaching or writing) that would inspire someone to pick up a military weapon and storm into a pizzeria to disrupt a suspected pedophile ring. (For the record, the gunman expressed remorse for his actions and did not, in fact, shoot anyone, nor did he say he was “influenced” to go to the pizzeria because of Eldrege’s book. He simply said he was “influenced” by it, also noting in a 45-minute interview that he had recently become a Bible believer. Perhaps the Bible too should be questioned?)

Second, who gave anyone the right to indict tens of millions of law-abiding, God-fearing citizens based on the actions of one individual who may not even belong to that group and who was acting totally independently? Shall we indict all blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians, Muslims, Catholics, atheists or others based on the actions of one black or Hispanic or Jew or Asian or Muslim or Catholic or atheist?

And shall we now indict all publications read by criminals? Perhaps a New York bank robber was an avid read of the Times. What then? Or perhaps a Wall Street embezzler loved Agatha Christie novels. Shall we suggest a nefarious connection between the two?

What makes Bailey’s article all the more unfortunate is that it not only brings false allegations against a substantial percentage of the country, but it completely ignores the very real dangers of anti-evangelical misreporting, such as the SPLC’s complicity in the near massacre at the FRC’s DC headquarters, when a demented gay gunman walked into the building intent on killing as many staff members as possible.

He had learned from the SPLC that the FRC was a “hate group,” finding their location by means of the SPLC’s hate map, which led a number of conservative commentators to state that the SPLC had blood on its hands.

Of all this, however, Bailey appears oblivious, instead making sweeping, unsubstantiated claims about millions of Americans, claims which could lead to further violence against them. After all, if you wrongly think your neighbor might be prone to violent acts against you or your family, you might be inclined to misread their innocent actions and act violently yourself.

I share with Bailey a disdain for “fake news,” and I deplore the destructive results of such “news.” In the name, then, of truthful journalism, I appeal to Bailey either to support her claims in detail or to retract her charges.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Billiam

    “..I appeal to Bailey either to support her claims in detail or to retract her charges.”
    Good luck with that.

    • galatians328

      SEE ABOVE: Evangelicals have FOR CENTURIES believed and promoted the FAKE NEWS of White Supremacy! Contrary to The Good News that they ‘say’ that they believe. God will judge, surely. But we do not yet know how miserably God will judge your idolatry and hypocrisy? Since your ‘Saviour Trump’ loves Putin so much – even to the point of DENYING the truth discovered by our CIA! – perhaps God will let evil come to you and allow Putin to make you all his sex slaves and labor slaves and drug slaves …. as he does with his own Russian people?

      • Billiam

        Wow. You make an amazing amount of assumptions here, and succeed only in making an @ss of yourself. Bravo! If you keep patting yourself on the back for your righteousness so much, you will put your shoulder out of joint.

        • galatians328

          Actually, I included in an original blog numerous citations from historical and theological sources making it clear that US Evangelical history and leaders have been complicit in the ideology and idolatry of White Supremacy. The Stream does not want people to understand the complicity of US Evangelicals in White Supremacy and removed the blog. The Stream, while claiming to support religious liberty, does not support the religious liberty of naming idolatry. The example of Jesus in the Bible, and of countless prophets, if that God upholds and support those who call the people of God away from idolatry! The Stream is now getting in God’s way by preventing prophetic discussion of idolatry at this website under its control.

      • AndRebecca

        Charles Darwin came up with white supremacy. V.I. Lenin decided he could make use of it in order to take over America and the western European countries. It’s been effective. Lenin’s minions in the mainstream media have been using it since the 1940s to “change” America… What language are you speaking in, word salad?

        • galatians328

          SORRY, ‘becky’ or ‘becca’: You haven’t a clue about history. White Supremacy arose LONG BEFORE Darwin. You are utterly mistaken, or lying! …. George Whitfield, the most famous Evangelical preacher of England and the American Colonies, of the 18th century – CENTURIES BEFORE DARWIN – turned from the Gospel and began to teach that Blacks were inferior to Whites, and began to own slaves. That is the core of White Supremacy among Evangelicals. The long history of Evangelicals owning slaves spread White Supremacy throughout much of the Colonies and then the States. And in the past 100 years Evangelicals staunchly opposed civil rights, human rights, and fellowship in prayer and worship with Blacks … and Mexicans, and Arabs, and Syrians, and Chinese, etc …. Christians! White Supremacy is utter idolatry against God’s Sovereignty! Jesus was NOT WHITE. Jesus dear mother, Mary, was NOT WHITE. Joseph, the Lord’s caring human father was NOT WHITE. He Apostles were NOT WHITE. White Supremacy abandons as inferior all these NOT WHITE founders of Christianity. What do you think Jesus in Glory in Heaven thinks about your considering his NOT WHITE family across the world inferior?

          • AndRebecca

            People may have preached the inferiority of blacks before Darwin, but Darwin wrote the book that the Marxists used to make an issue about it. Marxists didn’t use Whitfield. That’s what I was trying to get across to you. Lenin constantly compared (and wrote about ) the poor whites and blacks in America to the poor proletariats in Russia in order to come up with a plan to take America. One of the things he found was even in the south around 1900 blacks and poor whites were more literate than the people in Russia and of course both groups had it better overall than the Russian peasants. The whites in the South had about a 35% illiteracy rate and the blacks had a 40% illiteracy rate while the illiteracy rate in Russia was 70% among the peasants and they were 70% of the population of Russia, not a localized group. And, evangelicals have not opposed civil rights, but have had a problem with them being used to get rid of Christianity…For someone so smart you’re uneducated on this subject and it shows. Your brainwashing has gone well, though. Americans have had a problem with Mexicans since before the Texas Revolution and that is why we had the border put up between us and Mexico. Mexico is a Socialist nation and has many problems because of that. Mas corruption plus a huge problem with murders by drug dealers. We Americans have also had problems with Muslim pirates before the country was founded. I believe Hillary Clinton even dealt with Muslim piracy off the coast of Africa a while back. And, um terrorist acts as well. I hope Evangelicals have problems with terrorists acts. And, we’ve had problems with the other groups you mentioned starting fights with us… What is it, two hundred million people killed by the communists in the last century, and we’ve tried to stop the slaughter. You must be reading that Howard Zinn garbage. Get some primary sources going. After the Civil War the evangelicals did all they could to educate the ex-slaves. So did the government. And, what color do you think Jesus is, if not white? Are you saying Jews aren’t white? .. I’m happy to see your word salad problem has cleared up. You must have taken your medicine.

          • galatians328

            What the freak are you talking about? Lenin? Muslim pirates? Mexican corruption? Texas Revolution? …. Stop the Freak Out! We are making the HISTORICAL observation that ancient Israelites were NOT WHITE PEOPLE. And they were certainly not ‘White’ in the current parlance of White Supremacy. Jesus and his cis/birth family were ancient Israelites! The historical evidence – from ancient accounts, ancient art, and from contemporary anatomical re-construction of ancient bodies, and other research is that ancient Jews very likely had some African features, had red-brown or darker skin, had kinky hair (head, underarm, pubic), men VERY likely had short cut kinky/curly beards, etc. Jesus and Jesus’ cis/birth family were not VIKINGS! They also were not CHINESE, or AZTECS! … they were ancient Israelites! They did not know or care about Lenin, Muslim pirates, the the Texas Revolution. Has the FAKE NEWS boiled your brain? Stop with the FAKE NEWS and get with the GOOD NEWS!

          • AndRebecca

            You really don’t know history do you? And, you have a short fuse due to your mental confusion, but that’s what your medicine is for. And, you were talking about more than one thing, but must have forgotten and have no ability to go back and read what you wrote… I’m glad I’m me. The ancient evidence show the Jews in the Middle East looked white along with most everyone else in the region at that time. But, if you have some website showing that things were different, let me know. I have an open mind, just not so open that my brains have fallen out like some people.

        • Gregory Peterson

          No, Charles Darwin did not “come up with white supremacy.” In fact he, very unlike Southern Evangelicals, was strongly against race slavery. If memory serves, he did not believe that there were actually “races,” at least as racists define them, anyway.

          That said, he was a man of his times, as are we, and those times were extremely racist. He was less racist than others, as was his family, but racism was inescapable for many Europeans and ‘white’ Americans..

          I would suggest the now classic ‘White Over Black: American Attitudes toward the Negro, 1550-1812’ by Winthrop Jordan 1968, for starters. White supremacy was well established by the time Darwin was born.

          Simply because communists were against segregation and Jim Crow doesn’t mean that segregation and Jim Crow were right…not to mention that racists were using your argument to justify their hate propaganda, “Massive Resistance” tactics and even violent opposition to the Civil Rights Movement, as well as delegitimizing and silencing of Black leaders and intelligentsia and allies.

          Or to put it this way, on civil rights, the communists were right and conservative white Evangelicals were the real hate propagandists and terrorists. (Though the main leadership of the Civil Rights Movement were not all that fond of communism, mostly seeing it, correctly, as an oppressive and authoritarian system, and as they already lived in one, why exchange it for another?)

          • AndRebecca

            How do you recall Darwin, when you didn’t even read him? Darwin wrote an entire book on White Supremacy called “The Descent of Man.” …
            Let me suggest to you that in the year 1800 over 90% of the earth’s land mass was ruled by nomadic tribes who could neither read or write. They were still living in the stone age. They still practiced cannibalism in many parts of the world. Missionaries were going to places where there was still cannibalism clear into the 1950s. The only areas where there was any modern civilization 1800 was in parts of what is America, England, France, and Germany… Russia was a black hole… Christians in America fought a huge battle over slavery and the slaves were liberated by them, and not by Marxists.
            And Christians started schools and churches and hospitals in America and around the world for all sorts of people.
            Christians have been working to bring a better life to all the people around the world and have been doing it for centuries. Communists have not. Communists have only tried to get rid of Christianity… You have the most ridiculous ideas about the past…Communists don’t give a rip about civil rights. They care about taking over the world and having everyone live under a dictatorship. Are you oblivious to what goes on in North Korea and China and Cuba?
            I’ve read accounts of Christian missionaries to different racial groups. You should try reading about them yourself… They believe in the brotherhood of man.

  • Hmmm…

    People with “religion” only and not a genuine spiritual connection are woefully ignorant of the subject, and to be an editor operating in that condition is a miscarriage of representation. They merely murk the subject, and do need to be called out to either get in touch with it or get away from it.

  • TruthTeller (Deplorable)

    You want fake news: Reuters, early on election day morning, sent me this email: “There is an 87% probability that Hillary Clinton will be the next president.” Further proof that no news organization can be trusted to tell the truth. The false narrative of hands up, don’t shoot has led to the deaths of way too many men in blue.

    • galatians328

      HERE is SOME REAL FAKE NEWS! … Christians owning slaves! Christians opposing human rights and civil rights for Black people! and the like. White Supremacy is one of the greatest FAKE NEWS deceptions concocted by Satan! To replace Jesus Good News with Satanic FAKE NEWS.

      • Jim Walker

        You seemed to put “Human and Civil rights above God’s commandments
        So to you Evangelicals are White Supremacists ? What do you call a Black, or Hispanic or Asian Evangelicals ?
        The media likes to twist their narrative to push their agenda and they score a point making you believe them. you maybe an academic but you are daft.
        Why didn’t they blame Black Supremacists when majority of the Blacks voted for Obama ? So White men voting for Trump are labeled White Supremacists ?
        What school did you go to ? What Bible do you read ?

        • galatians328

          YOU HAVE MIS-read our words by our error of communication (we apologize if so], by your own error in reading (well, errors happen and we correct them), or by your intentionally mis-reading (you should apologize to us), or because the shadow of the Father or Lies covers your eyes (We Must Pray!).

          Let us speak plainly and simply:

          WHITE SUPREMACY IN ANY FORM IS IDOLATRY AGAINST GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY. THE BIBLE ALWAYS CONDEMNS IDOLATRY. WHEREVER EVANGELICALS OR OTHER CHRISTIANS COOPERATE IN IDOLATRY THEY/WE MUST REPENT AND TURN BACK TO GOD.

          The historial and theological evidence is that Evangelicals have cooperated in White Supremacy for many centuries in America. You only need to read commentaries by the conservative Christian historians and theologians on the topic at the website Gospel Coalition, for example.

          We are not discussion particular political parties and particular elections. White Supremacy ideology has infected Evangelicals from long ago, when Whitfield – the most famous Evangelical preachers in England and American Colonies of the 18th century – changed his mind about slavery, began to call Black ‘inferior’ to Whites, and began to own slaves. That was LONG AGO. And Evangelicals have been infected with White Supremacist ideas since.

          • Jim Walker

            I apologize. The world is not perfect and there will be some groups of people who think God favours them more, and there are many who are supremacists, not just white people.
            Even people in certain churches think they are more Godly and pure.
            I condemn such behaviour and pride.

          • Gregory Peterson

            Blithely dismissing the not so distant past of American white conservative Evangelicals as you have done…is misdirection.

            It wasn’t other “supremacists” who were defending Jim Crow by most every means possible, including turning Birmingham, Al into “Bombingham,” While there are other “supremacists” who are recycling old racist arguments, conspiracy theories and political tactics against a multi-ethnic minority group, ‘The Stream” is pitched for conservative Evangelicals…who apparently mostly just happen to be ‘white.’.

          • Jim Walker

            Do see the world at large, racism is everywhere, in the past and present, not just white people. Frankly I believe the reason why we don’t see much racism in action in US, its not because many people become sane, but the laws forbid them.
            Sadly,every “superior” race and the rich have some racism etch in their DNA.

          • imamazed

            just curious…. why do you refer to yourself as “we” and “us” and “our”? Are there more than one of you typing these posts? Do you take turns?

    • Wayne Cook

      Yep…agreed.

    • Gregory Peterson

      That would be a mistake. That’s not the same thing as “fake news.” Polling was exceptionally difficult in this tumultuous, roller coaster election cycle, especially with the negatives of both candidates and the new ways people use new media technology.

      I can’t find Reuters reporting that. The only “87% probability” prediction that I could find was for Trump to win. That was put out by SUNY professor Helmut Norpoth back in late July. He did call it, so that should get him some deserved political consulting work if he wants it. I didn’t want to believe him as the Pres. Elect is an awful bigot and a possible danger to me and mine, as his cabinet picks amply illustrate, but…if you’re right, you’re right, and the Prof. was right.

      Reuters actually gave Clinton a 90% chance of winning, I see, and their reasoning and numbers were sound… but that didn’t make them right, obviously. And in their defense, their caveats did show how Trump could, and actually did, win. Apparently, judging from other reporting, many people were still making up their minds on Pres. Elect Trump right up to the last second. (And, Sec. Clinton did win the popular vote as predicted, but as that was still a second place showing in our electoral college system, Too bad for her.)

      It’s in Reuter’s caveats that shows the difference between an honest mistake and “fake news.” Reuters reported how they could be wrong in their prediction from their data before they were actually proven to be wrong by the election itself. Does “fake news” do that?

      • TruthTeller (Deplorable)

        Evidence has shown that pollsters can and do skew their information to make the polls show the results they desire. I am sorry you and yours feel threatened by the man who is about to be President. But I know how you feel. I was scared of Hillary. The thought of dismembered baby boys and girls in the womb scares me also. My family is multi-racial, and male and female. We are all conservatives, we all voted for Trump for President, and none of us are afraid. We are not white supremacists, not black lives matter. We don’t live every day filtering everything through the color of our skin. We have no grudges against anyone, and we don’t focus on things that happened decades ago. No one is out to get us or take advantage of us. By God’s grace we move forward with His hand guiding us. By hard work and determination we take hold of the opportunities living in this great nation make possible. I do not need or want government assistance, but I do not condemn those genuinely in need who receive it. I will not wear the labels others who do not know me personally want to pin on me through their judgementalism. And I do not get in endless arguments with those whose views differ from mine. I have lived through many different presidents, and life goes on with and after each one. May you find peace and may your fears be put to rest, and my sincere hope is that we can all come together to make our nation the beast place to live for all of US. My best to you, my friend.

  • Howard Rosenbaum

    Those of us who have embraced a vigorous faith in a compassionate, quickening & trustworthy Creator can at times become somewhat oblivious to the distinctions that separate us from those who don’t hold as precious this inimitable relationship afforded us who believe . Our very lives were designed to be secured upon the veracity of God’s revelation of Himself thru the One sent to restore us to truth & subsequently a justice predicated upon Gods desire to have again a people who would “hear His footsteps in the garden ” … & have no cause to hide. This distinction is the qualifier. It qualifies us to embrace the truth, speak truthfully & act in accordance w/the truth. To presume that this is a people inclined to falsehood , intentionally or otherwise is premeditated ignorance or a simple refusal or perhaps inability to comprehend the distinction that separates he who believes from he who won’t. We need to be reminded from time to time the words of the Master, when He referred to”Satan”s future media empire”( I jest – just a little ..) He had harsh words for some religious people of his day. Accusing them of being in the devils family, He affirmed the distinction that separates God’s family on earth from that other dynasty of a once celestial being. This despot, Jesus states” does not stand in the truth , for there is no truth in him … he is a liar & is the father of it”. Seems that were one to claim biblical precedent( laying claim to their own Christian prerogative ) for the veracity of what is promoted as news in much of todays media, then it should be expected that those who insinuate or accuse the evangelical community of embracing or promoting falsehood have simply affirmed their own despotic lineage or at least their misguided association w/it.

    • galatians328

      You use eccentric and/or ecstatic grammar, rhetoric, and work-choice – which is difficult to plow through, like Milton’s Paradise Lost, for example – but IF we understand the fundamental points, we agree in part and disagree in part.

      We believe your fundamental points are

      1. Christian believers – who have a living relationship with the God of Creation – ‘can at times’ misunderstand, or not make strong enough effort to understand, those who are not Christians believers.
      2. Non-Christians – who do not have a living relationship with the God of Creation – are not ‘qualified’ to comment of the intentions of Christian believes because they are not Christian believers.
      3. Jesus provides an example to Christian believers that we must discern between ‘truth’ – which is from God and God’s Word ( Jesus being the Way, Truth, and Life) – and ‘untruth’ – which is from Satan and the demonic servants of Satan.
      4. Some people who are see – to themselves, and to others – to be Believers may be speaking and acting contrary to God, Satan and Satan’s demonic servants being so clever with deception.
      5. Much of ‘the news’ contains little or no truth. Believers may be deceived by ‘news’ and lead astray.

      So,
      We agree with 1.

      We do not agree with 2 because The Bible contains many examples – as story, as history, or parable – where non-Christians speak truly. In Numbers we find that “the LORD opened the donkey’s mouth, and it said …”. So, even non-humans may speak truly.

      We agree with 3.

      We agree with 4.

      We agree with 5.

      We seem to agree on many of what we perceive to be your fundamental points.

      BUT would we on every particular point of view, or even many, or some, particular points of view. Hard to know. We do not know you. And likely never will except through the Internet.

      We agree with many points of view in The Stream. But we disagree with many, too. And we’ve seen others who agree and disagree in The Stream, which, is a MEDIA of NEWS.

      So, it is humble – a good Christian virtue, since we are ‘to walk humbly’ – to conclude that not all Believers will agree on particular points of view about ‘the news’ in any ‘news media’.

      • Howard Rosenbaum

        Hey, I was reviewing my post when your reply popped up. First, appreciation for your interest , initiative to reply & comparing this rant in some fashion to Miltons Paradise Lost, which may be a bit too generous, but helps me to value the perspective of others. The implication may be made then, that the field you just “plowed through” was substantive & not too shallow & thus required some effort to dig up what may lie beneath the surface. Thank you. While your points 1, 3,4,&5 I suppose could be gleaned more or less readily enough from the verbiage presented, I will comment briefly on your #2 point as noted. You mention the intentions of Christians being perceived incorrectly by non Christians as something I project to be inappropriate. Our Savior implied that the intentions of others can only be known “by their fruit”. So were we to judge the skeptic or unbeliever’s intent then it is only by their fruit ( journalistic integrity) that we could make any ethical claim to “knowing them”. On the other hand , it is the grace of our God that provides a progressive revelation to those who are on a path of “enlightenment” leading to a full initial embrace of The Truth. So, Yes an unbeliever can discern those traces of God’s mark upon culture , humanity & even journalistic efforts, so called ….

  • Aaron Thomas Haskins

    PizzaGate is real, and the serious ones researching this such as David Seaman an independent investigative Journalist who was one of the MSM until his eye’s were open, have shown the reality of it. MSM is ignoring the huge mountain of evidence the DNC is nothing more than a bunch of Satanic Pedoskunks who abuse and destroy everything they get hold of. The real fake news is the MSM and we Christians are on to you, your days are numbered as we form our own media outlets, you can’t stop us you can’t control us and we don’t need your lies anymore. Hey, ever hear of Jimmy Savile? Yeah the guy the BBC and MSM covered up for years, while giving him access for more children’s lives to destroy? You people the MSM called it a conspiracy theory then too. All of you are walking around eye’s wide shut, ignoring the reality of the evil all around you.

    • Gregory Peterson

      Oh good grief. Seaman has proven himself to be an unreliable source.

      (Not to mention that both Pres. Elect Trump and the Clintons happen to have known the same, now notorious alleged for legal reasons pedophile Billionaire who also was generous with his charitable donations, so if you’re going the guilt by association route, you might think twice about where it could lead you.)

      What does Jimmy Savile, a British pedophile who died of old age and cigar smoking five years ago, have to do with American politics?

  • galatians328

    THE MOST GRANDIOSE EXAMPLE of ‘fake news’ that is endemic to Evangelical American culture is White Supremacy. Many – not all – Evangelical denominations, associations, cultural and moral norms, and perhaps even core beliefs about faith in the Lord have histories that have been infected with White Supremacy. This historical infection may be centuries long! or decades long!

    e.g. Centuries long
    Wikipedia:
    George Whitefield, famed for his sparking of the Great Awakening of American evangelicalism, campaigned, in the Province of Georgia, for the legalisation of slavery, joining the ranks of the slave owners that he had denounced in his earlier years, while contending they had souls and opposing mistreatment and owners who resisted his evangelism of slaves.Slavery had been outlawed in Georgia, but it was legalised in 1751 due in large part to Whitefield’s efforts. He bought enslaved Africans to work on his plantation and the orphanage he established in Georgia.

    e.g. Decades long
    Evangelical (Southern Baptist) theologian and historian, Matthew Hall
    But it does seem self-evident that, in the main, white evangelicals—particularly those in the South—were deeply invested in efforts to either uphold Jim Crow or to try to slow down its dismantling. While a previous generation of historians suggested this was symptomatic of “cultural captivity,” I’m not so sure. In fact, in many cases, it seems that evangelical theology—or at least distorted models of it—were part of the reason segregationist beliefs and structures took shape the way they did. The unfortunate reality isn’t that evangelical theology in the South was muted when it came to racial justice, it’s that it was actively used to undermine justice and to perpetuate a demonic system. And that’s the cruelest historical irony of it all: those who loved the “old rugged cross” were often also those who torched crosses in protest of desegregation.

    Dear Evangelicals: Please consider these FACTS. White Supremacy has infected Evangelical church structures, cultural and moral norms, and core beliefs about faith in the Lord FOR CENTURIES AND DECADES!

    This is the most EXTREME ‘fact news’, utterly contrary to The Good News! Evangelicals had a LOT TO ANSWER FOR to their fellow Americans, to people around the World, to their children and grandchildren – whom they have infected with White Supremacy …. and at The Judgement to the Lord! White Supremacy is Satanic idolatry opposed to the sovereignty of God!

    Get busy, Evangelicals! You have centuries of FAKE NEWS to correct!

  • Wayne Cook

    Right on target Dr Brown.

  • Dean Bruckner

    Best bumper sticker: Every morning I read the Bible and the Washington Post. That way I know what both sides are up to!

  • Liberal Elitist

    Fundamentalist Christians seem to be in a perpetual state of victimhood.

    • Howard Rosenbaum

      We,”Fundamentalist Christians” as you describe those who w/biblical precedent have been the favorite subject of persecutions throughout the millennia are no strangers to perpetuity. To paraphrase a recently departed champion of the faith ; “were somewhere in the future & we look much better than we do right now ..”
      No, were not the victims of duplicitous political systems & fragmented ideologies that lay claim to being the sole residents of that elusive “higher ground” that roughly half the population of these United States of America have no hope of ever reaching. We are rather pilgrims & foreigners, yet not strangers to the promise of a better tomorrow w/in the framework of a brighter today.

      • Gregory Peterson

        White “conservative” American Fundamentalist/Evangelicals, especially those in the South (but also everywhere else in America and among a great many other white Americans in various degrees [I’m an American of Scandinavian descent]) have a very racist, bloody history of white supremacist terrorism and the most oppressive authoritarianism… of the sort that got Emmett Till very viciously murdered because the whistle in his speech impediment was against “race etiquette.”

        And with their descendants endlessly recycling old racist arguments against a smaller, multi-ethnic minority group, all the while promising to roll back the clock on equal rights and remediation of economic injustices for them, why should I think that they now hold any believable promise of a better tomorrow within the framework of a brighter today?

        Speaking of Kim Clement, the hateful ‘Gay Christian Watch’ accused him of being a false prophet for defending the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Pres. Obama.

        Unfortunately, Pres. Obama didn’t bring peace to the Middle East as that champion of the faith foretold …which judging from the Bible, has never been all that much of a peaceable place to begin with (though Mecca and Medina once had a 4 century peaceful interlude, which was interrupted by Turkey’s entry into WW 1).. Somehow, some way, the people of the Middle East will need to bring peace to themselves, and one hopes very soon. America hasn’t helped them in that goal, to wildly understate.

        I’ve always thought that the people who slammed Rev. Wright, who studied ‘whiteness’ theory (as have I) and is a harsh critic of white privilege, as a racist, were heavily invested in whiteness themselves.

        • AndRebecca

          You should actually try reading American history and you will see it has not been very bloody or racist, except for the “Civil War.”

  • galatians328

    We have detailed in several attempts the complicity of Evangelicals in White Supremacy. But The Stream has failed to publish them.

    Why does The Stream refuse to publish documented history about Evangelicals’ White Supremacist ideologies and idolatries?

    By not publishing The Stream

    – offends the liberty that it claims to uphold

    – fails to hear the prophetic word firmly established in The Bible

    – appears to be indicating its own complicity in White Supremacy and that idolatry against God’s sovereignty.

    and will surely be judged by the God of Creation.

    • AndRebecca

      Huh?

  • galatians328

    Dear Editors, Publishers, and Owners of The Stream, and readers who care:

    We have been examining your Christianity (not your faith: that is God’s to examine; not your salvation: that is for each to examine – as Apostle Paul states many times, in many contexts of teaching – in your own ‘fear and trembling’).

    We have been examining your Christianity with the touchstone/conversation piece of ‘White Supremacy’.

    We are purposefully and consistently identified the various ideas and values of White Supremacy (as well as the full-formed ideology that gathers together ideas and values of White Supremacy into a ‘gestalt’, an ideological world view, field of meaning, life style, or other structure of beliefs, attitudes and behaviors).

    We have consistently claimed that White Supremacy is idolatry against God’s sovereignty. It is. The Biblical literature makes that clear. The effects, impacts, and consequences – ‘the fruit’ – of White Supremacy make that clear by empirical evidence, in theological insight, and to spiritual wisdom.

    We have seen responses that acknowledge White Supremacy to be the idolatry that it is. God is glorified by such believers! And we have seen responses that make claims, tell stories, assert evidence otherwise: that believe, and proselytize others to believe, that White Supremacy either no important to discuss, need not be challenged, is nothing to repent of, or indeed is Godly! Satan is growing stronger in these views!

    We assess that ignorance of factual history is a problem. Americans – as a group – 1. are notoriously ignorant of history, 2. are taught biased history ( with the many forms of bias that exist) without tools for critical research and reflection, 3. choose to believe, repeat, and transmit ‘magical’ stories about history as simple as believing that ‘the good old days’ were good for everyone and as dangerous as believing that America was built by Whites and should only be for Whites.

    We implore The Stream to have a ongoing series about history: American history, history of Christianity, history of Evangelicalism, history of political ideas (e.g. history of democracy, history of free speech) etc.

    We report to you also that the idolatry of White Supremacy and a-historical beliefs are infecting the authentic Christianity transmitted from Jesus’ Apostles to us. At the very beginning of groups and congregations following ‘the Way’ – the teaching and example of the Lord Jesus Christ – there were heresies arising, including a prominent heresy (heresy: deviation from authentic Christian teaching from the Apostles) that Jesus was not truly a human person. In the Apostle Paul’s writing we see – ALREADY, that soon! – that heresies denying Jesus’s humanity were arising and, indeed, strongly taking hold. By the First Century Docetism was widespread. And it continued in many forms: Apollonarianism,, Nestorianism, etc. We’ve heard people claim that Jesus was White like Europeans and Americans are White even through his family and genetic heritage were ancient Israelites. We’ve head people claim that Mary was from Israel but God the Father provided White-ness. Etc other bizarre, magical, and heretical beliefs. All these are shameful adventures into heresy contrary to the Bible, contrary to the Apostle’s teaching, contrary to historic authentic Christianity.

    We hope that The Stream will undertake a series on historical (and continuing) heresies.

  • Sonnys_Mom

    Sarah who?

  • galatians328

    No need to be concerned about WashPost … fear God!:

    BEHOLD …. God has sent/is sending the fearsome polar vortex across Trumpland, the land of grievous unrighteousness, secret greed, lusts, selfishness, and other ungodliness, and manifold idolatries! BEHOLD. THE CLIMATE CHANGED, AND HUMAN WICKEDNESS CAUSED IT! On the eve of the Electoral Vote the angels who sang at Jesus birth, as modest shepherds received the refugee baby as Lord, now wail in travail that the people hurry to anoint a Satanic Lord. BEHOLD. THE CLIMATE CHANGED, AND HUMAN WICKEDNESS CAUSED IT!

  • Gregory Peterson

    “Ryan’s “personhood” argument” is extreme and not all that biblical, for that matter. It’s about keeping women under the heavy thumb of people like yourself, controlling women by controlling their sexuality, treating them all as potential child murderers, as innately untrustworthy child/adults who an adult male who knows better than they what is best for them.

    • Gregory Peterson

      ‘galatians328’ below, does bring up the point that white “conservative” American Evangelicals don’t have all that inspiring of a history, having been tightly wrapped up in white male supremacy at the expense of pretty much everyone else.

      If moral people were very wise to reject their self-privileging teachings in the past, why should anyone accept your still self-privileging teachings in the here and now?

    • AndRebecca

      Hopefully, the people running this site will soon see you for what you are and delete your comments.

  • Jim

    “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”

    — Matthew 5:11-12, King James Version

Inspiration
To God be the Glory
James Robison
More from The Stream
Connect with Us