Jul. 25, 2008 - Book Review: Grand Theft Jesus
As is my usual habit (it may well be a dumb habit), I picked up this book randomly from the library’s new book shelf. Based on the title, and the summary, I thought it would be interesting. I realized from the summary that the author certainly held a very, very liberal theology (“bringing back the female side of God”) but I thought there might be a few good points. I certainly recognize that folks of every stripe have hijacked the name of Jesus to promote their own doctrines, and Christianity is plagued with false teachers, hucksters, and hypocrites. It was clear that I would end up disagreeing with many of the author’s conclusions. That is generally not a problem for me, as I love a good debate, even if I’m holding it with a book.
Unfortunately, what I hoped would be a well thought-out, persuasive, interesting book turned out to be poorly written screed against all things evangelical and conservative. Mcelvaine either misunderstands or deliberately misinterprets evangelical beliefs and what it means to be a Biblical literalist. He rightly points out the insanity in certain segments of Christianity which proclaim to the world that “God wants us to be rich!” He rightly reminds us of the social teachings of the Gospel, a principal one being caring for the poor in a self-sacrificial way. He is rightly outraged by the hypocrisy of calling something a perversion from the pulpit while engaging in that very behavior in private life. He is absolutely correct that such things are corruptions of the Gospel.
Sadly, that's as far as reason goes in the book. The bulk of the book is written with constant, very dull-witted attempts at word play and punning. He might as well have stamped in red ink “I hate Bush” on every page, for the number of times he manages to work in his disdain for our President (which respectful title is notably missing throughout the book in favor of the sneering ‘George W. Bush’ or ‘thief-in-chief’). Dr. James Dobson gets similar treatment, oddly (and wrongly) lumped in with televangelist snake-oil salesmen. Mcelvaine does exactly what he accuses evangelicals of, at the opposite extreme. His book reads like Anne Coulter’s would if she were liberal instead of conservative. Grand Theft Jesus is full of the broad-brushed generalizations and name-calling that it condemns from Ms. Coulter and other conservative authors. He misinterprets (whether it’s intentional or not) beliefs and twists them in order to fit his assumptions of evangelical Christians and social conservatives. He exaggerates, misrepresents, and denigrates wildly and in many instances undeservedly. In some cases the book is downright deceptive about the beliefs of certain high-profile Evangelicals. Anyone who has listened to Focus on the Family or read any of Dr. Dobson’s materials would know that he most certainly does not preach against contraception as a universal evil, and does not believe that women must spend their lives barefoot, pregnant, and miserable. FotF will not even outright condemn the Pill, asserting that there is no real proof that it is abortifacient (How do I know this? I emailed and asked them directly) Yet, reading the book, one would have no choice but to assume that Dobson believes and teaches such things.
Some of Mcelvaines "facts" are either patent lies or tortuous stretching of the truth. From reading the book, one might imagine Timothy McVeigh was a fundamentalist or evangelical Christian. Maggie Gallagher has a good explanation for why that's an untruth. And even a passing knowledge of McVeigh gives no impression of any kind of Christianity whatsoever. The statements he made and the literature he was interested in point strongly towards agnosticism. Likewise, Fred Phelps is presented in the book as only slightly worse than James Dobson, the implication being that Dobson is a quiet but vicious hater, while Phelps takes his hatred to the streets with great noise and gusto.
Mcelvaine condemns evangelicals for picking and choosing which portions of the Bible they take literally and seriously, while he himself does the very same thing, and worse. He assumes that “free grace” is “cheap grace” to all of us, and decides that because we believe we cannot be saved by works, we therefore do not believe good works matter at all.
What I find absolutely fascinating is that Grand Theft Jesus completely ignores some of the most high-profile and well known “name it and claim it” wealth preachers out there. At first, when I noticed this, I thought, “Surely not!” I combed through the book, and through the index, looking for names of folks that I know preach that God wants us all to be wealthy. How odd that I did not see the name of T.D. Jakes, Juanita Bynum, or Eddie Long. Do you know what the common denominator is? They’re all “minorities”, or “people of color”. According to Mcelvaine's definition of “Christianity Lite” these people should be on the top 10 of worst offenders. Yet somehow, they escape even a mention in the book. Is Mcelvaine only brave enough to pick on elderly (in one case, deceased) white males? Are minorities immune from criticism? And since he roundly lambasted various right-wing folks for intimating that 9/11 and Katrina might be God’s judgment, why did he not also condemn the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for doing exactly the same thing? Surely Mcelvaine did not somehow miss the widely broadcast “God #@$% America” sermon from Wright’s pulpit.
This obvious bias, packaged with the constant forced attempts at humor, twisting of hymns, revision of Scripture (to mirror Mcelvaine’s assumptions of what conservatives believe), and general poor writing made the book not worth reading, unless one likes to chuckle at the literary antics of the ignorant. Grand Theft Jesus reads more like a series of hate-blog rants than a well-researched and well-considered book. It’s really a shame, because had Mcelvaine gotten past the fog of his own bias and rage, he could have taken the concept in a very different and much more valid direction.
Comments
Jul. 25, 2008 - Untitled Comment
Posted by Anonymous
I don't know that the author was remiss in not pointing out that many prosperity preachers are "minorities", when some of the most notorious are "Caucasian": Jesse Duplantis, Kenneth Copeland, Joyce Meyer, etc...
Why does race matter in these issues, anyway? Error is colorblind.
Jul. 26, 2008 - <em>Untitled Comment</em>
Posted by cappuccinosmom
anon--race doesn't matter to me. I just thought it was interesting that someone who would certainly claim not to be racist would focus soley on one race and ignore any problems in another race. :)
If Mcelvaine has researched Kenneth Hagin and Joyce Meyer, then he can't possibly be ignorant of the existence of Juanita Bynum and TD Jakes--they work together, promote each other's books, etc. So why was there not even a passing mention of them in the book? IMO, it was political correctness taken to the extreme, and the reason I mentioned it was as an example of his bias. If Mcelvaine were truly "color blind" then those minorities who preach what he considers error would have been mentioned. ;)
Edited by cappuccinosmom on Jul. 26, 2008 at 3:36 AM
