It's well known that these folks are crazy.

politicians in DC. Obama attends their events, Tom Coburn who is Obama's friend was the guy who worked out the payments to silence mistresses of the Family members. Obama has preached that Coburn is Super Holy 'a devoted Christian'. And a pimp, but who's counting? Not Barack that's for sure, to him anything Straight is Holy Beans.
Then there's Hillary. She offers the Coes up as mentors, as fonts of wisdom who should be teaching everyone.
These people are sexist, homophobic hypocrites, liars and I do in fact measure a candidate by the company they keep, the people they praise and the bullshit they call wisdom.

I can still remember the feeling when it was announced that Rick Warren would give the invocation at Obama's inauguration - it was like a kick in the gut. I could almost hear the prez say, "Suckers!"

Politicians are politicians. They do stupid shit all the time like coddle religious bigots in an attempt to get votes.

because both parties catered to the religious right in order to win.

it's origins can be traced back to the results of the 2010 elections and subsequent gerrymandering after the census.

Republican legislatures and governors have been passing these restrictive laws.

The election of Obama caused Republicans to move rightward in many cases. One of the results is restrictive abortion laws. Another result of the 2010 election disaster is voter suppression and failure to expand Medicaid.

And of course citizens united is also playing a part as much of these GOPers winning office are bankrolled by people like the Koch's.

That's why voting is no joke.

Saying 'no surprise, not news, don't look' is not helpful. This group needs the sterilizing light of day to be cast upon it.
One of the things that made me sick of this group was Obama's fawning over Coburn 'we are both Christians, gays bad, our wives are friends' while Coburn was acting as C Street pimp. Brokering hush money deals for the extra marital partners of the anti equality Christians and Obama placed him above every gay person in America as a moral example. A filthy, dirty corrupt old bigot. 'He's my good friend, marriage is between one man and one woman, Oklahoma is lucky to have Tom!'
Made me sick. Because when you claim a bigot is a good man, you are saying something really awful, no matter how dulcet your tones.

It's disingenuous for you to claim that I said that. I did not. I'm totally opposed to catering to religious bigots.

I think we need to cast our gaze long and hard on religious bigots.

But what's happening with these abortion restrictions that madfloridian had mentioned is a recent phenomenon in red states and it's a byproduct of the anti-Obama fervor that swept red states after Obama's election. They have moved to the extreme.

Democratic politicians have catered to these crazy religious folks since forever, but the recent rollback of abortion rights in red states in the last 4 years cannot be attributed to this.

Thanks for the thread, madfloridian.

This group disturbs me. It has way too much influence over our politicians.

A Calvinistic view that the "saved" were "chosen" by God long before they were ever born and nothing and I mean nothing they do can interfere with their salvation outside of rejecting that "gift".

It is a pretty fucked up doctrine of a pretty fucked up branch of Christianity, but I have never heard it embraced so completely as it is by this group. Most of the modern Calvinists also believe that the wealthy are wealthy because they were chosen and therefore "blessed" by God and are supposed to run the world. They also believe that the poor are being punished by God for being wicked unsaved souls and it is wrong to help them or some such nonsense, both these views also appear to fit this group.

I think it is safe to say they are radical Calvinists. It is a very dangerous belief system because of these beliefs and I had previously extrapolated that such beliefs could lead to the atrocities this group is manifesting, but I never thought I would see my theories played out in real life as they obviously are by this group.

If these people don't scare the shit out of you, they really should.

The religiously weird scare me.

They are secretive about their members, so we can never really be sure.

like the Pilgrims. England had the good sense to kick them out, but then they sent them to America. To be fair, this was also a by product of them sending the Scotch everywhere; as Scotland embraced Calvinism. In the South, a people who would be called Scotch-Irish (scots who were orginally sent to live in Ireland) were sent to the colonies, especially what would become "The South."

There is a reason why Baptists and other Calvinists are strong in the South, and why the stars and bars is a Scottish style St Andrews cross.

The correct title for it is "antinomianism", which means that your sins are forgiven in advance is the logical end of the doctrine of pre-destination. There is a famous gothic horror novel about this: "The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (1824), by Scots writer James Hogg, which was written as a scathing criticism of Calvinism It was routine for Orthodox religions to accuse dissenters of holding this doctrine, but a few apparently did. Calvinists would reply that one way you could tell who was "justified", i.e., among the elect, would be by their righteous life, which would be lived according to God's will. On the other hand Calvinists (and Lutherans) believed in "total depravity", which means that no action a person could take would contribute to their own salvation.

"The Family" just sounds like a kind of mafia or cult.

I was raised Southern Baptist, though I no longer belong. Their view was that we were all evil when born, but that if said we accepted Jesus as savior and got baptized by immersion....we would be okay. The present head of the Baptist seminary in Louisville was once a student of mine. The last few years I have seen him on TV, and I realize why I am no longer Baptist.

Thanks for the post.

Southern baptist being among the most fundamentalist of the different Baptist groups. I do not favor any one over any other, I gave up Christianity after a bad experience when I took classes to prep me for the seminary (Catholic, a whole other animal than either of the other two).

In my younger days I was fascinated by theology and really did want to become a priest, after turning away from Catholicism I spent a few years auditing other Christian belief systems and becoming acquainted with their theology by attending their bible studies and services. In the end I did become a priest, but to the horror of many in my family I became a Wiccan priest (which they equated with devil worship for some reason).

would never embrace such radical ideas as this justification for rape or murder, or the idea that financially privileged people have some special grace from God.

I do have one question tho, do "the elect" that you know believe that they are forgiven if they do such things, or do they believe those things earn them a place in the hell they believe in?

Also, you don't know very many it would appear as prosperity theology is extremely common among Calvinists, more so than the free to commit sin nonsense.

I also did post that I had never come across a group so extreme as they before, I am sure their extremism is quite an embarrassment to other members of the elect of God.

Forgiven if they sincerely repent, which means they do their best not to repeat the sin, and they believe God knows their heart. Unforgiven sin can lead to punishment, but I don't know how that is to be accomplished for them.

I think that by the eighteenth century Calvinism had much softened and no longer held such extreme views (if they ever did). They still believe in justification by faith alone, however (not works).

No, this is NOT the doctrine of predestination. The doctrine of predestination is NOT about being chosen to rule the world or do whatever the hell you want. This doctrine, which actually goes back to Augustine (and indeed the earliest roots of Christianity), is part of Catholicism (e.g., Thomas Aquinas has it in his theology), and is part of Calvin's theology (although not nearly as important or central to him as people often think), and it is basically a doctrine based on the question: if we do not save ourselves, if our salvation is from God, why then are some saved and others not? (Universalism - i.e., the idea of universal salvation regardless of faith- is one way of dealing with this question. A doctrine that says it is not God, but rather ourselves who ar ethe agents of our salvation, is another way to answer it - see Arminianism. Or you can go the way of the doctrine of predestination, which ultimately says that God is the agent of salvation, and hence salvation of each individual is known only to God.) The doctrine of predestination is, therefore, in essence a doctrine that goes against the hubris that the self is central to salvation, and is indeed, in essence, a doctrine that humbly submits to the grace of God. In some versions it even goes as far as saying that no one knows if he or she is included in God's grace, and therefore all you can do is to live sober and hardworking lives and hope for the best. This in essence - there are more nuances, but this is a discussion board, not a theological treatise.

Calvinism is much like Hegelianism, in the sense that you get right wing and left wing versions of it. Growing up in South Africa, I witnessed the right wing version in the form of apartheid theology, and the left wing version in the form of anti-apartheid theology. Here in the US the right wing churches are usually NOT Calvinist in their theology, but rather Arminian - they believe that they are responsible for their own salvation - which ironically often leads to a hubris of "if I can believe myself into heaven, why can't you?" Keep in mind that the Presbyterian Church (USA), the single largest denomination of Calvinist origins, ordains gay clergy and just last week decided in favor of gay marriages being performed by their clergy, affirmed yet another anti-racist confession (this one from South Africa), and decided to disinvest in companies that aide Israel in its occupation efforts. The very progressive United Church of Christ is likewise of partial Calvinist origin. Etc.

I personally disagree with some versions of the doctrine of predestination, but I also know that it is a much misunderstood doctrine, and certainly not the root cause of theological evil in this country. Far more problematic is the cosmic (Manichean) dualism present in the evangelical churches in North America, with their stark dichotomy between good and evil, mixed up with an absurd biblical literalism, and a good dose of old-fashioned American anti-intellectualism. As I said, this being an online discussion board and not a theological treatise, it is not possible for me to go into more details. I just want to argue against oversimplifications. To malign Calvinism with simplistic or distorted views of one of the doctrines traditionally associated with Calvin, to ignore the very progressiveness of many of the main Calvinist denominations, and to ignore the influence of other theological concepts in the conservative churches, is problematic.

Also what is described in the OP sounds a great deal like the logical conclusion of what they were teaching directly and plainly in those classes. Yes, other denominations use the word differently and there are many branches and sub branches of Calvinism and Christianity in general, but it is fair to say that since the doctrine appears to be misunderstood by many according to how you were taught it, they would likely say the same of you.

Do you really doubt it is what they are using to rationalize theologically what they believe? I don't, as it is taught that way by many and would be the easiest of many options to slightly bend to justify what they justify for their members.

I doubt you share their beliefs and such would never even occur to me so you don't need to view my observation as some sort of attack on you or Christianity in general.

I did not experience your post as an attack on me or on Christianity in general - I'm not inclined to take things too personally, for what it's worth!

However, your post generalized a lot more than you might say now. Your very own words "It is a pretty fucked up doctrine of a pretty fucked up branch of Christianity" are painting with a pretty broad stroke. I am well aware that this doctrine, like pretty much any other theological doctrine out there, is easy to abuse. I should add that I was not taught this doctrine in just one way - with years and years of theological training (far more than just a few classes), including a doctorate, I think I safely say that I do not operate with just a one-sided view of this doctrine (or any other, for that matter). I'm pretty familiar with different takes on it, and my own theological work is often deeply critical of many aspects of Christian theology, including this one. From that vantage point I would have to respectfully disagree with a broad stroke approach that describes these people as influenced by "a pretty fucked up doctrine of a pretty fucked up branch of Christianity." I share your horror at these people. It is quite possible that some version of the doctrine of predestination plays a role in their thinking. It is also quite possible that ideas of "manifest destiny" (a vaguely similar but distinct notion that was central to the subjugation of Native Americans and the exploitation of Africans in this country) still influence them. In general, though, I see the right wing in this country to be far more influenced by Arminianism and a Christian form of gnosticism (indeed, Manicheaism) than by old-school Calvinism, although there are certainly still uber-conservative Calvinists and Calvinist influences around.

I really only meant to comment on their interpretation of both the doctrine and the branch of Christianity, I meant to be specific to them and my words do not make that at all clear, I apologize for that.

I only have had the one perspective and one personal study exposure over the course of about a year of the branch and the doctrine that was taught in a very affluent and right wing congregation. They commonly said very similar things to those horrendous quotes in the OP and only differed in matter of extreme and so I saw it as an extreme branch of the already RW extreme interpretation of predestination and the doctrine of the elect that I had experienced.

I admire your knowledge and your training and find your view that the right wing is more widely influenced as a whole by Arminianism intriguing, I do know at least a bit about some of the forms of Christian Gnosticism and I certainly agree there, I also find it glaringly obvious that the ideas found in "manifest destiny" are very much alive unfortunately for the country, we should have outgrown that long ago and I found the concept of manifest destiny to be well, evil, for lack of a better word.

I know a great many of the teachings as well as practitioners of more than a couple branches of fundamentalism practiced locally, but I have never infiltrated audited and studied "mega-churches" as they are not prevalent in my area, what generally do they adhere to (if one can even find enough commonalities among them to find a general set of teachings that they adhere to)? I worry about them because they seem to be a growing part of Christianity in many parts of the country.

What do you know of them?

Megachurches, "non-denominational" churches, evangelical Christianity in general, tend to be more Arminian than Calvinist. By Arminian, I mean that they emphasize the individual's personal choice for Christ, the born-again experience etc. (This is in fact the opposite tradition to that of Calvinism, where the individual's salvation is rooted in the mystery of predestination and not in personal choice for faith - although certainly Calvinism can just as easily be twisted.) Born-again-ism in itself is not necessarily problematic, but it can have all kinds of negative effects, including anxiety, since the emphasis is on the strength of one's personal belief. It is therefore often fearful of doubt, and fearful of any kind of challenge to certainty of faith - including any doubts regarding biblical literalism. Mix with that the tendency towards a sort of gnosticism - denial of real earthly life, denigration of the material as evil, in particular the body, a cosmological semi-Manichean dualism of good vs. evil, and you've got right wing American Christianity. There was a wonderful document that came out before the Iraq invasion in which many progressive theologians (many of Calvinist orientation, I should add!), protested against the invasion). It did a pretty good job of pointing out the Manichean logic of the Bush administration, which I found really interesting. I could not find the link right now. I'll see if I can do so later.

I think I like discussing this with you! You seem like an interesting, open-minded person!

bigots, anti choice sexists and they all believe in the same basic theology. The hair splitting people who are very religiously oriented is 'inside baseball' chatter. No one else cares. 'They are so different, they have whole other reasons for being exactly the same as the others!!!'
Anyone who comes to tell me that one set of bigots is worse than the other has come to defend and promote a set of bigots.

One can also discuss theology without believing in any branch of Christianity. Case in point, I am not Christian.

I have known many Christians that have no problem with homosexuality, some of whom are very much in love with their same sex partners. I have also known a few that embody the stereotype you describe and I rather hate them.

But if you choose to believe that all Christians are bigots, or that all atheists are not, I doubt I could change your mind, nor is such a mission of mine. I prefer Wicca as a means to explore my spiritual side but do not actually believe in any anthropomorphic Goddess or God.

Some sets of beliefs are more dangerous and violent than others and depending on the point in history their danger level changes, it is not a bad thing to understand what they teach if you wish to know the harmless from the dangerous during the point in history one finds oneself in. It is possible to find allies as well as enemies among them and failing to make all religion cease to exist it is perhaps the smartest thing to do.

But go on blanket hating all Christians on this board an in the RW, I am sure those among them that are trying to help protect your rights have it coming!

Making the effort to clear up the misunderstanding about predestination.

I would like Hillary supporters to explain her admiration for Coe. This is kind of like President Obama's admiration of Reagan—a deal breaker.

I don't think many were aware of it, actually.

Reagan is the first KNOWN simulacrum for the corporate megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, and our global economy.

I also have a problem with many of his cabinet members, including Arne "I Play Basketball" Duncan. One has to wonder if this is his (failed) effort to be Lincolnesque.

but i am not sure if i am correct about that.

but he explained himself well to show she was making shit up. *gasp!

Start at about 4:00 mins in. It was Hillary's False Accusation and slippery interpretation that wanted you to believe that Obama 'admired' Reagan, as you said.

It's a lie, it's a falsehood, it's what is wrong about the Clintons.

I want her to explain it. And to outline exactly how much interaction she's had and for how long she's dealt with 'The Family'.

but still chose to say that and have it in print for all of history.

I can see if it was a question during a presser or something impromptu where you could instinctively just say nice about everyone and not necessarily mean it, if you aren't prepared.

What she said about Coe was deliberate and thoughtful -- she likes him.

any background knowledge about this asshat other than he is a fundy.

Last edited Mon Jun 23, 2014, 12:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Yet most of the country doesn't realize just how dangerous they are.

Thanks for this post.

It is very sad and quite frankly makes me angry..we don't want to lend any
credibility to people who think like that..horrible.

Thanks for the OP, madfloridian.

"unforgiveable" act, so long as you're an established member of the "tribe". I've seen this attitude expressed time and time again by people like this all over cyberspace.

K&R.

Says a lot about them.

Very scary that they have so much power & no one calls them out on what they are really about. I'm starting to believe that at least half the human race really are monsters.

Oh, I know why....
I lump them all together the C Street Family, the Bundy Family, the FOX Family.....add yours to the list.

Yep.

Octafish..have you set up your twitter account yet so I can follow you?

often rationalize away their own offenses, and claim exemptions from the rules that apply to everyone else, claiming special 'privilege' that does not apply to those not part of the group of those who see themselves as exceptional.

And that applies to religion, wealth, political power, or any other form of 'specialness' they feel defines them as being 'better than' others not in their group.

scary ones too.

wrote about these guys a long time ago. It's the old beyond good and evil argument that claims some people, for whatever reason justifies it, are sufficiently superior and essential so as to be above the law of man and exempt from the law of God. It's great work if you can get it and lack a conscience that mocks you for it.

Pastor Coe and his fundy Church hosts the annual President's Prayer Breakfast.

The Coe klan owns the C Street Church notoriously known as Frathouse for Jesus.

And, Hillary Clinton has been associated with this extreme, far rightwing Church since 1992.

Christian Dominionist Church.

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/10/12/ted-cruz-dominionism-and-jesus/

Guest Blogger Mike Spindell writes about the way that Christianity has changed from following Jesus to Men becoming Kingmakers.
This seems to describe the Family of the Coe's, Falwell's, and Robertson's, to me.

and saying otherwise seems a bit silly to me. Everything is justified by their interpretation of Christianity.

more about power but also about religion.

If we lived in a democracy, instead of an oligarchy, the NSA, DOJ, and FBI would have most every member of "The Family" under surveillance.

Well, except for the ones they had already arrested and imprisoned, of course.

I'm confused a little. He's the son of Doug Coe, who clearly is the leader. But does David Coe have a leadership role in this or any other organization?

Clearly, he's a dominionist asshole, but do his words carry any weight?

A few weeks into my stay, David Coe, Doug's son, dropped by Ivanwald. My brothers and I assembled in the living room, where David had draped his tall frame over a burgundy leather recliner like a frat boy, one leg hanging over a padded arm.

"You guys," David said, "are here to learn how to rule the world." He was in his late forties, with dark, gray-flecked hair, an olive complexion, teeth like a slab of white marble, dark eyes so big they didn't need to move to take in the room. We sat around him in a rough circle, on couches and chairs, as the afternoon light slanted through the wooden blinds onto a wall adorned with a giant tapestry of the Last Supper. Rafael, a wealthy Ecuadoran, had a hard time with English, and he didn't understand what David had said. He stared, lips parted in puzzlement. David seemed to like that. He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. "You have very intense eyes," David said.

"Yeah." David nodded as if he hadn't heard that before. "Hey, you know what's interesting about King David?" From the blank stares of the others, I could see that they did not. Many didn't even carry a full Bible, preferring a slim volume of New Testament Gospels and Epistles and Old Testament Psalms, respected but seldom read. Others had the whole book, but the gold gilt on the pages of the first two-thirds remained undisturbed. "King David," David Coe went on, "liked to do really, really bad things." He chuckled. "Here's this guy who slept with another man's wife — Bathsheba, right? — and then basically murdered her husband. And this guy is one of our heroes." David shook his head. "I mean, Jiminy Christmas, God likes this guy! What," he said, "is that all about?"

"Because he was chosen," I said. For the first time David looked my way.

"Yes," he said, smiling. "Chosen. Interesting set of rules, isn't it?" He turned to Beau. "Beau, let's say I hear you raped three little girls. And now here you are at Ivanwald. What would I think of you, Beau?"

nothing much about him, other than references to the same material. I'm just curious about whether he's often there, giving advice, etc. I don't know, and can't seem to find out much of anything about him.

Even searching for his name, along with The Family, the Fellowship, and C Street doesn't turn up much. I can't seem to find what it is that he does with his life, either. There are several David Coes out there. The man's full name is David Mark Evans Coe, but that doesn't turn up much either.

There is a David Coe who is a drunken Baptist minister in West Virginia. Maybe that's him. I just can't find out, after some basic Google research. I'll keep looking.

ETA: The WV David Coe is not this one. Doug Coe's son, David Mark Evans Coe, apparently lives in Annapolis, MD, but doesn't seem to show up on places like LinkedIn or other professional listings. He apparently graduated with a degree in Political Science from James Madison University in Virginia in 1978. Other than that, there's just nothing really about him to find.

There are quite a few of them, but of course no mention of a connection to this group.

I have looking for a while. Bound to find something someday.

There's very little on the Internet about him, which is a little strange. His full name is David Mark Evans Coe. Nothing to find using that search, but David M. E. Coe does turn up some stuff that ties into this person. He graduated from James Madison University in 1978 with a degree in Political Science, but doesn't seem to have any professional records.

It's possible that he goes by David M. Coe or David E. Coe. There are many of those, but none seem to be a great match. David Mark Evans Coe apparently lives in Annapolis, though.

I found a picture or two on a search that might be him, but no way to know.

I read "The Family" back when it was released and I have to say that while I had already known I was an atheist for decades by that time, that book along with a few others in the post-9/11 examination of the role of religion in our lives really drove it home for me.

Religion in all of its organized forms is a blight on humanity and something we should make haste in its accelerated demise. The sooner our species retires it from our world, the better off all humanity will be.

That's the problem with a hierarchical religion. Its basic structure depends on power, and the invisible king is seen as some sentient being with preferences and agendas of his own---as interpreted by false prophets claiming special "understanding" and powers.

I assume that means using it for his own purposes, as so many political leaders do.

Love that cat.

during the early years.

There is so much megalomania among these sicko assholes. And they are so well financed by so many evil people, so that they can spread their evil across the globe.

Unfortunately, they have many fans and supporters among the so-called "conservative" leaning politicians.

There used to be so many long, well-sourced posts showing good research. Then long was too much, and we all started posting shorter stuff. I miss those days.

else. One religion for the wealthy and one for the mere peons. The rich are told greed is good, the rest of us are told the poor have a better chance of getting into heaven than the rich. They are told raping and killing young girls is okay, they are chosen and therefore can not commit sin. We are told that having an abortion to save a woman's life is a sin and go to hell.

The Family does not think rape is a crime, then they send their little worker bees out to murky up the waters on what rape is....George Will, the guy who said some women are easy to rape.

because we lack fear of some god or other. Maybe they need to rethink things.

My own prediction is that Coe's megalomania will eventually force the paranoia, always the flip side, to the surface in such a way that he finishes out his days in a nice hospital somewhere.

in our area. There is such a lot tolerance level where I live for anything liberal in nature. Right wing radio is on all day, with liberal radio only available from Sirius XM.

"Because, as a member of the Family, he’s among what Family leaders refer to as the “new chosen.” If you’re chosen, the normal rules don’t apply."

They understand this perfectly. The hidden hand of God.

Religion is the perfect cover. If the religious are targeted, they claim persecution. If they are ignored they shout for attention.

If they are given power, the world suffers as did Jesus on the cross.