Religion

February 5, 2005 11:31 PM

Jim and Tammy Faye's son, Jamie Charles Bakker, is a tattooed punk rock preacher of Revolution Church, in Atlanta.
posted by semmi (49 comments total)

According to our by-laws, everyone that walks into The Masquerade on Monday nights is technically a member of Revolution. Lil' Jon is now a member of our church. Good times.

From what I see so far, I think this is another small encouraging sign of the next wave of reclassification for Christianity, even though subculture churches aren't all that new, and probably this one's getting press because of the bloodline.

Anything that appears to further encourage breaking-down of mass stereotypes within organized religion makes me very happy, though, especially when they come across as non-antagonistic.
posted by redsparkler at 12:20 AM on February 6, 2005

Also, the Beauty link on the main page thrills me to no end.
posted by redsparkler at 12:26 AM on February 6, 2005

The manipulation of religion runs in the family. How is this a surprise at all?
posted by interrobang at 12:31 AM on February 6, 2005

My God he's got his father's mouth and his mother's eyes! This does NOT bode well.
posted by WolfDaddy at 1:08 AM on February 6, 2005

This is nothing new. Something similar existed next door to my town. I guess if it keeps kids off drugs, more power to them. In my experience it just manifested more confusion in their souls. Just trading one opium for another I guess.
whatever...
posted by nickerbocker at 2:47 AM on February 6, 2005

I don't know if this could really be considered news, outside of the Bakker boy aspect. Conservative Christianity has been doing this manipulation of popular culture for years. Despite Jack Chick's fears, they have the same conservative theology as before.

There were a lot of teens in this subculture in my high school (a small English-speaking one in Jerusalem run by a Christian Zionist group of the Church of England).

Admittedly, I've never felt any attraction to that type of Christianity (I'm a sucker for smells and bells), and consider myself lapsed at the moment.

Offtopic
While looking around the Jack Chick site to find the comic I remembered, I found the sort of interpretation only Jack Chick could do of the Israel/Palestine situation. That is, I expected the Christian Zionism, but to connect his Vatican conspiracy theory to it blew me away. There's even a panel with the Pope as puppet master.
/Offtopic

On Preview: I guess I'm sort of going off in the direction Nickerbocker is.
posted by Gnatcho at 3:06 AM on February 6, 2005

Interesting, semmi. Quite a good (though old) article here that discusses Jamie and his memoir ("Son of A Preacher Man"), in slightly less than sympathetic/enthusiastic terms.

I don't know... His parents are vile creatures, and while I feel sorry for what must have been a sucky childhood, I'm afraid I also have my doubts about him, especially after reading this (from the article I've linked above):

"He vigorously denies any financial misconduct on the part of Jim Bakker; he acknowledges that his dad "made some mistakes" but neglects to detail just what those were.

and

Most disturbingly, Bakker's vision of redemption for his family takes the form of their triumphant return to the public eye. He couldn't be more excited about his mother's starring role in the camp documentary The Eyes of Tammy Faye. Any irony implicit in that film is lost on Jay Bakker. To him, God's favor shows in sister Tammy Sue gearing up for a gospel singing career, father Jim plotting to return to his role as shepherd of the airwaves, Jay's own face in Rolling Stone magazine. For a guy who claims publicity destroyed his life, he's awfully hungry for more.

posted by taz at 4:13 AM on February 6, 2005

jay baker is a good example of the phrase "the apple does not fall far from the tree"
posted by halekon at 6:57 AM on February 6, 2005

The New York Times Magazine had an article on this just a few weeks ago.
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 7:16 AM on February 6, 2005

Like Christian rock, this is a vile scam to con kids into joining their cult. They pull them in by convincing them it's "cool" with cheap tricks like this, and then do things like move all their prayer parties to Friday and Saturday nights to cut them off from their peers, and use all the rest of the time-tested methods of indoctrinating young people, etc...

As someone that runs a tattoo site with a large youth membership that "preaches" solitary and individual empowerment, it disgusts me to see it subverted like this. And to be clear, I have no problem with Christians. I have a problem with cults and mind-destroying indoctrination.
posted by glider at 7:26 AM on February 6, 2005

From the NYT article:

'We're just trying to love people with no agenda,'' he told the group. ''That's hard, to be a Christian and have no agenda, and it's hard for people to think of a Christian with no agenda.''

Nice. I read that, and I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. Sure, it could all go to shit, but think about it...they post their budget on their page...it's obvious they don't make a ton of money from this, and aren't interested in hiding anything.
posted by taumeson at 7:32 AM on February 6, 2005

glider:

They pull them in by convincing them it's "cool" with cheap tricks like this, and then do things like move all their prayer parties to Friday and Saturday nights to cut them off from their peers, and use all the rest of the time-tested methods of indoctrinating young people, etc.

that sounds like an agenda to me....if revolution starts doing that kind of shit, then i'll be right along with you.
posted by taumeson at 7:35 AM on February 6, 2005

I applaud Revolution. They are doing as Jesus did. They are going to the margins of culture and helping people in their pain. I think Jay Baker can help them because he has been through pain himself. It's hard to find an agenda or cult-like activity on this webpage.
Glider or taumeson, did I miss it? Where is the cult activity you two referenced?
If any of you read any of their notes on grace, it's a beautiful thing. I am just learning it in my late thirties and am overwhelmed by the grace of God. This seems to be what these guys are teaching.
posted by davenportmom at 7:47 AM on February 6, 2005

Sorry Taumeson,
I just reread your comments. I think we are on the same page. Sorry
posted by davenportmom at 7:48 AM on February 6, 2005

and then do things like move all their prayer parties to Friday and Saturday nights to cut them off from their peers

Damn, Glider. Repressed memories of some unfortunate moment from Vacation Bible School bubbling back to the surface?
posted by grabbingsand at 8:16 AM on February 6, 2005

Like Christian rock, this is a vile scam to con kids into joining their cult.

That's a bit strong.

I'm no fan of the Bakkers, but I'm also not big on the sins of the father being visited upon the son. And as far as Christian Rock goes, there's a lot of different flavors and variations on Christianity and there's just as many different flavors of Christian popular music. Are U2, Bob Dylan, T-Bone Burnett, Maria Muldaur & Van Morrison (self-described Christians who often address spiritual themes in their work) cult recruiters?

There's some charlatans out there and there's some sincere ministers, too. I don't know enough to truly judge this kid, but given the family track record, I admit I'd be cautious about him.
posted by jonmc at 8:20 AM on February 6, 2005

i'm with nickerbocker...i was big into the new christianity thing when i was a kid because of small local programs much like this...

when i was 16 i used to play nine inch nails covers in the church basement at the friday night coffee house...it was all quite silly and friendly and harmless....

sounds like the same thing for bigger kids....the personnel bit seems a little gratuitous, but schmeh...

ps. see the movie Saved! for a great look into this type of thing.
posted by es_de_bah at 8:22 AM on February 6, 2005

"I...am overwhelmed by the grace of God"

...yeah, you and all the tsunami victims I suppose. You've not met this man, you haven't looked into his eyes, talked to him...nothing. Yet, by reading a web page you've come to the conclusion he is doing as Jesus did? Explains why the Bakkers so easily swindled so many people.

Look, if this organization is truly helping kids and putting them on a path to a better existence, great. I'm all for it. But history should tell you that it is rare such organizations exist without an ulterior motive (i.e. money).
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:57 AM on February 6, 2005

Young Christian makes religion "edgy, " "hip," and "with it." Film at 10.
posted by sourwookie at 9:04 AM on February 6, 2005

Damn, Glider. Repressed memories of some unfortunate moment from Vacation Bible School bubbling back to the surface?

No, but back in my drug dealing art school days I had a lot of fun dosing these kids (consensually!) and then interviewing them about their lives.
posted by glider at 9:23 AM on February 6, 2005

"Young Christian makes religion "edgy, " "hip," and "with it." Film at 10."

"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit." (Matthew 7:16-17, KJV.)
posted by davy at 9:54 AM on February 6, 2005

but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Just to make sure I'm clear on the point of your quote: You're talking about the Bakker family, right?
posted by sourwookie at 10:00 AM on February 6, 2005

[slightly tangential]

An interesting phenomena here in Springfield:

In our downtown area, there is a place called the Mudhouse, which is The coffeehouse here in town. There are others, but for years this has been the place to hang. It is only a couple blocks from a major state university (enrollment around 12,000 when I attended). Yet when you walk from front to back, looking at the tables to see what people are studying, you don't see people with Art History, Math, Comp Sci, or Biology textbooks, for the most part you only see people studying for classes from one of the several local bible colleges. If you see a group of people having a meeting, it will invariably be a bible study group or a church youth group of some sort.

Why is this worth pointing out? It's interesting because several people have opened Christian-friendly coffee houses here in town, hoping to cater to high school and college aged Christian youth. They have all had similar atmosphere to The Mudhouse (or any other hipster-infested coffee house in any other city for that matter), served similar product, were even in the same neighborhood. Yet they have all gone under.

Any attempt to get Christians to patronize a Christian coffee shop where they could be openly Christian and be surrounded by Christians have all met with failure. It seems they find it "hipper" to be in the secular shop, almost in an attempt to appear distanced from their Christian identities.

This is not a judgment of any sort, just an observation that many of us locally have made.

[/slightly tangential]
posted by sourwookie at 10:23 AM on February 6, 2005

"Revolution," please...

Is this another one of the machines pumping out droids wearing tacky "Jesus died for your sins shirts" and trying to impose their values on others while pretending to be martyrs.

I'm SO glad I don't live in the South anymore. Christ...
posted by pwedza at 10:28 AM on February 6, 2005

As terrible as the PTL scandal was, the Bakkers weren't even the worst villians in that story. Were they addicted to prescription meds, fame, power, and a luxury lifestyle? Yes. Were they the patsys in huge power grab by the likes of Jerry Fallwell and Jimmy Swaggart, the ramifications of which affect us to this day? You betcha. I highly recommend "The Eyes of Tammy Faye". FWIW, I'm not a fundamentalist christian and I hate what most of them stand for - intolerance, smug self-righteousness, and using the bible to justify their bigotry while ignoring the parts of it that supposedly define their faith. I just think that the Bakkers were relatively benign and well-meaning compared to the other players in the televangelist world.

As far as Jay Bakker, we'll see how it plays out in the next couple of years. So far I don't see anything wrong with what he's doing - his message seems alot more "christian" than the majority of evangelist ministers I hear about. I'd rather spend time with members of his flock than Falwell's or Robertson's anyday. Besides, someone who entitles a sermon "Nobody Likes a Selfish Bastard" and links to the Sixteen Horsepower website can't be ALL that bad.
posted by echolalia67 at 10:36 AM on February 6, 2005

I quoted Scripture: "but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit."

Then Sourwookie asked: Just to make sure I'm clear on the point of your quote: You're talking about the Bakker family, right?

More that Jamie Bakker should be judged by the "fruits" of his words and deeds rather than what you yourself referred to as his
"edgy, " "hip," and "with it" presentation. One crafted, as you pointed out, to appeal to a certain "demographic", who as you said might still prefer places like the Mudhouse. Then Pwedza made a similar point. (Maybe we should start a club!)

And no, I don't read those verses in Chapter Seven of the Book of Matthew as referring to heredity or family background, but to the individual's "fruits"; in context Jesus is warning about "false prophets" and how to tell whether they're false (verse 15 of that chapter). To rephrase the point, even a false prophet can seem "edgy", "hip", and "with it". (I know, I don't write very good sermons yet.)

By the way, who remembers the Christian "heavy metal" group Stryper from the '80s? Somebody I knew called them "Spinal Tap for Jesus", a remark I remember when I come upon this whole "crossover and save the youth" thing.
posted by davy at 1:04 PM on February 6, 2005

And: yes to what Glider said.
posted by davy at 1:15 PM on February 6, 2005

I'm as likely as the next guy to be skeptical of something like this, but after looking over the site and listening to some of the mp3's in the media section, it's hard to believe that this is a scam of any sort.

If you find yourself comparing 'revolution' to 'Christian Rock' youv'e grossly missed the point.

It's been said earlier in the thread and I agree, these guys are a much more accurate representation of Christ than any other religious personality you might find on tv.

Listen to some of the media before you criticize this too much.
posted by benhugstrees at 1:46 PM on February 6, 2005

Any organized religion is a scam. The path to God is direct, not through paid employees. Assuming one buys that there is a path.

If an omnipresent God exists, by definition a church is irrelevant. At best a glee club or a fanzine is appropriate. But not a church, not a Bible, and certainly not a high-profit-margin church with a clever marketing ploy.

But what do I know? I met God by smoking DMT, so you should probably ignore my comments.
posted by glider at 1:54 PM on February 6, 2005

There's a good chance, IMO, that the correct reading of the NT is that Christ was advising people to look to their own hearts (look inside themselves; find the strength within; etc) instead of relying on priests and authority figures.
posted by five fresh fish at 2:30 PM on February 6, 2005

It would have been interesting to see what a different world we'd be living in if some of the gnostic sects had become dominant instead of Pauline Christianity...
posted by glider at 2:36 PM on February 6, 2005

Glider, I think that would be one of the few "alternate histories" books that I would be compelled to read. Can someone start working on that?
posted by redsparkler at 2:51 PM on February 6, 2005

Thanks for the clarification davy, I understand now.
posted by sourwookie at 3:25 PM on February 6, 2005

I think it would be interesting had one of the many pagan religions that Christianity is based on (the crucified Osiris, the crucified Krishna, the crucified Horus, etc) been selected by Constantine...

The whole pagan crucifixion thing is quiet interesting. There are several cultures that had a crucifixion theme long, long before Christianity came around. Just another example of how there is no one true religion: they all steal from each other.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:15 PM on February 6, 2005

Glider,

Please note that this is not trollbaiting, but I'm curious. If someone believes and follows Christ and believes that others should follow Christ as well, then what mode should they take if not this one?

If someone is an atheist and believes atheism is right, shouldn't he/she try to be convincing of that? If not, what kind of atheist is he/she?

I have no problem with Christians either, I'd just like to know what mode of action a follower of Christ should take to meet your thought of "being taken into a cult"

I live in the ATL, I may actually go visit this and report back about what I found (just for the hell of it). I think it'd be interesting to see the validity of it. If I do visit, and you want an email update, my email is in my profile.

FiveFreshFish: I agree with you about the borrowing (they also borrowed Baptism which is an old pagan tradition) but wouldn't it be arrogant for someone to not believe their religion is the one true religion? I mean, if an Atheist said "well, there might be a god...or if someone worships god then that's fine with me" Just a thought. I'm not trying to start a battle, I am just being the devil's advocate
posted by Hands of Manos at 4:23 PM on February 6, 2005

There's a good chance, IMO, that the correct reading of the NT is that Christ was advising people to look to their own hearts (look inside themselves; find the strength within; etc) instead of relying on priests and authority figures.

FiveFreshFish, ya think??? Now if only the Conservative Christians would understand this.

Please do know that there are a lot of Christian factions that believe in social justice and are very much concerned with "love thy neighbor" instead of "God hates fags-convert of burn!" it's just that their cousin, the evangelicals are the "winners" right now and history is currently being written by them.

In Seminaries where thought and theological discovery was once prized was destroyed by evangelicals because they thought it was "liberal teaching." Many upon many theological ministers and professors lost their jobs because of this. They regrouped and made new seminaries but it's been a long battle upwards (credited, certified, etc) to do so.
posted by Hands of Manos at 4:33 PM on February 6, 2005

If someone believes and follows Christ and believes that others should follow Christ as well, then what mode should they take if not this one?

They shouldn't take any route at all in my opinion.

I do not buy the missionary model when it comes to God. That's fine for matters of human intellect, but if someone wants to find God, all they have to do is disconnect from the things that ground them and say "Hey God, here I am. Let's chat" If God exists, God will pick up the phone, and God will do this for EVERYONE, no matter what their Church says. As I said earlier, by definition, an omnipresent God does not need a church. In my deranged opinion.

Missionaries have something to sell. God does not.
posted by glider at 4:49 PM on February 6, 2005

Glider,

Hmm...I would debate that (in a friendly way) as I've yet to see anyone (I know at least) have God answer the proverbial phone. I'm not infringing on anyone's personal beliefs or anything (in case they believe they had some supernatural experience like what you are saying).

I do believe that a God would need a church. Without a church, there is no God (which can be heavily argued, but I'm just trying to make a light point). Another example is, there is no husband if there is no wife.

I do think your missionary model is something I agree with (I'm not for selling things as well) but there was the great commission in Acts. It was given to the disciples that they were supposed to be missionaries. Now I do not believe people should just barge into someone's place and say "hey! Worship god or die bitch!" But I look at it in reverse, it would be an atheist duty to disprove the existence of God because if he/she did not, what type of atheist is he/she (a wavering one at most).

I'm just giving a counterpoint, I really enjoy what you are saying, Glider, albeit a little strong (imho). But all in all, thanks for your thoughts!
posted by Hands of Manos at 5:59 PM on February 6, 2005

How would you (or anyone other than the single individual) know if God has answered the phone for someone else?

Why in the world would God need a church? If God created everything and is omnipresent, thene everything IS God, and everything is a "church". Only a non-omnipotent/non-omnipresent "God" would need a church... And that's not much of a God, that's just a powerful entity.

As far as your husband+wife example, that doesn't seem quite correct, since you're talking about two individuals there. The relationship that a person has with God, in my opinion anyway, is more akin to the relationship that an individual atom has with the rest of the universe -- not the relationship that one atom has with a second atom. Sorry for dragging this thread off topic by the way.
posted by glider at 6:34 PM on February 6, 2005

How would you (or anyone other than the single individual) know if God has answered the phone for someone else?

Because no one has told me that has happened to them (well, Jim Bakker did and then he asked for a 1,000 dollars to keep that phone line open with God). Other than that, I don't know. Hasn't happened to me yet however I have almost been struck by lightening.

Why in the world wold God need a church?

I doubt that a God would. But I know if I were God, I'd ask to be worshipped. What's the point of being God then? To not have to pay for pr0n sites?

husband = God, Wife = the church. Somewhere in the bible I believe Jesus uses that analogy in Matthew and Mark (I know definitely it's in Mark).

Anyway, no problem with me dragging the topic off (I can't say that for the other 20k of folks reading). I don't not think you are wrong in your thinking, I just think there is some stuff worth exploring that you are talking about.

One thing that did bother me though:
No, but back in my drug dealing art school days I had a lot of fun dosing these kids (consensually!) and then interviewing them about their lives.

What's the difference in someone being a missionary and selling that "Jesus is Lord" and you selling good drugs? Seems the supply is both metaphorically / relatively the same thing? I mean, seems if you are against people selling things, you'd be against selling drugs?(or were you just being sarcastic you statement).

Once again, just to make it clear: I'm not really trying to get "one up" on you per se (so don't take it that way, I'm pretty neutral about stuff). I could care less one way or another, but I do like to hear what makes people tick. It's interesting.

Back to the Bakker boy...I think it's really interesting that they have it at the Masquerade, that's actually a really cool place to be. I'm not sure what's the difference in them coming in and having a worship service than some other things that happen there as well (they have a really cool 80's dress up night there on Tuesdays). I figure if people come, and they think it sucks ass, they won't come back and that's the end of the Bakker Jr Church. If they get "sold" on it, well...if you don't like it, then start a counter thing to his church. I personally think it's dumb as hell but hey, they aren't hurting me. Well unless I get pinned down and injected with "Christian Goo" that makes me a robot to worshipping something I may not neccessarily buy into. The I'd be a little highly pissed off that they infringed upon my right to think.
posted by Hands of Manos at 7:03 PM on February 6, 2005

Incidentally, I often what an insecure bugger "God" must be to need to hear so much how "great" and "good" he is. ("I mean you're really HUGE.")
posted by davy at 7:05 PM on February 6, 2005

Hands of Manos, if you don't know anyone who's met God, and that's what you're looking for, them maybe you haven't talked to the right people. I'm not sure what else to say without this becoming the two of us going "nuh-uh" at each other cyclically.

As far as God needing a church in order to be worshipped, I again repeat that only an inferior -- but still superior to us -- entity would need to be worshiped. God simply IS EVERYTHING. Worship would have at best a masturbatory satisfaction to it.

As far as what "Jesus" said in a heavily church-edited manuscript written long after his death, I'll remind of of the obvious flaw in that logic -- there was no Christian Church at the time Jesus spoke, and Jesus effectively denounced the temples of the time.
posted by glider at 7:15 PM on February 6, 2005

Don't worry, Jim has some new plans himself.
posted by shinynewnick at 7:17 PM on February 6, 2005

"great" and "good" he is

god's a he?

Worship would have at best a masturbatory satisfaction to it.

then why did the early christians worship?

heavily church-edited manuscript written long after his death

you still have access to the original text (the dead sea scrolls) as well as some of Josephus' documentation as well. They were not church-edited.
posted by Hands of Manos at 7:19 PM on February 6, 2005

English doesn't have a good pronoun that's gender neutral, thus he. Personally I'd be surprise if God has a thousand light-year long wang. I vote for genderless.

Early Christians worshipped in a very wide range of styles (see the gnostics for an obvious example), but I think the more interesting question is who did Jesus worship and how (but that's not recorded by anyone at the time)... and as far as the Dead Sea Scrolls, they're not a product of early Christians as I understand it, and while relevant to Christianity, they are not really stories of the life of Jesus...?
posted by glider at 9:07 PM on February 6, 2005

good thing these religious converstations never get redundant and boring on mefi...
posted by glenwood at 9:07 PM on February 6, 2005

But Josephus was church-edited; apparently they added pieces here and there about topics like Nazareth, Christ and Christians. He's not too reliable on Jewish/Judean history either.
posted by davy at 9:24 PM on February 6, 2005

Glenwood,

My apologies to you. How could I, in your opinion, not contriubted to this thread becoming redundant? By not commenting so much? Just letting "sleeping dogs lie?" If you will let me know I will consider it in future posts.
posted by Hands of Manos at 4:54 AM on February 7, 2005

aaah. This thread was perfectly lovely and amazing for a MeFi religion post... Don't, please, Hands of Manos, fall into the trap of getting into some personal dialogue with some other poster, carried out via the thread.

Try always to look at the whole post/thread as a piece, and only answer back when you are clarifying, adding, or bringing up additional, associated information. The thing that is most boring and least rewarding is two posters having at each other via thread(s) in MeFi, and you are better than that.

(ps: I know that it's difficult, but to quote someone, somewhere: "DO IT!")
posted by taz at 6:22 AM on February 7, 2005