DL Foster was Stephen Bennett’s guest today. The conversation covered quite a bit of ground as Joe Brummer documents on his site. Most disturbing however was DL’s promotion of his unique political variety of Christianity many refer to as Dominionism:
(+19:35) I believe that god has given us dominion over this world and because of that, you know that’s found in the scripture for anyone who wants to look that up, we have been given dominion, and dominion means we move forward and we take what rightfully belongs to us as children of God and so I take that very seriously.
[Download MP3 of Segment] Yes that’s iChat you hear in the background I’m new at this ok.
Thanks for transcribing this part of the broadcast, Dan. I think it’s a particularly remarkable and telling statement from DL. The Wikkipedia entry you linked to says this: “Politically active conservative Christians rarely use the term dominionism as a self-description; many feel it is a loaded or pejorative term.” Either DL thought only like-minded people were listening in, or he doesn’t ‘get’ that the concept of dominionism (taking over the world as a mandate/privilege from Christ) is a horrifying concept for many.
Well, gee…segregationists firmly believed in it too and still do.
For Foster to even mention it, considering it’s place in our nation’s cultural past-slavery, Jim Crow, just shows how selectively disabusive he’d like to be.
He mentioned on his site the constant opinion that homosexuality is a ‘dangerous lifestyle’.
See the funny thing about those loaded words…and they ARE loaded, is that
coal miners,
crop duster pilots,
cab drivers
soldiers
loggers
law enforcement officers
These are dangerous lifestyle choices that many people make everyday to lead.
Would he argue that the miners and pilots, etc are dangerous PEOPLE because they have those lifestyles, or that the choice is dangerous just to who leads it?
See, the anti gay ex gays are not honest about what they say.
Sincere, but not honest.
These are people that cannot discuss homosexuality as a difference, rather than a danger.
As St. Valentine’s Day approaches, gays and lesbians above all exemplify who St. Valentine defended with his life.
Soldiers were not allowed to marry. It was illegal. Their lives were dangerous. They had to have a soul that made them willing to kill and they were taken from their families for long periods.
Even to this day, the military has so many divorces and domestic violence issues within, that now the government is investing in marriage promotion and weeding processes.
Our tax dollars are spent on this.
Yet, despite the dangerous and difficult life that a soldier will lead-heterosexual ones can still and are encouraged to legally marry.
In this, it’s only compassionate and humane to encourage it.
And the only people left who can’t exclusively, are gay people to each other.
Stephen Bennett and DL Foster are promoting all over again, the weak argument that gay identity and gay sexual activity is dangerous.
Even if it were…it’s the gay person’s life to have, not theirs.
Happy Valentine’s Day everyone.
Love will always be love, and matter most above all things.
I believe they said that DL pastors a church somewhere? That is one scary thought but it also explains some things to me. And the more I read about “dominionism”, the more I am convinced that at the heart of it is the most basic of sins, pride, arrogance and a lust for power.
David
He’s based in Atlanta.
Recently the National Black Justice Coalition held it’s first conference there. I guess Foster had observers or he went himself. It was hard to tell from his blog article.
He bad mouthed it, of course.
He bad mouths a lot of things.
When he went on a tear about Tyler Perry, self made gazillionaire from the gospel music infused stage productions, I knew he is seriously impaired where a sense of humor is concerned.
The drag persona “Madea” that Perry has played on stage, have been turned into movies.
The first was out last year. A new one is due in March, I think.
I’m a fan of Perry’s. His character is hysterical.
And the brotha is FINE!!!
Now he’s got some explaining to do why he’s a fan of Bishop Eddie Long, who is also a millionaire, has a mega sized church and sent Mrs. CS King to a bogus clinic in a dusty town in Mexico that was closed the day after she died.
Some people. Are beyond trying to bother to figure out.
DL’s blog posted notice of his appearance on Straight Talk Radio and asked readers to “Please check local listings for air times.” I wrote a comment asking if DL or anyone knew of any stations that carried STR since I had been unable to find any and had to assume it was solely a podcast. I did make a point to ask in a straightforward manner without sarcasm or ridicule. DL added the following to the comment:
DL’s OFFICIAL response:
No I don’t and frankly my dear [fill in the blank]
But to make you fellas reeeeeaaaaal happy:
Please check your local podcast listings for air time.
So the question remains for me whether STR is an actual radio program as it presents itself, or simply a podcast. In Sept/Oct Stephen Bennett announced that one of the largest radio stations in the country had contacted him about doing the show, thus the birth of STR. I would love to have an official Stephen Bennett response, since the offical DL response was just snarky and unhelpful. Since the STR discussion board is shut down and I was denied membership anyway, I’ll send an email to SB directly and let you know what I find out.
Deception deserves snarkiness….whatever that is
Okay Rick, so you were being “straightforward manner” huh? What an honorable thing to do, buddy.
You left out the fact that you were an xgaywatch operative simply fishing for information to report back to your xgaywatch groupies. So much for “straigforwardness”. As expected, you and your coven of buddies here are still engaging in unscrupulous gossip and innuendo which has become the calling card of just about anyone residing on this website.
You were blessed that you only got “snarkiness”, considering your covert motives.
Well, DL, I would say my question was straightforward in the sense that I did not use sarcasm or assign motives to others. I did make clear that I had doubts STR is an actual radio show. I do not consider myself an ‘Exgay Watch operative’, and I do not believe I need to explain my full position in order to ask a direct question. Considering the tone of your response (ridicule laced with mild implied profanity), it seems you were offended by my question anyway and considered it an attack from the opposition (‘you fellas’). Since you’ve now removed my question and your response from your blog, it’s just ‘he says/he says’ anyway.
Which would be a greater deception?:
a.) an individual asking a question to get specific information, or
b.) a Christian spokesperson producing and promoting a podcast in such a manner that even guests on the show believe it’s a legitimate radio broadcast?
DL, this thread actually was started to discuss your use of the term ‘dominion’ on STR. I believe you were talking about how you see political activism as a form of ministry. As you can see in this thread, there are questions about what that means and concern about what dominionism has come to represent among conservative Christians. You said people should look it up in the Scriptures. I’m aware of 62 uses of ‘dominion’ in the KJV and assume most dominionists base their views primarily on Genesis (subduing the earth.) While I don’t think anyone here wants to get into a debate on theology, I wonder if you could lay out your understanding of dominionism and what you mean by the children of God taking what is rightfully theirs.
xgaywatch operative?
Good grief, what grade are we in here? So if this logic goes forward, I suppose nothing would be said if XGW was to advertise that it was a newspaper column and instruct others to “check your local paper” for our columns? Lie in the small things and I’m unlikely to believe you on the larger issues.
David
“You were blessed that you only got “snarkiness”, considering your covert motives.”
DL’s kinda cute when he tries to be intimidating.
Maybe if you’re nice to him he’ll meep for you.
Sill holding on to my orginal statements about good ole DL. He is just so angry all the time. He isn’t nice to people or at least us.
You have to wonder why he so mean. He reminds me of Jim Carey in the Grinch.
Pastor Foster,
I was wondering if you could justify your use of the word coven? If you havnt really noticed, we also discuss and debate biblical text in the spirit of Martin Luther, and yes that sometimes means we nail our greviances to the metaphorical Church door. So why do you accuse us of being witches and warlocks?
Are outbursts of emotion in the new cyber “pubs” of the world serve as an immediate condemnation of all discourse on the site? After all, if we read your website and various articles your emotions and sarcasm drip through the screen; however, does that invalidate all of your points and arguements?
In your article “Rape, by any other name…” you embellish your statement with:
“…it seems religious gays have become obsessed with being ordained. To understand why homosexuals and their rabid, control-starved troops want ordination…”
So does your ‘snarkiness’ invalidate your article and the points you make? NO, the article provides an intersting microcosm of the current state of politics in America. You suggest ulterior motives in the advance of freedoms within the church, which could be related back to the use of homosexuals as tools for the advancement of Socialism in our capitalist Republic. Hmmm, I looked past your emotions for interesting points and metaphors. Can you not afford us the same respect?
guys & gals…
I think by now we’ve learned that DL does not engage in dialog. It’s like trying to argue with a four year old – it doesn’t matter if you’re logical, logic has no impact on DL.
Let’s just let him be. If he’s not going to answer a simple question like “is Straight Talk broadcast on any radio stations?”, then he’s certainly not going to give a reasoned treatise on his views on dominionism.
It’s clear from his posting that DL considers himself to be chosen by God (perhaps predestined) to have dominion over the Earth and its inhabitants, including us. He does not feel constrained by the rules of civil discourse nor does he believe we merit any answers or common courtesy.
So lets not waste our time responding to him or getting worked up over his crassness. It just feeds his ego.
BTW – Boo, you made me chuckle
Timothy said:
So lets not waste our time responding to him or getting worked up over his crassness. It just feeds his ego.
Agreed – his ego and perhaps some other deep personal demon which I have no desire to feed either. Why don’t we just agree that discourse with DL is useless and ignore him. And if you are so inclined, pray for his congregation.
David
I hate multiple posts so I will make one big party:
credo,
sure, read 1 Samuel 15:23. Also, you have a lot of questions that I dont feel obliged to answer at this forum. Feel free to email me and I will answer your questions. I have no problem explaining myself or my views about homosexuals at exgaywatch. Notice my distinction.
boo:
how nice of you. This meep’s for you.
Rick:
Maybe you misunderstood me too and confused humor with being “snarky”. I believe it would had been an altogether different story had you not rushed back to xgaywatch and posted your findings like you were some kind of military scout. Thats on you, not me. I deleted your comments because I sensed them to be fishing for information.
And wow, I learned something: Im a “dominionist”
And to think all this time I thought I was Pentecostal. I would suggest that you dont believe everything you read on Wikipedia.
Joe Bummer:
you are a true party pooper
And finally to Timothy:
Id like to know when you intend to extend “civil discourse” to the numerous people you have slandered, gossiped about, lied on and defamed on this website?
You seem to think I am constrained to answer you simply because you front a “question” to me. It shows your own arrogance, which is your problem not mine. Even Jesus stubbornly refused to answer Pilate when asked questioned. Do you consider him uncivil? As a self proclaimed Christian you are no different than the other gay activists here. How antithetical to the Christian principle.
Dl to Joe Bummer:
you are a true party pooper
Joe replies: Sorry, did you think this was a party? You were sadly mistaken.
Joe,
Shame on you for pointing out that his radio show as make-believe. 😉
“Look! The emperor has no clothes!”
I completely agree with you now Timothy. Yes or no doesnt require a new forum or emails. Oh and the Church prosecuted Galileo using that scripture to support their heresy charge. PDLF deflects better then Hillary Clinton when asked a question….
“So lets not waste our time responding to him or getting worked up over his crassness. It just feeds his ego.”
That’s the Ghandi-esque thing to do.
The cynical thing to do would be to encourage him, because let’s face it, the guy’s basically a walking stereotype of the “ex-gay” movement.
I’m torn. On the one hand, he’s clearly drowning in his own self hatred, but on the other hand, as long as he’s intent on taking that hatred out on others, why not get some use out of him? If people like DL and Fred Phelps didn’t exist, we’d have to invent them.
But I guess Jesus would frown on me for that.
I agree Boo. DL is an extremely useful tool. I’d like for him to have a bigger podium personally.
Once people see what kind of crackpots we deal with, they’ll understand.
Boo said:
…as long as he’s intent on taking that hatred out on others, why not get some use out of him?
Doing that on his blog or over email is your choice. Doing it here just lowers the quality of discourse at XGW. In this instance, DL is simply playing the role of a troll and responding is counterproductive and unlikely to achieve the desired result anyway. In short, it’s just not what XGW is about.
David
I was hoping I wouldn’t have to mention or hear from DL Foster again.
He says gay activist like it’s a bad thing.
Foster has no intention of answering questions that aren’t in keeping with a religious reference.
Especially to people who he feels contempt for.
Which is pretty much anyone who is a committedly gay person and those hetero folks who support them, like me.
I get the feeling he’d like to discuss Scripture and his own faith and beliefs within it.
This is what a secular point of view would be vital. The religious views that Foster take are too rigid and self explanatory for dissent from that.
The political and legal and legislative issues regarding gay life: he’s not mentally or intellecutally at home.
I suppose he can’t be avoided…?
What is it about human nature that makes it so difficult to ignore an insult? I know that responding is only playing into the other person’s wishes and – in a way – turning power over to them… and yet it is so hard just to let it go.
What is harder yet is to let go a complete falsehood or a distortion of fact. I want to jump right back with “oh yeah, well let me list where you’re wrong…” even though I know on an intellectual level that it’s pointless.
But I’m trying to behave (mostly) the way I wish others would so in this one instance I’ll try to be adult. Who knows, maybe with time this will become easier.
I do want to discuss something here that really was the initial point of this thread: dominionism.
As best I understand this principle, there is within some strands of Christianity the idea that the physical Earth, being the property of God, has been turned over to the care and control of Christians. This isn’t a very new idea as it was the basis of The White Man’s Burden and, in its worst incarnation, slavery. On one hand the Christian tells himself that he’s helping the less fortunate or the ungodly or the deluded by taking on the roll of overseer. On the other hand, the Christian then feels justified in taking complete advantage and disregarding the rights, wishes, or dignity of the others.
Perhaps what I find most offensive about this attitude is that not only does it dismiss the concerns of the subjegated as childlike and unimportant, but it implies that God does not see the parties as equal. It assumes that God has chosen one to have dominion over the other.
I can’t think of any instance in history where the assumption that God sees you as better than someone else has ended positively. And it seems so contrary to Scripture that I can’t see how a Christian of conscience can hold that position for long.
But I may be misunderstanding either the principle or the application. I welcome correction or clarification.
Thanks for bringing us back to topic, Timothy. I’m fine about not engaging DL further!
There is a good summary of the concept of dominionism here:
https://www.publiceye.org/christian_right/cr_intro.html
I’m not sure how to add a link, so maybe someone could set that up properly.
It’s true that most people who hold to dominionist views do not use that terminology and perhaps (like DL) are unaware that when they talk of ‘taking what rightfully belongs to them as children of God’, that is what they are speaking of.
Dominionism is not the same as Pentecostalism. Many Pentecostals are not dominionists, and vice versa.
This is a critical issue when it comes to retaining or gaining civil rights for all persons. It is un-American (let alone un-Christian) for any group of people to be allowed to dominate the political process simply because they believe they have a mandate from God to rule the world. The concept of dominionism, though, explains why it is so hard for a segment of the Christian population to adopt a ‘live and let live’ attitude that respects the equal rights of all persons.