Evangelical America's Future

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNT1
"RABBI WOLPE"

ANS:
If Rabbi David Wolpe is correct, viz. the Exodus is a mirage, he delegitimizes his own priesthood, makes the Passover a Halloween Party, while destroying the legitimacy of his Jewish Faith.

http://www.cresourcei.org/exodusdate.html

"There is simply no solid historical or biblical evidence that will definitely establish a date for the Exodus. In fact, there is no direct extra-biblical historical evidence of the exodus itself.

This should not be surprising even from a historical point of view. On the one hand, we could hardly expect slaves fleeing for their lives to stop and leave monuments and inscriptions describing their escape. And we know from other historical records, for example where there are two accounts from different countries about a battle, that Egyptian pharaohs did not erect monuments to their failures and tended to describe defeats as victories, much like modern political parties still tend to do.

So, if we are looking for external verification of the exodus, historians are not able to help us much. Rather than disproving anything, this simply says that we do not have the historical evidence to affirm or deny the event or to establish its date by the criteria of historical critical methodology. Historically, we simply do not know beyond probability.

However, this does not mean that historical investigation is of no value to us in the exodus narratives, or that the narratives do not provide any historical evidence.

We may not be able to answer all of our specific questions. But there are some features of the Exodus story that generally provide a context for the biblical narratives.

For example, from a sociological perspective the biblical traditions bear a clear memory of Egyptian ancestry. The tradition remembered that Moses had an Egyptian name, in spite of the fact that the traditions try to give it a Hebrew meaning (Exod 2:10). In fact, several of the pharaohs bear the name "mose" in various forms meaning "is born" (Thutmose, Ahmosis, Rameses). Moses is even mistaken for an Egyptian (Ex 2:19).

Our temptation is to assume that the Bible was written for us directly. Historical investigation helps us realize that while Scripture has ongoing relevance, it is not timeless (outside of time) any more than God’s revelation in that history is timeless.

God’s actions are and have always been time conditioned for us, because he has chosen to reveal himself in human history, not apart from it.

Since that is true, historical investigation will always be necessary, not to prove that something happened, or when it happened, or how, but rather to help us hear the confession about God from the midst of God’s historically conditioned self-revelation and the people’s historically conditioned witness.

In that sense, while historical investigation cannot prove much about the Faith, it is a crucial tool of biblical study.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
“RABBI WOLPE”

IRT:
Rabbi David Wolpe contends that Exodus never happened because there is no evidence of its existence, and this seems impossible for some 2 million people to wander around the desert and leave no trace of their ever being there.

ANS:
However to deny the existence of Exodus is to deny the very authority for the Jewish and Christian religions and unwittingly Wolpe’s own priesthood.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11646c.htm

“The contents of the Pentateuch furnish the basis for the history, the law, the worship, and the life of the Chosen People of God. Hence, the authorship of the work, the time, and manner of its origin, and its historicity are of paramount importance. These are not merely literary problems, but questions belonging to the fields of history of religion and theology.

The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is inseparably connected with the question, whether and in what sense Moses was the author or intermediary of the Old-Testament legislation, and the bearer of pre-Mosaic tradition.

According to the trend of both Old and New Testament, and according to Jewish and Christian theology, the work of the great lawgiver Moses is the origin of the history of Israel and the basis of its development down to the time of Jesus Christ.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNT1
THE SCRIPTURES
POSTED JULY 3, 2009

IRT:
And how do you know so much about god and Jesus? Did she/he/it visit you in the night? Dream visions? Or are you simply taking what you read in the NT as god's word? If indeed it is the words found in the NT, that gets into, as noted by many, circular thinking.

ANS:
If there is a circular arguments in the NT, can you point it out.

IRT:
To wit:
“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”

ANS:
The Scriptures are true, because they are Revealed by God. Who said they were Revealed by God? The people God revealed them to. Moreover, what was revealed was authenticated by the consequences that occured when their directions were followed.

Therefore, the credibility of the Scriptures rest on the veracity of those to whom they were revealed. Moreover, if the Scriptures were a farce, then those who believed in them and acted on them would be a farce, but just the opposite is true.

Those who follow the Scriptural directives and the inspirations grow in progress and maturity and how to live in a concrete way. It leads us somewheree that is good.. Those who don't follow the precepts imbedded in them end in social suicide.

The Pagans, Atheist, and Agnostics have time and time again attempted to discredit the Scriptures and claim they didn't matter. Unfortunately, they all have eventually destroyed themselves. The most salient contemporary example is North Korea contrasted to South Korea, viz a basket case vs. a civilized industrial modern nation.

This is explicitly shown when one contrast East and West Germany. East Germany looked like a graveyard in comparison to West Germany.. Further, the success of any civilization's social order is in direct porportion to its adherence to the Natural Moral Laws that are inscribed in the Scriptures and personified in the Ten Commandments.

The Scriptures are authentic because they do not contradict human nature; they authenticate it. Objectively, looking at the Scriptures, their precepts are the vanguard of progressive civilizations. Scriptures define freedom as the antithesis of license, of reason over concupiscence.

Scripture decribes the authentic family and its purpose, human nature and its purpose. The Scripture is the authentic source interpreted by God's Church on the relationship of man to his Creator.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNT1
"RABBI WOLPE"

IRT:
"Your issues with the OT should be taken up with the OT exegetes such as Rabbi David Wolpe, an On Faith panelist."

ANS:
David Wolpe is a Rabbi. Can you imagine a serious Rabbi claiming Moses and the Exodus is fantasy. He cuts both of his legs off and has nothing to stand on in claiming he is a Rabbi. In fact he makes himself look like a fool.

Wolpe claims his religion is a complete fabrication because he believes Exodus is a sham. Though the proof of Exodus is all around him, Wolpe can't see it either because of his ignorance of God or a pronounced arrogance that blinds him.

Wolpe either believes or doesn't believe in a God. If he doesn't believe in God, then he is a charlatan because he claims to be a Rabbi. He would be a profligate of a religion he knows is untrue.

Without question God's existence can be demonstrated from the Scriptures, by reason, and from an innate presence of God. There are Aristotle's and Aquinas's astucious proofs of God. Order requires an intelligence. Because the Universe is ordered, the orderer must be a Divine Intelligence.

The question next is, since God lacks nothing and is our Creator, why did God create us? The only logical answer is that God loves man and wants man to share in His Love. Consequently, when man sinned against God, God sent His beloved Son to redeem us.

Since God exists, God is by necessity Omniscient and Prescient. Thus, if Wolpe believes in a God, he has no idea who God is, because he wouldn't make such an asinine judgment that an Omniscient and Prescient God would allow a farce for over 2,000 years to continue that is a pretense to honor Him.

If Wolpe is right, God would not only be a fool but He would also make the people He loves fools,

To the contrary, Exodus happened. Further, God is no fool, and His people are not fools, but Wolpe appears to be one.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNT1
"WOLPE"

IRT:
"Your issues with the OT should be taken up with the OT exegetes such as Rabbi David Wolpe, an On Faith panelist."

ANS
Here is your problem, you can't think for yourself, you have someone doing it for you.

I am going to give this to you again.

"To deny or to doubt the historic personality of Moses, is to undermine and render unintelligible the subsequent history of the Israelites.

Rabbinical literature teems with legends touching every event of his marvellous career: taken singly, these popular tales are purely imaginative, yet, considered in their cumulative force, they vouch for the reality of a grand and illustrious personage.

It is a strong character, high purpose, and noble achievement, so deep, true, and efficient in his religious convictions as to thrill and subdue the minds of an entire race for centuries after his death. The Bible furnishes the chief authentic account of this luminous life."

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
"ADULTERS AND PEDOPHILES"
POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM

IRT:
"Current crises:
Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology, all male hierarchies and strange banking and funding."

ANS:
The pedophile priest you speak of turned out to be .25 percent of all Catholic priests in the last 30 years. On the other hand, in the New York Public School System (PSS), the pedophiles are five percent of the PSS and the pedophiles are being shuffled around.

If your seriously concerned about children, and you should be, you might shift your bane to the Democrats who run the NY PSS and Obama who agrees with gay sex and gay Marriage.

Try directing your derision on the people who are causing this crisis, viz. the 70 percent of homosexuals, and organizations like NAMBLA that are outside the clergy who practice pedophilia and pederasty.

Instead of the Church that no longer listens to the APA, that is one of the causes of this crisis, and a Church that no longer allows gays into the Priesthood, try directing your bane on the real causes of the problem, homosexual sexual promiscuity in the Public Square.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
"THE ONE WHO CREATED MAN IS A PLAGIARIZER"
POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM

IRT:
Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

ANS:
Who and what did God, the Omniscient, the Creator of the Universe, plagerize? What could man tell God who created man what God didn't know? Isn't that kind of an idiotic and arrogant accusation?

IRT:
For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

ANS:
I can see why you are having a tough time understanding the Scriptures. Notwithstanding the poor sources you've used, it appears you were looking for someone to agree with your predispositions. Unfortunately, Truth doesn't work that way; it is independent of thought.

Now filicide is an act of a parent murdering their children. I don't believe the Jewish hierarchy was the father of Jesus;.the Father was the Holy Spirit. You might look it up in Luke.

To save you from further consternation and a cataclysmic paroxysm, don't try to figure out the Trinity; it's a mystery revealed by God to His Church that exceeds the capacity of the intellect, The Church didn't invent the Trinity; it is ubiquitously revealed by God in the Scriptures.

For all those interested in R. David Wolpe's view of Exodus, here they are in HIS OWN WORDS. Those familiar with R. Wolpe's thinking, will note that his views are fundamentally indistinct from those of Maimonides, of whom he has written at length.

For those unfamiliar with R. Wolpe's thought, I would add that he believes the "soul" exists, that the universe had a divine creator, and, no, he isn't an idiot.

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2004/12/Did-The-Exodus-Really-Happen.aspx?p=1
===================================
As for CCNL1's assertions about what 1.5 million Conservative Jews believe, evidence for them exists only in the blogger's mind, if there, and I use the term loosely.

"Did the Exodus Really Happen?

by Rabbi David Wolpe

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2004/12/Did-The-Exodus-Really-Happen.aspx?p=1

"Knowing the Exodus is not a literal historical account does not ultimately change our connection to each other or to God.

Three years ago on Passover, I explained to my congregation that according to archeologists, there was no reliable evidence that the Exodus took place--and that it almost certainly did not take place the way the Bible recounts it. Finally, I emphasized: It didn't matter.
Some argue that there is no evidence to back my assertion. Endlessly reiterated is the mantra "absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence." In other words, the fact that we have never found a single shred of evidence in the Sinai does not mean the Israelites were not there.

This is nominally true. We have found Sinai evidence of other people who predated the Israelites, and while it is improbable that 600,000 men crossed the desert 2,500 years ago without leaving a shard of pottery or a Hebrew carving, it is not impossible. (Together with women and children, that makes a couple of million, who could actually fill the distance between Egypt and Israel by standing in line.) One rabbi quoted to me the mystical tradition that one tribe was deputized to clean up every trace, which at least shows the Jewish tradition's unease with Sinai's preternaturally clean slate.

However, the archeological conclusions are not based primarily on the absence of Sinai evidence. Rather, they are based upon the study of settlement patterns in Israel itself. Surveys of ancient settlements--pottery remains and so forth--make it clear that there simply was no great influx of people around the time of the Exodus (given variously as between 1500-1200 BCE). Therefore, not the wandering, but the arrival alerts us to the fact that the biblical Exodus is not a literal depiction. In Israel at that time, there was no sudden change in the kind or the volume of pottery being made. (If people suddenly arrived after hundreds of years in Egypt, their cups and dishes would look very different from native Canaanites'.) There was no population explosion. Most archeologists conclude that the Israelites lived largely in Canaan over generations, instead of leaving and then immigrating back to Canaan. "

See the rest of Rabbi Wolpe's commentary can be found at the referenced website.

zebra4:

Kindly do not put me in the category of CCNL1. My concern is with supersesssionist ideology, per Said, as I have often said. As well, I do not enjoy seeing sources misrepresented any more than I enjoy seeing myself mischaracterized. And if you have something to say to me, please say it directly. There is no ghost in the machine who will read your postings.

As for working to advance human rights, I have done so since I was seventeen. And you? (Please don't give me "I've served my country..." I've heard it. Human rights?)

I find it amusing that Farnaz, a self proclaimed athiest, and CCNL1, who claims to have been liberated from Christianity are continually arguing about what is in OT or NT or what the views of Rabbis or Catholic priests were. I confess I didn't want to tax my brain to read the details of those lines of argument.

Shouldn't the two of them be working to advance the cause of humanity and Human Rights wherever there is oppression--religious, racial, ethnic or caste based?

Religion is only one source of conflict in the world today.

For all those interested in R. David Wolpe's view of Exodus, here they are in HIS OWN WORDS. Those familiar with R. Wolpe's thinking, will note that his views are fundamentally indistinct from those of Maimonides, of whom he has written at length.

For those unfamiliar with R. Wolpe's thought, I would add that he believes the "soul" exists, that the universe had a divine creator, and, no, he isn't an idiot.

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2004/12/Did-The-Exodus-Really-Happen.aspx?p=1

Farnaz, Farnaz, Farnaz,

As with TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2, your issues with the OT and Judaism should be taken up with the OT exegetes such as Rabbi David Wolpe, an On Faith panelist. Maybe they can bring you back into the fold of Judaism since currently you a professed atheist.

Most members of the The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States have declared most if not all the OT to be myth i.e. the Book of Leviticus is not the word of god but rules borrowed from the Babylonians, Hittites, Canaanites et al.
=========================
Quotations and sources stating that "most members of the United Synoguge of Conservative Judaism" have done what for years ccnl claims are not in the sources he provides, nor are they in any other souce. These claims are without evidence and substance, existing only in the mind of the blogger.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

Your issues with the OT should be taken up with the OT exegetes such as Rabbi David Wolpe, an On Faith panelist.

From the cited NY Times article:

"The notion that the Bible is not literally true ''is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis,'' observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to ''Etz Hayim.'' But some congregants, he said, ''may not like the stark airing of it.'' Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that ''virtually every modern archaeologist'' agrees ''that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all.''

The rabbi offered what he called a ''litany of disillusion'' about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have ''found no trace of the tribes of Israel -- not one shard of pottery.''

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
MOSES "PROBABLY"
POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM

IRT:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

"Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred.

ANS:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10596a.htm

Probably, no matter how many times it is said, is not fact, but an opinion and in this instance is baloney. Your source must be orignated in the Caartoon Network's or the Nether World.where it is said, lives the Father of Lies, the Prince of Darkness, Beelzebub.

To deny or to doubt the historic personality of Moses, is to undermine and render unintelligible the subsequent history of the Israelites. Rabbinical literature teems with legends touching every event of his marvellous career.

Taken singly, these popular tales are purely imaginative, yet, considered in their cumulative force, they vouch for the reality of a grand and illustrious personage, of strong character, high purpose, and noble achievement. They are so deep, true, and efficient in Moses' religious convictions as to thrill and subdue the minds of an entire race for centuries after his death. The Bible furnishes the chief authentic account of this luminous life.

Birth to vocation (Exodus 2:1-22)
Of Levitic extraction, and born at a time when by kingly edict had been decreed the drowning of every new male offspring among the Israelites, the "goodly child" Moses, after three months' concealment, was exposed in a basket on the banks of the Nile.

An elder brother (Exodus 7:7) and sister (Exodus 2:4), Aaron and Mary (AV and RV, Miriam), had already graced the union of Jochabed and Amram. The second of these kept watch by the river, and was instrumental in inducing Pharaoh's daughter, who rescued the child, to entrust him to a Hebrew nurse. The one she designedly summoned for the charge was Jochabed, who, when her "son had grown up", delivered him to the princess. In his new surroundings,

Moses was schooled "in all the wisdom of the Egyptians" (Acts 7:22). Moses next appears in the bloom of sturdy manhood, resolute with sympathies for his degraded brethren. Dauntlessly he hews down an Egyptian assailing one of them, and on the morrow tries to appease the wrath of two compatriots who were quarrelling.

He is misunderstood, however, and, when upbraided with the murder of the previous day, he fears his life is in jeopardy. Pharaoh has heard the news and seeks to kill him. Moses flees to Madian. An act of rustic gallantry there secures for him a home with Raguel, the priest. Sephora, one of Raguel's seven daughters, eventually becomes his wife and Gersam his first-born.

His second son, Eliezer, is named in commemoration of his successful flight from Pharaoh.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

And how do you know so much about god and Jesus? Did she/he/it visit you in the night? Dream visions? Or are you simply taking what you read in the NT as god's word?

If indeed it is the words found in the NT, that gets into, as noted by many, circular thinking.

To wit:

“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”

Would anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book
or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:

x=TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2
x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”

More “logic”?

“I believe there is One God Jehovah because He is revealed in the infallible
Bible. I believe the Bible is infallible because it is the Word of the One God Jehovah.”

With respect to the illiterate Jesus, see

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/georgetown/2009/06/our_pragmatic_president.html

continued below:

Observations with respect to the "miracles" performed by Jesus:

Curing the sick?? Hmmm, there is no medical documentation of this because there was no diagnostic tools for said sicknesses in first century Palestine.

And many Jesus "miracles", are single attestations and by rigorous historical review by most contemporary historic Jesus exegetes were obviously added to the NT to embellish Jesus' biography.

Said "miracles" were added to compete with the local "voodooers of the hoodoo", the physical "resurrection" was added to compete with Roman and Greek gods and the "pretty wingie thingies" and "demons of the demented were added to continue the fear and superstitions of the ancients!!!!!"

Other references for your perusal:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

http://www.joezias.com/HealthHealingLandIsrael.htm

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

Economics in First Century Palestine, K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
ST JOHN, "MOST LIKELY," THEREFORE..."
POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM

IRT:
"John 8:11?? likely another embellishment of the life of one simple preacher man."

ANS:
"Most likely" is not fact. The Church, is the official interpretor of Scripture authorized by Jesus, to decide what is "supposition" and what is "truth."

Conseqently, Jesus said to the Rock, St. Perer, the Church's first Pope:

Mt 16:19: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Consequently, Jesus told the Church, "Go and teach all natioins and I will send the Holy Spirit to guard over the Church until the end of ages."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08438a.htm

It is thus possible, even from the purely critical standpoint, to adduce strong evidence in favour of the canonicity and inspired character of this pericope. the Adulterous Woman Jn.8: 11, which by decision of the Council of Trent, forms a part of the Holy Bible.

"Still clearer grounds for this view are to be found in the express testimony of the author [St. John]. Having mentioned in his account of the Crucifixion that the disciple whom Jesus loved stood beneath the Cross beside the mother of Jesus (John 19:26 sqq.). John adds, after telling of the Death of Christ and the opening of His side, the solemn assurance: 'And he that saw it hath given testimony; and his testimony is true. And he knoweth that he saith true: that you also may believe" (xix, 35).'"

"According to the admission of all, and John himself, is the "disciple whom the Lord loved". His testimony is contained in the Gospel which for many consecutive years he has announced by word of mouth and which he now sets down in writing for the instruction of the faithful.

He assures us, not merely that his testimony is true, but that he was a personal witness of its truth. In this manner he identifies himself with the disciple beloved of the Lord who alone could give such testimony from intimate knowledge."

Hence, the authority of the passage is shown in the link above. To claim John's testimony is not true is to call him a liar.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CCNL1
POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM
"THE PROBLEM"

IRT
"The 30% of the NT that is "authentic..."

ANS:
Really, only thirty percent was true? Pray tell us how they figured that one out? Did they interview the witness and those cured? What profound priggery. The Problem is not Christianity, it those who think they know more than God and His Church.

Are your professors also eye witnesses? Can they explain how Jesus mesmerized the cured, the Jews, Pagans, Agnostics and Atheists who were witnesses to the miracles and not your professors?

Explain how the dead thought they were alive as did their relatives, and how all who saw, thought the crippled were walking the blind could see, or how the ten lepers confounded the Rabbi that Jesus cured them. Explain how Jesus transfixed the hungry to believe they ate at the miracles of the loaves and fishes.

Isn't it your professors that are a little delusional?

How did Jesus bewitch the fish of the sea to jump into the nets of the Apostles? or cast a spell on the turbulent sea and calm it, or sent a fish with a coin in his mouth to Peter to pay the taxes?

Explain why all the Apostles died excruciating deaths for lies and hallucinations, as your professors have described them, after this Jesus the charlatan ascended into heaven. How could Jesus be a liar and ascend into heaven as did His Mother.

And while you''re at it, try explaining how an illiterate, as you have described Jesus, who is God the Omnipotent, confounded the brilliant Jewish scholars in their attempt to trap him and the thousands who were witness to it.

Even after Jesus was murdered by the Chief Priest and his cohorts, still under a Dead Man's spell, had plotted to denounce Jesus' illusionary resurrection by bribing the Roman soldiers who were also delusional.

How did Jesus, supposedly ignorant, confuse his adversaries time after time, who read their minds and their iniquities when they attempted to stone the adulteress and schemed to murder HIM.

Even in the Garden, where the soldiers came to arrest Him, Jesus, showing them that they had no power over Him, rendered them helpless as they fell to the ground when He questioned them.

I would say it's rather puerile crassitude to claim a man, who you at least admited he was a carpenter, on what authority I know not, couldn't read a ruler; chutzpah!

IRT TTWY:

Thank you for giving me your answer to my question.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)

CCNL1

POSTED ON JULY 2 2009 6:14 PM
"THE PROBLEM"

IRT:
"The problems are much deeper than one contemporary and renegade evangelists. The problems are the flaws and errors in the history and theology of Christianity itself.

ANS:
Were they there at the time? The problem is not Christianity; the problem is your sources. You might try getting some credible Biblical schollars for your sources, for instance, Professor Scott Hahn. For anyone to claim that Jesus was an illiterate is an illustration of your sources' Scriptural ignorance and poor scholarship.

Scripture writes of Jesus reading the Scriptures of the Old Testament in the temple and His knowledge of the Scriptures astounded the Jewish scholars. More over, Jesus named His Church as the authorative official interpreters of Scripture and guaranteed the Church's credibility by sending the Holy Spirit to guard the Church from error in its universal teachings and beliefs.

It's a little ridiculous and illustrative of profound ignorance and Biblical illiteracy of your professors to claim Jesus didn't know how to read when he wrote the Scriptures using man as His instrument.

Luke 4:14-30
"14 And Jesus returned in the power of the spirit, into Galilee: and the fame of him went out through the whole country. 15 And he taught in their synagogues and was magnified by all. 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he was brought up: and he went into the synagogue, according to his custom, on the sabbath day: and he rose up to read.

17 And the book of Isaias the prophet was delivered unto him. And as he unfolded the book, he found the place where it was written: 18 The spirit of the Lord is upon me. Wherefore he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor, he hath sent me to heal the contrite of heart..."

Your sources should first read the Scriptures before pontificating on what they say. You may prefer to adhere to their poor scholarship, but I prefer to believe over 2,000 years of exegesis by all the credible theologians through the centuries who interpreted the Scriptures and those who witnessed the works of Jesus. That included Jews, Pagans, Gentiles, Atheists and Agnostics.

But did the historic Jesus utter the words of John 8:11?? Said passage is a single attestation found no where else in the NT or other sources making it most likely another embellishment of the life of one simple preacher man.

Most members of the The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States have declared most if not all the OT to be myth i.e. the Book of Leviticus is not the word of god but rules borrowed from the Babylonians, Hittites, Canaanites et al.

http://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

IN REPLY TO (IRT)

COLORADODOG

"SENATOR ENSIGN?"

POSTED ON JULY 2, 2009 8:47 PM

IRT:

"As a member of the Catholic clergy, you can't explain to me why Leviticus 18:22 applies to gays but why Leviticus 20:10 doesn't apply to Senator Ensign?"

ANS:
Your assumption is false; I am not a member of the Catholic clergy, just a normal Catholic. As to Leviiticus, I have no idea what kind of life Senator Ensign leads. If he is an adulterer as you seem to suggest, who said the passage wouldn't apply to him. It applies to all adulterers and for homosexuals that they be laved in the virtue of Chastity.

Of course, Christ said to the adulterous woman, "I will not condemn you either; go and sin no more." God came down from heaven to save sinners. His forgiveness is unfathomable, but one must ask for his love. More so, God ask others to pray for the sinner, and that includes you as well to pray. God does not condemn the homosexual, He condems gay sex, the deadly sin of lust both in adultery and gay sex.

Dear TTWSY,

As a member of the Catholic clergy, you can't explain to me why Leviticus 18:22 applies to gays but why Leviticus 20:10 doesn't apply to Senator Ensign?

The problems are much deeper than one contemporary and renegade evangelists. The problems are the flaws and errors in the history and theology of Christianity itself.

To wit (for Mr. Cizik's eyes only):

Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

Current crises:

Pedophiliac priests, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

Current crises:

Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology, all male hierarchies and strange banking and funding.

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican is all that is needed to get to heaven the Christ's Great Commission will languish.

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican is the same as being Saved and being in alignment with God.

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican is a greater requirement than 'Being Born Again through the Blood of Christ"

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican gives them the authority to decide who is and isn't Save

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican excuse a person for moral lapses

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican makes them better than Bill Clinton

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican gives them the divine authority to continue punishing Bill Clinton for transgressions that God has long forgiven him for

As long as the evangelicals believe that
being a republican IS their high Calling

.........Souls will be lost. People will go without knowing what it REALLY means to be a Christian and how to Love your neighbor.

The issue may be: Who is a Christian?
At root the word means "Christ bearer."
Unless the spirit of Christ inhabits a person, it doesn't matter what he calls himself. True religion is a matter of the heart. By these lights there may be thousands upon thousands who hang the label of "Christian" around their neck--or wear it right on their sleeves--but miss the essence of Christianity: Being Christlike. There may be others--maybe thousands (or millons?) again who indeed reflect a
Christlike spirit in their daily interactons with others but who do not necessarily label themselves as Christians. Such others may include Jews, Moslems, Buddhists or agnostics. If all those who call themselves Christians would live up to their label, the whole planet would be transformed and the words "Thy kingdom come" from the Lord's prayer would be realized in dramatic fashion. "God is love and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him." 1 John 4
John Patrick Grace- Huntington, WV

As a person of science and reason rather than faith and superstition my response is that I would love to believe as Berlinerblau hopes that Cizik represents some emerging majority view among evangelicals, but the way to know rather than guess is do some opinion polling. Using supposition from anecdote rather than objective analysis and fact-gathering is the personality flaw (or educational flaw) which taints all our public discourse...

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CIZNIK
"ENVIRONMENT"

ANS:
Religion has nothing to do with postulating what our environmental laws should be. The purpose of Religion is to instruct man what his duties are in respect to the environment; it is not to dictate what methods we are to use, but only that it should be done.

Religion describes the moral duty of man as stated in Genesis. Genesis only tells man to respect God's Creation. He set man in the Garden and told man to care for it.

As in Liberation Theology, Environment, is not the mandate of God's priests, it is the duty of the laity to take care of what God made man dominion over. It is the clergy's duty to inform man of this duty, and man makes the choices to do it the best of his ability. Consequently, he will be judged on his acts and intentions as to their moral relevance..

Dear TTWSY,

Can you explain to me why Leviticus 18:22 applies to gays but why Leviticus 20:10 doesn't apply to Senator Ensign?

Thank you.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
CLZIK
"I BELIEVE IN CIVIL UNIONS"

Cizik may have been charming and entertaining, but he has no sense of moral values. Opinions change, but the universl Natural Moral Law doesn't. The Ten Commandments are still the same today as when God made man and God gave them to Moses.

Of course, it's not unusual for Protestantism to protest Protestantism. We have some 25 to 35,000 Christian denominations that contradict each other in part or whole. That is what happens when man decides he is the sole authority on what God intended for the sake of man.

God is Omniscient; He is also Prescient, and therefore he saw the future. Conseequently, Jesus didn't spend 33 years on Earth and give up His life for man that man may distort His Church in a matter of years.

To the contrary, God sent the Holy Spirit to guard the Church from error in its teachings and beliefs. Hence, the Church has, since its inception, never changed what it was set forth to do, teach all nations what God had taught the Apostles. Conseequently, the Ten Commandments can only be changed or suspended by God, not man.

When God made them Male and Female, he did it for a purpose, to increase and multiply. From that day, lust was lust and lust remains lust, Cizik or no Cizik and all the thousands dissadent who told God what God ought to believe, viz. that it is their belief that it is man not God who writes the mind of God. The consequences of what happend to them is written in history.

Satan thought he was God and he fell from the heavens like a bolt of lightening into the pits of eternal fire. Adam and Eve attempted the same thing and were kicked out of the Garden, and we had to go with them.

Man never seems to learn; Men at the Tower of Babbel figured they would tell God what to think, and it didn't go so well with God or them. It happened at Sodom and Gormorrah, and all you can find of the two cities is sulpher balls.

Ramsey, the Egyptian Pharoah, attempted to change the will of God and he lost his whole army, his son, and nearly his country.

Using the NEA as a reference for all issues evangelical is like using the Rainbow Coalition as a reference for all things African-American.

"Richard Cizik resigned Wednesday night as vice president for governmental affairs of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) during a week of growing uproar over his comments that he is shifting his views on same-sex unions."
=========================
Cizik sounds like an okay fellow, but I do wonder when the Evangelistos will get their enormous noses out of our government, why we must hear so much about them, for what reasons they aren't considered poster children for ending tax exempt status for religious institutions....

Meacham and Quinn are almost giddy when one of their lackeys ferrets out a breakaway Christian who hates the GOP and loves homosexual activity. "on Faith" can always be counted on to tell God-fearing Republicans to quit fearing God, 'for the good of the GOP, dontchaknow'. If Barack Obama was onethousandth as transparent as these people are, he wouldn't be where he is today.Unfortunately, the commenters herein take the bait with alarming haste. "Oh, no, not me! I"M not a BAD Christian. I'm a GOOD Christian and I HATE those old Republicans and I LOVE homosexuality! The GOP won't get MY vote, Jon and Sally! You can count on me! Yes, indeedy, it's an UNHOLY ALLIANCE!"
......Give...me...a...bleeping...break.

We Christians need to learn from our mistakes and avoid repeating them.
The wild-eyed evangelicals get the most media attention with their outrageous statements, but mainline and middle-of-the-road Christiand are quietly reforming our sector of Christianity to better understan d what we see as the essence of Jesus's teachings.
For over a thousand years organized Christianity, often allied with government, has chosen to persecute people. I can't think of a single case where Christians later said: "that was the right thing to do." Mentally ill people, suspected witches, Jews, women, Catholics or Protestants, Muslims, scientists like Gallileo, homosexuals, unmarried pregnant women, children born out of wedlock, poor people, etc. have all been victims of society abetted by Christianity.
(Christianity has done much more right than wrong (in my opinion), but that is not the subject at hand.)

----------

For someone who does not want to hear and be found needing to adhere to the principles of the word of God, Christianity is and will be seen and defined by them as only by those who are found corrupt while toting the faith. It is the only way to justify calling the Bible evil when you don't know or understand a word of it. But these same people are full to the brim with hatred and many evils themselves. Man is corrupt and without accountability and principles to live by, left to their own devices, they are destructive. We see that all over the world and that is not where I want to see our country move to. However, that is not in my hands.

I say good luck to them all because this time we are in is written and it is surely coming to pass. The words of hatred toward Christianity brings about their own self-destruction. No one has the right to demand anyone to stop how they live and/or to accept principles that they do not want to accept but all will reap the consequences of their choices. It is inevitable. That's God's will and man can't change it. That's all Christianity as based truly on the life of Jesus is trying to tell anyone. Ones hating it and not accepting it, well, that is on them.

Fear not the works of the evil one nor those that live by and for him because all things work together for good for those who love God and are called according to his purposes.

Religion of any kind is nothing but a fraud. Why would anyone believe a book written by Jews, about Jews, for Jews has any bases in reality? I truly think one must have a screw loose to believe in any deity as sadistic as the Yahweh.
You religions nuts can believe anything you want, just keep it out of my face and out of my life. I want no part of such nonsense.

The alliance of Republican politics and Christianity is problematic because the fundamental nature of the Republican Party is that it is based on the selfish motive of taking care of me and my own which by its nature is exclusionary. Republicans view existence as a fight to hang on to hard earned money. If some poor, black person is dumb enought to live next to a levee in the Ninth Ward in New Orleans, then he has to live with the consequences of Katrina. If a person is sick with cancer and can't afford the deductibles on her medical insurance, or, if she does not have insurance, well, it is her fault. Poor people are poor because they are lazy. There is no room at the table for gays because they are different. The environment exists to feed the machine of business. Republicans live in houses, not the environment. In short, every core value of the Republican party is based on the attainment and preservation of wealth and personal security. Genuine Christianity is based on giving to those who are less fortunate. It seeks to include, not exclude. I would argue that the brand of Christianity that has been grafted onto the Republican platform is the same type of Christianity that enabled Jim Crow and lynchings; that fostered the three fifths rule which protrayed Blacks as less than human. The most reactive, violent responses to the Civil rights movement historically came from the most Christian parts of the United States. The highest execution rates in the US are southern Christian states. As a nation we are being held captive by a vocal brand of Christianity in which you are either Christian or you are damned. Until we become a nation in which religion is a guide to personal behavior and ethics rather than a hammer to be used against those who are different we will maintain this unholy alliance.

We Christians need to learn from our mistakes and avoid repeating them.

The wild-eyed evangelicals get the most media attention with their outrageous statements, but mainline and middle-of-the-road Christiand are quietly reforming our sector of Christianity to better understan d what we see as the essence of Jesus's teachings.

For over a thousand years organized Christianity, often allied with government, has chosen to persecute people. I can't think of a single case where Christians later said: "that was the right thing to do." Mentally ill people, suspected witches, Jews, women, Catholics or Protestants, Muslims, scientists like Gallileo, homosexuals, unmarried pregnant women, children born out of wedlock, poor people, etc. have all been victims of society abetted by Christianity.

(Christianity has done much more right than wrong (in my opinion), but that is not the subject at hand.)

OK, I watched the interview. If more "evangelicals" were like this guy, I "could change my mind" about them being the absolute enemy of democracy and the Constitution.

He's still and "outlayer," though, and there's a big difference between him and the Huckabees (that's why Andersen threw him out) There's a long way to go to restore religious mutual respect in America after our culture was bullied at the hands of Huckabee, Haggard, Dobson et. al. the last eight years.

We can only have hope in younger generations of evangelicals who may actually listen to this guy.

Save the Constitution and the benefits of a two party system from the Huckabees.

Jesus, please protect me from your followers.

This is obviously a well educated man whose Christian beliefs are not being hocked. Every profession has its charlatans but some need a bigger space for that assignment than do others. The limited information you provided about this man will allow me to admit, if ever I am accused of being an evangelical, that I could smile, say 'thank you' and admit that I am one like Rev Cizik, if I do remember his name. He is really showing the way.

save evangelical religion from the g.o.p.? or is it vice versa?

it seems to me that there has grown up a nest of vipers since 1980, both in the g.o.p. and among evangelicals who are beyond redemption. they're simply not capable of reason, empathy, or change. so be it. its time to move on. let the dobsons, bauers, robertsons and falwells have each other and what's left of their annointed party.

it may come as a shock to some, but the right wing religionists do not own the christian franchise, nor do they have a supernatural license to parse between who and who is not a christian. it is quite possible to be a card carrying liberal and a christian. i dare say that the liberal comes closer to what jesus was.

the righties might not own the keys to heaven, but from the last thirty years, i've been convinced they do to hell.

---And if that's indeed the case, then the Republican Party must start to worry about its own future.---

I think the worrying started in 2006 and is only worse now.

If the republicans ever want to get back in power they need to actually have ideas, vision and a path toward the vision. Right now they have none of that and they are obstructing legislation the majority of people are interested in such as universal healthcare and bringing the troops home. Lack of leadership and obstructionism is doing them a lot more harm than losing future evangelicals.

This is an interesting article. I hope the next challenge reminds the GOP-based evangelicals that Jesus spoke up over and over and over to defend the needs of the poor and helpless. This "raise yourself by your bootstraps" approach sounds good, but Jesus extended help and forgiveness whether he knew that the person would be worthy or not. If we become a kinder nation, sure some people will take advantage. We need a way to hopefully figure that out, but we never had as many "welfare queens" as people thought we did, and our level of care for our fellow citizens demonstrates a mean, niggardly spirit when compared to so many other nations in the world.

Has Mr. Cizik done any rethinking of his views on the subject of alcohol vs. cannabis?

This guy sounds like a real, un-politcized Christian, who understands that government is tasked with protecting the civil rights of all citizens, yet, is not empowered to sanctify any civil union, straight or gay, as under God. Only our religious institutions can do that, which takes the sanctity of marriage issue off the political plate and tosses it back to the churches to adjudicate. That is not an acknowledgement that homosexuality is not sinful in God's eyes, but that it is no more sinful than the arrogance of trying to quantify your sin, as compared to those of others and condemning others. There is NO condemnation in Christ - but there is personal discernment, thanks to the Holy Spirit who indwells the sincere believers.

The insincere believers are the ones who verbally profess to know Him, yet trust politicians to solve spiritual malaise instead of trusting God's ability to carry out His plan for us, without the artful manipulations of professional, power-seeking compromisers (politicians).

Save the Evangelicals from the GOP?? I think the biggest problem the GOP has now indicates that the GOP needs to be saved from the Evangelicals.

I think the problem with Evangelicals in general is that rather than move the base to a "moral" ideology, they want to take the faster route by legislating and forcing everyone to their way. They need to get out of the government and get back to the Church's grass roots system where people truly believe, rather than just "make a show". One would hope that they are now learning that they have to TEACH the general concept of morality, not legislate it. When people truly believe, they are far less likely to step on others' toes, impose THEIR will on others and more likely to live by "do unto others... "

Now if we can only get him to stop believing in fairy tales, spooks, ghosts, oracles, and gods--excuse me, THE god, he won't be beholden to anybody and do and say whatever he pleases.
Of course, his god is a vengeful one so that's probably out of the realm of possibility. Nothing like the threat of eternal fire and brimstone to keep a true believer in line.
As far as his fellow Evangelicals, don't look for a mass reconsideration of who and what they've become. The Rapture will occure before that happens.