Who Are You Calling A Religious Centrist?

I have to laugh everytime I read that Thistlethwaite refers to herself as a person of faith. Faith in what? Certainly not the Bible. The apostle Paul stated that the Jews had a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. It was his desire that they would come to Jesus and be "saved". (Romans 10:1-3) We can assume then, that they were not saved. So it is with this disillusioned Thistlethwaite.

She states, "Poverty increased dramatically in the United States, and collectively we are responsible for horrible human rights violations, unnecessary deaths and maiming in wars that should never have been waged. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered Americans are still denied equal rights, rights that as citizens they must and should have. Women's privacy about their reproductive choices has been under systematic attack. We are now effectively both fiscally and morally bankrupt from this shift to the right."

There you have it. She supports homosexuality which God says is an abomination. But then, she's a member of the ObamaNation. She supports abortions which is outright murder. (Before you question me on this, I suggest that you go to www.silentscream.org and click on videos and view all 5 parts of the "Silent Scream". If you are unwilling to do this, then keep your opinions to yourself. WARNING: Not for the faint of heart or for children)

Yes, poverty has increased dramatically because we have opened the doors to any and every illegal alien who wants to come into this country whether they hate us or not. So, yes, we are fiscally and morally bankrupt because we throw away our tax dollars to take care of these illegal aliens and to fund programs for abortions and every other ungodly practice. Instead of practicing God's instruction for a Life for a Life, we keep killers, the likes of Charles Manson, alive wasting millions if not billions of dollars.

I could go on and on but I have learned one thing in my 74 years of life: You can't debate ignorance.

I have 4 verses for Thistlethwaite:

Isaiah 30:1 ~ Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:

Isaiah 5:20 ~ Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Jeremiah 23:1 ~ Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.

1 Timothy 2:12 ~ But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

The religious left, as exemplified by the author, is aptly named. They have left the clear teachings of Scripture in favor of something else that, whatever else it may be, is neither biblical nor anywhere close to the political center. Disgusting.

The author couldn't be more wrong if she tried. Religious opposition to a homosexual agenda is NOT homophobia. And homophobia and abortion did NOT move the center to the right in the past 20 years.

In fact, I support gay marriage and abortion, but I fall on the right side of the spectrum because I'm sick of the left -- people like the author -- demonizing anyone they disagree with intellectually as racist or homophobic or intolerant.

And I suspect that's why the religious left -- if there truly is such a thing -- has lost any power that the author claims it had. You're not reaching out, you're PUSHING people away with your vitriol and name calling.

As noted below:

"Some examples of the "hallucinations" of the simple preacher man aka Jesus (or were these "hallucinations" simply embellishments by P, M, M, L and J to raise the status of the simple preacher man to that of a deity??)"

It is obviously the latter i.e. embellishments made by P, M, M, L and J and apparently NOT "hallucinations" had by the simple preacher man as one would conclude from only accepting the "literal" words of the mentioned passages.

"Religious left" - huh? Kind of like "clean coal".

CCNL,

The temptation in the desert and the wedding at Cana are generally regarded by scholars as late additions to the story of Jesus. They don't tell us that Jesus himself had hallucinations, as they were written decades after his death.

I agree with dgblues...The Christian right is certainly vocal, but I do not believe they are as much in the majority as everyone seems to believe. Not anymore. And what the Christian right practices and what it preaches are two different things, often. Example: Catholics will campaign tirelessly against abortion, but their daughters grow up, get pregnant and abort their children as often or more often than their Protestant counterparts. This says to me that the one-sided, black-and-white, vitriolic campaign might not be working the way it's meant to work. The middle ground, on the other hand, might have sympathy for those who are pro-life, trusting that they believe what they do for solid reasons, and also have sympathy for those who are pro-choice, believing that they might have a point too. The result might be that the two sides might work together to create a world where abortion is the least desirable option, and happens less. I think both sides would probably want that. The one-sided-I-can't-see-anyone-else's-point-of-view approach seems to accomplish very little except stirring everyone into a frenzy. Instead, we might seek balance, or a center.

Also, I think we need some saner, more balanced, centered people representing religion, judging from some of the comments on On Faith. I am a believer, but I absolutely sympathize with atheists who have dismissed religion as lunacy. Religion does seem to attract a vocal group of representatives who have completely, absolutely lost their minds; religion can have that effect on people. But I suspect the vast majority of believers are relatively sane, balanced people capable of critical thought who find joy and peace in their spirituality and attend church to share that, even if it means they run the risk of becoming religious and facing all the pitfalls that go along with religiosity. Maybe the challenge is to encourage those who are already at the center, whether liberal or conservative, to speak up more often.

Some examples of the "hallucinations" of the simple preacher man aka Jesus (or were these "hallucinations" simply embellishments by P, M, M, L and J to raise the status of the simple preacher man to that of a deity??)

1. The Temptation in the Desert

“Samuel T. Lachs
Lachs [Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament, 50]:

The theme that a hero or holy man was to be tested before his career began or before his mission was undertaken is commonplace in the literature of antiquity. Rabbinic homilies on this theme are often based on Ps. 11.5, The Lord tests the righteous, not the wicked. The most notable example of this testing in Jewish tradition is Abraham, of whom it is stated, "With ten trials our father Abraham was tried, and he withstood them all to make known how great was the love of Abraham our father."

Gerd Lüdemann
Lüdemann [Jesus, 10] dismisses the tradition as unhistorical:

The tradition is present only in rudimentary form (cf. by contrast the tradition in Q: Matt. 4.1-11/Luke 4.1-13) and the details can no longer be reconstructed. Perhaps it seeks to depict Jesus as a righteous man, a new Adam (cf. Rom. 5.12-21; I Cor. 15:45-49), who embodies the righteous son of God.”

continued below:

2. Changing of Water into Wine – John 2: 1-11 (only reference in the NT- single attestation )

“Jesus Seminar
In common with most critical scholarship, the Fellows of the Jesus Seminar considered this episode to be the creation of the evangelist, or at least the Signs Gospel. The commentary in The Acts of Jesus observes:
It is evident that the fourth evangelist is less interested in the miracle itself than in its symbolic value. In the tale of the paralytic by the pool (John 5:1-18), the cure of the lame man is told for the sake of the controversy about the sabbath. In the story of the man born blind (John 9:1-41), the miracle provides the occasion for a theological discourse on blindness and sight. The raising of Lazarus (11:1-57) anticipates the resurrection of Jesus and furnishes some of the motivation for the authorities to kill Jesus. ... In the Cana story, the replacement of the water destined for the purification rotes with good wine constitutes the symbolic miracle: the new, good wine is Christianity, which replaces the old, ineffective rites symbolized by the imperfect number six—one short of seven ...

"Gerd Lüdemann

While Lüdemann [Jesus, 433ff] attributes the story to the Evangelist, he notes the following ancient parallels:
'When one struck the rock with the thyrsos, immediately a cool spring arose, and on striking the narthex on the ground, the god's sweet wine flowed out ' (Euripdes, The Maenads, 704-7). '... The priests bring three vessels to the count and set them down empty (viz. in a building) ... The next day ... they find the vessels filled with wine' (Pausanias, Description of Greece, VI 26, 1-2). However, in the Old Testament there are narratives about the transformation of water into some other matter; cf. Ex. 7.19-22 (Moses turns water into blood); Ex 15.23-25 and II Kings 2,19-22 (each time undrinkable water is transformed into drinkable water). Moreover, it should be noted that according to many Old Testament texts the time of salvation will be marked not least by an inexhaustible supply of wine (cf. e.g. Amos 9.13f; Hos. 2.24; Zech. 8.12; see also Mark 14.25)."

"John P.Meier
For a summary of Meier's extensive comments on this miracle, see: Proper_2C#Miraculous_wine_at_a_wedding_in_Cana "

The Creator, G-d, is the "center" of all...and particularly for those with a "religious" inclination. America's Founders recognized in The Creed that this is so making "Annuit Coeptis," "Divine Providence blesses our endeavors," the key Motto, of the three, bridging sectarian factionalism and ethnic advantage.

Truth and Justice are indisputable aspects of G-d as Americans know It. Those who disagree are fundamentally not of America, or G-d.

Bush and Cheney committed 9/11. Christian theologian and American Patriot David Ray Griffin, PhD, reveals this truth for all to know and understand in "logic primer," "The New Pearl Harbor." Any who turn from this truth are turning from G-d and have, with Bush and Cheney, the Blood of Innocents on their hands.

Persons "of Faith" who have read the above yet fail to pursue justice by trying and frying Bush and Cheney for treason and expropriating and banishing or executing their accomplices are kidding themselves.

G-d is watching each and every one of us. The writing is on the wall. Deny the truth...deny your own salvation...and be accursed.

To CCNL,

Before you continue to describe Jesus as hallucinatory, I hope you will take a few minutes to read the scholars' version of the "sayings gospel" Q1, which contains most of the sayings these scholars believe are authentic sayings of Jesus. Q1 is sometimes described as the "no-frills" Jesus. Lots of discussion of Q in general is found at the website you recommended, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.html . You'll find Q1 as the sayings in bold face here: http://www.cygnus-study.com/pageq.html .

Read just the bold faced sayings (Q1). Then consider whether there's anything in those "authentic" sayings to characterize Jesus as someone who "suffered from halllucinations."

I don't necessarily agree with the scholars of the Jesus seminar (Borg, Crossan, Mack, et al) on their division of Jesus' sayings into "authentic" and "inauthentic." To me, the Jesus they identify in the oldest layer of the Gospels, Q1, shows a tendency toward pronoia--the belief that all things are working together for good, for anyone who joins in that work. This belief may be over-optimistic and naive, or it may be the truth in the long view of life. But it isn't hallucinatory.

What I gather from your post is that you don't like Christianity. There are many aspects of institutional Christianity that I don't like, either.

But you demonstrate that you have not read your cited sources very carefully. It would be more interesting to have a discussion with some one who has carefully read the views they cite.

Left, Middle, Right but it all comes down to this: (for those eyes that have not seen or bothered to study)

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, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams et al, founders of Christian-based 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.

Jesus Christ was unquestionably the most liberal person to have ever lived. He taught love, peace, and inclusion, not hatred and warfare. Technically, all followers of Christ must be liberal (and progressive). God bless all Christians working to teach His truth to all lost sinners, including and especially the fundamentalists who have strayed so far.

LOGCABIN1836:

Nope, not exactly. His message, the one He preached more than any other, was that if we didn't stop sinning and submit to Him, we would burn in Hell. But the liberal progressives don't like to tell you that.

Nice try, though.

"Who Are You Calling A Religious Centrist"

People like you on the Left and the Right are truly dispicable for religion in general. You are clearly more concerned about society than piety.

“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”

Of all the wisdom offered by Jesus, none was more telling. You can be a culture warrior or a follower of Christ...the proposition that you can do both is a fallacy that has diminished Christians on the Right and Left. Be a culture warrior on your own time...certainly not in the name of Christ, pastor Susan.

How partisan! How utterly Godless! This writer's strictly out for more political advantage. What is she doing in theology circles? Wouldn't Susan feel more comfortable with a column at "The Nation" or on Daily Koz. No wonder the Post is rapidly losing money; its losses follow the Paper's lack of common sense.
Posted by: TJLinBallston | April 2, 2009 2:08 PM

How so? If you read your Bible, you'll remember Jesus wasn't rich. He encouraged the rich to serve the poor. He said "Love thy neighbar, as why would thyself." and this is what the author is saying.

Where is the lack of common sense?

From what I read in Religion class, back in grammar school, Jesus was of service to the common society. He would certainly be a socialist, if he were alive today. Heck, most Christians would probably crucify him all over again!

The greatest liberal progressive of all time who advocated for the poor and disenfranchised in society, who preached that the welfare of our fellow man was far more important than wealth and riches.......Jesus Christ.

The most important relationship is that with God. Our fellow mortals have us for oh, so brief a time; he has us for eternity.

How partisan! How utterly Godless! This writer's strictly out for more political advantage. What is she doing in theology circles? Wouldn't Susan feel more comfortable with a column at "The Nation" or on Daily Koz. No wonder the Post is rapidly losing money; its losses follow the Paper's lack of common sense.

This "theologian" probably would rant on about the separation of church and state but her whole raison d'etre seems to be politics and "winning". It would be surprising if she had any time left over for God.

The problem arises because we cede the center to what is really a minority on the right. In point of fact, the true center, as represented by the majority opinion in our country, is far more progressive than our media would have us believe.

This mythology is disseminated in order to preserve the illusion that we're a "center-right" country. Perhaps at one time we were, but eight years of Bush and the right wing Christo-fascist charlatans have educated us more than any partisan bickering ever could. Now it's real, the disaster is at our doorstep, and we're not in the mood for being duped any longer.

So instead of merely reclaiming the dignity of "liberal," I think we need to step up and rightly claim the mantle of "center," and take it away from the right.