Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong

Religions > Atheism > Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 15

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	""
Date:	06 Dec 2004 06:53:05 AM
Object:	Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong

In our email this morning
***********************************************************
From: "Robert Nordlander" <nord@famvid.com>
To: <gartland1@hotmail.com>
Subject: If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:26:35 -0600
forwarded Religion News Blog article:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[USA] If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong
As reported by . Webblogged by Religion News Blog on 2004-11-30 13:52:56
Religious Right? It seems more like the religious 'wrong'
Was Jesus a big winner in the last election? You'd sure think so. If the
pundits and Religious Right zealots are correct, the Son of God scored a
knockout victory on Nov. 2.
We've had it drilled into our heads that something known as "moral values"
was decisive in the election. Some worked-up commentators have even said
we're on the brink of a second Great Awakening.
All this hype about the God talk swirling around in our culture prompted me
to do a little research (a big departure from how I usually prepare for
writing a column). I cracked open my Bible and started rereading the
Gospels.
And you know what? I can't see what all this sanctimonious values rhetoric
has to do with Jesus. I've compared what I read in Gospels with what I've
been hearing from the Religious Right, and I've concluded that the
holier-than-thous must have traded in their red-letter editions of the Good
Book for red-state versions that omit most of Jesus' teachings.
The truth is, if you depend on the Christian right for your theological
sustenance, you probably won't recognize the Jesus of the Gospels.
Jesus was quite a troublemaker. In fact, I'm thinking the Bush
administration would have a special place for Jesus were the swarthy
Nazarene to take up his ministry today in the U.S. of A.--in a cell with
other Middle Eastern men awaiting deportation.
Let's recall what the Jesus of the Gospels espoused. "When you give a
banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you
will be blessed, because they cannot repay you," the sandal-wearing
rabble-rouser was known to say.
That sounds pretty good, but it makes you realize that JC would never have
reached "Ranger" or "Pioneer" status in the Bush fund-raising machine.
Then, of course, there's Jesus' encounter with the rich ruler who said he
was a righteous man because he'd followed the Ten Commandments since his
youth (though he gave no indication that he'd ever erected a monument
dedicated to them in a public place).
Jesus told the ruler: "There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you
own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in
heaven; then come, follow me."
When the ruler started looking glum, Jesus responded with his famous
kicker: "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of
God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
Holy class warfare! No wonder Republicans have switched out the Jesus of
the Gospels for a low-rent moralizer preoccupied with what other people are
doing with their bodies.
I've no intention of turning this column into a Sunday school lesson, so
I'll ease up on the Bible quotes. But go ahead and read the Gospels for
yourself, and see if you can reconcile the Jesus you encounter in those
texts with the Jesus the Religious Right wields as a battle-ax.
If you're a thoughtful, independent-minded person, I'll bet you read the
Gospels and wonder: Where in America does this Jesus dwell?
Where in America is the Jesus who sides with the poor and the outcasts?
Where in America is the Jesus who disdains those who wear their piousness
on their sleeves? Where in America is the the Jesus with the prophetic
voice, the radical who dares to tell the powerful what they don't want to
hear?
Is he in the pews that fill every Sunday morning with the smug and
complacent? Is he in a political party that fights for tax cuts for the
rich while neglecting the needs of decent, hard-working Americans? Is he
among the "God-and-country" demagogues who push an idolatrous nationalism
and who see military service as the supreme form of sacrifice?
Your questions might not end there. You may observe that other things are
missing from our fashionable "moral values" rhetoric.
You may, for example, notice the absence of any critique of an economic
system that turns Jesus' birthday into an opportunity to jump-start
consumer spending. Or any critique of corporate control of the public's
airwaves, which helps ensure the culture is saturated with sexuality and
violence that appeal to the lowest common denominator but generate huge
profits.
Where is the righteous conservative Christian politician who makes these
things campaign issues, who talks about them as moral issues?
I have no doubt that the Christian right and their leader, George W. Bush,
are sincere about their faith. But I also have no doubt-- to paraphrase one
of America's pre-eminent theologians, Stanley Hauerwas--that sincerity has
precious little to do with Christianity.
This "moral values" talk doesn't do much to sustain Christianity, either.
The phrase is as banal as the hacks (of both the political and journalistic
variety) who are busy fetishizing it.
For political operatives, the phrase's beauty lies in its meaningless. It
can be made to mean anything, and, in a culture with no meaningful moral
narratives, it can be turned into a cudgel that's useful for political ends
but has nothing to do with any coherent religious tradition.
In the spiritual vacuum that exists in this country, the Christian right is
well-positioned to argue that its menagerie of fears and chauvinisms--piled
into a box labeled "moral values"--constitutes a serious moral narrative.
It doesn't, but the Religious Right's contribution to the denigration of
Christianity will continue unabated until other Christian communities come
up with a compelling alternative.
The trouble is, our society seems to lack the kind of exemplars who could
build that alternative. What we need are the spiritual descendants of
Martin Luther King Jr. and Dorothy Day, people who are willing to endure
the enmity and scorn of the political establishment and mainstream culture.
Maybe those people are out there, but I don't see them. That's why I'm not
optimistic about the survival of the Christian tradition in our culture.
What many view as a great spiritual revival looks a lot to me like another
stage of rot in American Christianity's corpse.
Can the cadaver rise up? It doesn't seem hopeful. In contemporary America,
the Jewish Palestinian whom many call their messiah has become just another
Middle Easterner to be ignored or reviled.
RICK MERCIER is a writer and editor for The Free Lance-Star.
.. More columns by Rick Mercier
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	06 Dec 2004 02:34:08 PM

wrote:

In our email this morning
***********************************************************
From: "Robert Nordlander" <nord@famvid.com>
To: <gartland1@hotmail.com>
Subject: If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:26:35 -0600

forwarded Religion News Blog article:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[USA] If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong

As reported by . Webblogged by Religion News Blog on 2004-11-30 13:52:56
Religious Right? It seems more like the religious 'wrong'

Was Jesus a big winner in the last election? You'd sure think so. If the
pundits and Religious Right zealots are correct, the Son of God scored a
knockout victory on Nov. 2.

We've had it drilled into our heads that something known as "moral values"
was decisive in the election. Some worked-up commentators have even said
we're on the brink of a second Great Awakening.

All this hype about the God talk swirling around in our culture prompted me
to do a little research (a big departure from how I usually prepare for
writing a column). I cracked open my Bible and started rereading the
Gospels.

And you know what? I can't see what all this sanctimonious values rhetoric
has to do with Jesus. I've compared what I read in Gospels with what I've
been hearing from the Religious Right, and I've concluded that the
holier-than-thous must have traded in their red-letter editions of the Good
Book for red-state versions that omit most of Jesus' teachings.

The truth is, if you depend on the Christian right for your theological
sustenance, you probably won't recognize the Jesus of the Gospels.

Jesus was quite a troublemaker. In fact, I'm thinking the Bush
administration would have a special place for Jesus were the swarthy
Nazarene to take up his ministry today in the U.S. of A.--in a cell with
other Middle Eastern men awaiting deportation.

Let's recall what the Jesus of the Gospels espoused. "When you give a
banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you
will be blessed, because they cannot repay you," the sandal-wearing
rabble-rouser was known to say.

That sounds pretty good, but it makes you realize that JC would never have
reached "Ranger" or "Pioneer" status in the Bush fund-raising machine.

Then, of course, there's Jesus' encounter with the rich ruler who said he
was a righteous man because he'd followed the Ten Commandments since his
youth (though he gave no indication that he'd ever erected a monument
dedicated to them in a public place).

Jesus told the ruler: "There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you
own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in
heaven; then come, follow me."

When the ruler started looking glum, Jesus responded with his famous
kicker: "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of
God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

Holy class warfare! No wonder Republicans have switched out the Jesus of
the Gospels for a low-rent moralizer preoccupied with what other people are
doing with their bodies.

I've no intention of turning this column into a Sunday school lesson, so
I'll ease up on the Bible quotes. But go ahead and read the Gospels for
yourself, and see if you can reconcile the Jesus you encounter in those
texts with the Jesus the Religious Right wields as a battle-ax.

If you're a thoughtful, independent-minded person, I'll bet you read the
Gospels and wonder: Where in America does this Jesus dwell?

Where in America is the Jesus who sides with the poor and the outcasts?
Where in America is the Jesus who disdains those who wear their piousness
on their sleeves? Where in America is the the Jesus with the prophetic
voice, the radical who dares to tell the powerful what they don't want to
hear?

Is he in the pews that fill every Sunday morning with the smug and
complacent? Is he in a political party that fights for tax cuts for the
rich while neglecting the needs of decent, hard-working Americans? Is he
among the "God-and-country" demagogues who push an idolatrous nationalism
and who see military service as the supreme form of sacrifice?

Your questions might not end there. You may observe that other things are
missing from our fashionable "moral values" rhetoric.

You may, for example, notice the absence of any critique of an economic
system that turns Jesus' birthday into an opportunity to jump-start
consumer spending. Or any critique of corporate control of the public's
airwaves, which helps ensure the culture is saturated with sexuality and
violence that appeal to the lowest common denominator but generate huge
profits.

Where is the righteous conservative Christian politician who makes these
things campaign issues, who talks about them as moral issues?

I have no doubt that the Christian right and their leader, George W. Bush,
are sincere about their faith. But I also have no doubt-- to paraphrase one
of America's pre-eminent theologians, Stanley Hauerwas--that sincerity has
precious little to do with Christianity.

This "moral values" talk doesn't do much to sustain Christianity, either.
The phrase is as banal as the hacks (of both the political and journalistic
variety) who are busy fetishizing it.

For political operatives, the phrase's beauty lies in its meaningless. It
can be made to mean anything, and, in a culture with no meaningful moral
narratives, it can be turned into a cudgel that's useful for political ends
but has nothing to do with any coherent religious tradition.

In the spiritual vacuum that exists in this country, the Christian right is
well-positioned to argue that its menagerie of fears and chauvinisms--piled
into a box labeled "moral values"--constitutes a serious moral narrative.
It doesn't, but the Religious Right's contribution to the denigration of
Christianity will continue unabated until other Christian communities come
up with a compelling alternative.

The trouble is, our society seems to lack the kind of exemplars who could
build that alternative. What we need are the spiritual descendants of
Martin Luther King Jr. and Dorothy Day, people who are willing to endure
the enmity and scorn of the political establishment and mainstream culture.

Maybe those people are out there, but I don't see them. That's why I'm not
optimistic about the survival of the Christian tradition in our culture.
What many view as a great spiritual revival looks a lot to me like another
stage of rot in American Christianity's corpse.

Can the cadaver rise up? It doesn't seem hopeful. In contemporary America,
the Jewish Palestinian whom many call their messiah has become just another
Middle Easterner to be ignored or reviled.

RICK MERCIER is a writer and editor for The Free Lance-Star.

. More columns by Rick Mercier

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are
not representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of
most of the elite left.
Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and believes
that God talks back - would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and
his realationship he claimed with His "Father".
.

User: "Dave Thompson"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	06 Dec 2004 02:36:51 PM

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:4n3td.6691$cH5.6315@news01.roc.ny...

buckeye-ELO@nospam.net wrote:

In our email this morning
***********************************************************
From: "Robert Nordlander" <nord@famvid.com>
To: <gartland1@hotmail.com>
Subject: If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:26:35 -0600

forwarded Religion News Blog
article: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[USA] If you read the Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong

As reported by . Webblogged by Religion News Blog on 2004-11-30 13:52:56
Religious Right? It seems more like the religious 'wrong'

Was Jesus a big winner in the last election? You'd sure think so. If the
pundits and Religious Right zealots are correct, the Son of God scored a
knockout victory on Nov. 2.

We've had it drilled into our heads that something known as "moral
values"
was decisive in the election. Some worked-up commentators have even said
we're on the brink of a second Great Awakening.

All this hype about the God talk swirling around in our culture prompted
me
to do a little research (a big departure from how I usually prepare for
writing a column). I cracked open my Bible and started rereading the
Gospels.

And you know what? I can't see what all this sanctimonious values
rhetoric
has to do with Jesus. I've compared what I read in Gospels with what I've
been hearing from the Religious Right, and I've concluded that the
holier-than-thous must have traded in their red-letter editions of the
Good
Book for red-state versions that omit most of Jesus' teachings.

The truth is, if you depend on the Christian right for your theological
sustenance, you probably won't recognize the Jesus of the Gospels.

Jesus was quite a troublemaker. In fact, I'm thinking the Bush
administration would have a special place for Jesus were the swarthy
Nazarene to take up his ministry today in the U.S. of A.--in a cell with
other Middle Eastern men awaiting deportation.

Let's recall what the Jesus of the Gospels espoused. "When you give a
banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you
will be blessed, because they cannot repay you," the sandal-wearing
rabble-rouser was known to say.

That sounds pretty good, but it makes you realize that JC would never
have
reached "Ranger" or "Pioneer" status in the Bush fund-raising machine.

Then, of course, there's Jesus' encounter with the rich ruler who said he
was a righteous man because he'd followed the Ten Commandments since his
youth (though he gave no indication that he'd ever erected a monument
dedicated to them in a public place).

Jesus told the ruler: "There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that
you
own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in
heaven; then come, follow me."

When the ruler started looking glum, Jesus responded with his famous
kicker: "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of
God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

Holy class warfare! No wonder Republicans have switched out the Jesus of
the Gospels for a low-rent moralizer preoccupied with what other people
are
doing with their bodies.

I've no intention of turning this column into a Sunday school lesson, so
I'll ease up on the Bible quotes. But go ahead and read the Gospels for
yourself, and see if you can reconcile the Jesus you encounter in those
texts with the Jesus the Religious Right wields as a battle-ax.

If you're a thoughtful, independent-minded person, I'll bet you read the
Gospels and wonder: Where in America does this Jesus dwell?

Where in America is the Jesus who sides with the poor and the outcasts?
Where in America is the Jesus who disdains those who wear their piousness
on their sleeves? Where in America is the the Jesus with the prophetic
voice, the radical who dares to tell the powerful what they don't want to
hear?

Is he in the pews that fill every Sunday morning with the smug and
complacent? Is he in a political party that fights for tax cuts for the
rich while neglecting the needs of decent, hard-working Americans? Is he
among the "God-and-country" demagogues who push an idolatrous nationalism
and who see military service as the supreme form of sacrifice?

Your questions might not end there. You may observe that other things are
missing from our fashionable "moral values" rhetoric.

You may, for example, notice the absence of any critique of an economic
system that turns Jesus' birthday into an opportunity to jump-start
consumer spending. Or any critique of corporate control of the public's
airwaves, which helps ensure the culture is saturated with sexuality and
violence that appeal to the lowest common denominator but generate huge
profits.

Where is the righteous conservative Christian politician who makes these
things campaign issues, who talks about them as moral issues?

I have no doubt that the Christian right and their leader, George W.
Bush,
are sincere about their faith. But I also have no doubt-- to paraphrase
one
of America's pre-eminent theologians, Stanley Hauerwas--that sincerity
has
precious little to do with Christianity.

This "moral values" talk doesn't do much to sustain Christianity, either.
The phrase is as banal as the hacks (of both the political and
journalistic
variety) who are busy fetishizing it.

For political operatives, the phrase's beauty lies in its meaningless. It
can be made to mean anything, and, in a culture with no meaningful moral
narratives, it can be turned into a cudgel that's useful for political
ends
but has nothing to do with any coherent religious tradition.

In the spiritual vacuum that exists in this country, the Christian right
is
well-positioned to argue that its menagerie of fears and
chauvinisms--piled
into a box labeled "moral values"--constitutes a serious moral narrative.
It doesn't, but the Religious Right's contribution to the denigration of
Christianity will continue unabated until other Christian communities
come
up with a compelling alternative.

The trouble is, our society seems to lack the kind of exemplars who could
build that alternative. What we need are the spiritual descendants of
Martin Luther King Jr. and Dorothy Day, people who are willing to endure
the enmity and scorn of the political establishment and mainstream
culture.

Maybe those people are out there, but I don't see them. That's why I'm
not
optimistic about the survival of the Christian tradition in our culture.
What many view as a great spiritual revival looks a lot to me like
another
stage of rot in American Christianity's corpse.

Can the cadaver rise up? It doesn't seem hopeful. In contemporary
America,
the Jewish Palestinian whom many call their messiah has become just
another
Middle Easterner to be ignored or reviled.

RICK MERCIER is a writer and editor for The Free Lance-Star.

. More columns by Rick
Mercier --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are not
representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of most
of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and believes
that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.
- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	07 Dec 2004 03:22:34 PM

Dave Thompson wrote:

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are not
representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of most
of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

I didn't necessarily mean "athiest". I meant anti-religious.
I'd dare to say that the left is far more vitriolic in it's critiscism
of religion than the right.

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and believes
that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.

Your point?

- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?

Come on! There are numerous elitist leftists who scoff at Bush because
he's a Christian. They say things like "He actually believes God talks
to him", and "He thinks his presidency is a mandate from God".
They belittle the very idea that someone would think God communicates
with them.
Well guess what, Jesus thought God talked to Him, and He thought His
ministry was a mandate from God.
.

User: "Dave Thompson"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	07 Dec 2004 04:12:27 PM

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:uaptd.6865$ay6.5590@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are not
representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of most
of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

I didn't necessarily mean "athiest". I meant anti-religious.

How is the left anti-religious, other than for the most part backing the
establishment clause and being against using the government for their bully
pulpit? I don't find that to be anti-religious at all.

I'd dare to say that the left is far more vitriolic in it's critiscism of
religion than the right.

When it comes to other religions, and the liberal side of the Christian
church, the right is extremely vitriolic. You might consider that most of
what you see directed at the Christian right is about their politics, not
their religion.

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and believes
that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.

Your point?

That the Christian right would consider the Founding Fathers evil liberals
and anti-christian if they were alive today.

- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?

Come on! There are numerous elitist leftists who scoff at Bush because
he's a Christian. They say things like "He actually believes God talks to
him", and "He thinks his presidency is a mandate from God".
They belittle the very idea that someone would think God communicates with
them.
Well guess what, Jesus thought God talked to Him, and He thought His
ministry was a mandate from God.

So? We live in a country with a secular government. No one elected Bush as
the country's highest minister, no matter what he believes.
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	08 Dec 2004 02:41:40 PM

Dave Thompson wrote:

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:uaptd.6865$ay6.5590@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are not
representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of most
of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

I didn't necessarily mean "athiest". I meant anti-religious.

The left constantly demonizes fundamentalist Christian beliefs - as you
and many others in this newsgroup prove on a regular basis. In fact
"fundamentalist" is often used as a term of derision. And, believe it or
not, fundamentalist Christianity - I think - qualifies as "religion",
hence the left is anti-religious.

I'd dare to say that the left is far more vitriolic in it's critiscism of
religion than the right.

I see an extreme hatred and distaste for those who actually believe that
Jesus taught that He was the *only* way to God. Those who believe Jesus'
words are called intolerant and bigoted - and for what? For believing
the words of Jesus. That's not about politics, that's the heart of their
religion.

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and believes
that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.

Your point?

That the Christian right would consider the Founding Fathers evil liberals
and anti-christian if they were alive today.

Certainly not all the FF would be seen this way. I'm sure they were
individuals with their own individual belief systems - not a block of
liberals as you intimate.

- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?

Come on! There are numerous elitist leftists who scoff at Bush because
he's a Christian. They say things like "He actually believes God talks to
him", and "He thinks his presidency is a mandate from God".
They belittle the very idea that someone would think God communicates with
them.
Well guess what, Jesus thought God talked to Him, and He thought His
ministry was a mandate from God.

So? We live in a country with a secular government. No one elected Bush as
the country's highest minister, no matter what he believes.

Bush *never said* he believes he has a mandate from God - that's just
been assumed by those who so fear a "born again" Christian that they
have no other way of understanding the concept. To them, "born again"
signifies "crazy wacko who thinks God talks to him".
I'm just pointing out that Jesus believed that God talked to Him too.
These secular elitists often like to paint Jesus as some kind of
liberal, yet it was He who said "You must be born again", and "No one
comes to the Father but by me" - views that are seen as crazy and
intolerant in today's liberal world.
.

User: "Dave Thompson"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	08 Dec 2004 05:39:48 PM

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:8GJtd.7012$Ej7.2719@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:uaptd.6865$ay6.5590@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are
not representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of
most of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

I didn't necessarily mean "athiest". I meant anti-religious.

How is the left anti-religious, other than for the most part backing the
establishment clause and being against using the government for their
bully pulpit? I don't find that to be anti-religious at all.

The left constantly demonizes fundamentalist Christian beliefs - as you
and many others in this newsgroup prove on a regular basis.

More than just the left criticizes christian extremists like evangelicals,
but why don't you listen to the criticism for a change. Most of the
criticism centers around their politics and religious goals for our country.
People have a right to criticize them for these beliefs because it will
effect them as well.
In fact

"fundamentalist" is often used as a term of derision.

So? The Fundies constantly focus derision and scorn upon liberals,
moderates, democrats, greens, unbelievers, gays, lesbians, public schools
and public school teachers, and even Christians of different churches. If
they feel that they can impune at will, then why should anyone pass up a
chance to criticize them?
And, believe it or

not, fundamentalist Christianity - I think - qualifies as "religion",
hence the left is anti-religious.

Just because it is religious doesn't mean it is exempt from criticism and
just because it is criticism does not mean it is bigotry. I think the
fundies, if they are going to air their beliefs in the public forum, should
quit whining and accept that they do not speak for the majority of people in
this country, and that some might find their extreme beliefs irrational.
They and you need to quit acting like every remark against them is
anti-religious bigotry, because it is not.

I'd dare to say that the left is far more vitriolic in it's critiscism of
religion than the right.

I see an extreme hatred and distaste for those who actually believe that
Jesus taught that He was the *only* way to God.

You are doing exactly what the fundies do here. You are lumping yourself
into all Christians and pretending like it is an attack on the whole group.
This is incredibly dishonest and ignorant because not only do you not
represent all Christians but also many Christians themselves object to the
fundies and their politics. Take responsibility for your own beliefs and
don't pretend that you own all of christianity because you are holier than
thou.
Those who believe Jesus'

words are called intolerant and bigoted - and for what? For believing the
words of Jesus. That's not about politics, that's the heart of their
religion.

You are just ignoring that not all Christians are being criticized when
people criticize the objectives of the religious right.

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and
believes that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.

Your point?

That the Christian right would consider the Founding Fathers evil
liberals and anti-christian if they were alive today.

Certainly not all the FF would be seen this way. I'm sure they were
individuals with their own individual belief systems - not a block of
liberals as you intimate.

If you polled the religious right on some of the issues found in the
constitution without saying where the ideas came from, no doubt many would
disagree with many of them. Free speech, religious freedom, seperation of
church and state, equal rights, privacy, and others would all be issues that
would either not be embraced fully or objected to outright. If you want me
to be more specific about each one I can do that. And remember I am not
refering to all Christians, just the far right political fundies.

- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?

Come on! There are numerous elitist leftists who scoff at Bush because
he's a Christian. They say things like "He actually believes God talks to
him", and "He thinks his presidency is a mandate from God".
They belittle the very idea that someone would think God communicates
with them.
Well guess what, Jesus thought God talked to Him, and He thought His
ministry was a mandate from God.

So? We live in a country with a secular government. No one elected Bush
as the country's highest minister, no matter what he believes.

Bush *never said* he believes he has a mandate from God - that's just been
assumed by those who so fear a "born again" Christian that they have no
other way of understanding the concept.

No, there have been several quotes by him and at least one by a friend that
said he believes that god essentially wanted him to be president and works
through him. He peppers his speech with religious references, among others
that I remember was a speech just before we invaded Afghanistan where he
said that he was leading a crusade of good verses evil. It was a really
scary remark.
To them, "born again"

signifies "crazy wacko who thinks God talks to him".

To wish Bush has admitted to more than once. The latest was after he was
asked if he talked to his dad about invading Iraq and he said no that he
talked to a higher power and not his dad.

I'm just pointing out that Jesus believed that God talked to Him too.

So? To an unbeliever like me who discounts the divinity of the man, why
should I care who you think he spoke to. This is irrelevant.

These secular elitists often like to paint Jesus as some kind of liberal,
yet it was He who said "You must be born again", and "No one comes to the
Father but by me" - views that are seen as crazy and intolerant in today's
liberal world.

Well, they are at least arguably irrational and unprovable. Do you honestly
think unbelievers should give these beliefs credibility only on your word?
You need to get a grip and realize that it's not just unbelievers that
support a secular government. Plenty of Christians do to. And when my
freedom will be affected by it, I have every right to say that I reject it.
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	09 Dec 2004 02:41:18 PM

Dave Thompson wrote:

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:8GJtd.7012$Ej7.2719@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

"Wall of Sleep" <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote in message
news:uaptd.6865$ay6.5590@news01.roc.ny...

Dave Thompson wrote:

While I'll agree that the characterizations of the right you give are
not representative of Jesus' values, neither are the "godless" views of
most of the elite left.

Oh, so the left is atheist, huh? Care to back that up?

I didn't necessarily mean "athiest". I meant anti-religious.

How is the left anti-religious, other than for the most part backing the
establishment clause and being against using the government for their
bully pulpit? I don't find that to be anti-religious at all.

The left constantly demonizes fundamentalist Christian beliefs - as you
and many others in this newsgroup prove on a regular basis.

"fundamentalist" is often used as a term of derision.

not, fundamentalist Christianity - I think - qualifies as "religion",
hence the left is anti-religious.

I'd dare to say that the left is far more vitriolic in it's critiscism of
religion than the right.

I see an extreme hatred and distaste for those who actually believe that
Jesus taught that He was the *only* way to God.

words are called intolerant and bigoted - and for what? For believing the
words of Jesus. That's not about politics, that's the heart of their
religion.

You are just ignoring that not all Christians are being criticized when
people criticize the objectives of the religious right.

Those who recoil at the thought of a man who talks to God - and
believes that God talks back

You just described some of our more prominant founding fathers.

Your point?

That the Christian right would consider the Founding Fathers evil
liberals and anti-christian if they were alive today.

Certainly not all the FF would be seen this way. I'm sure they were
individuals with their own individual belief systems - not a block of
liberals as you intimate.

- would be revulsed by the teachings of Jesus and

his realationship he claimed with His "Father".

Evidence?

Come on! There are numerous elitist leftists who scoff at Bush because
he's a Christian. They say things like "He actually believes God talks to
him", and "He thinks his presidency is a mandate from God".
They belittle the very idea that someone would think God communicates
with them.
Well guess what, Jesus thought God talked to Him, and He thought His
ministry was a mandate from God.

So? We live in a country with a secular government. No one elected Bush
as the country's highest minister, no matter what he believes.

Bush *never said* he believes he has a mandate from God - that's just been
assumed by those who so fear a "born again" Christian that they have no
other way of understanding the concept.

signifies "crazy wacko who thinks God talks to him".

To wish Bush has admitted to more than once. The latest was after he was
asked if he talked to his dad about invading Iraq and he said no that he
talked to a higher power and not his dad.

I'm just pointing out that Jesus believed that God talked to Him too.

So? To an unbeliever like me who discounts the divinity of the man, why
should I care who you think he spoke to. This is irrelevant.

OK, if we're talking strictly politics here - you're right - sometimes
the religious right has some wacky ideas. My point was more about the
original subject of this thread which was comparing the religious
right's politics to the teachings of Jesus. I'm just trying to point out
that the liberal left also has little in common with the teachings of
Jesus. I said this because many on the left have coopted Jesus and
attempted to turned him into a liberal - while ignoring His
"fundamentalist" beliefs.
.

User: "wbarwell"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	10 Dec 2004 10:39:44 AM

Wall of Sleep wrote:

Bluntly, I don't think you know anything about the teachings of Jesus.
Sell all you have and give to the poor.
Take no thought for the morrow, what you will eat, what you will drink,
what you will wear.
Luke 14:36,
So likewise, whosoever he be of yoy that forsaketh
not all he hath, he cannot be a disciple of mine.
Luke 14:26
If any man come to me and hates not his father, and
mother, and wife, and children, and bretheren and sister,
yea, and his own life alos, he canot be a disciple of mine.
Prayer is to be done strictly in private, not in public.
Make no religous oaths.
Matthew 25, one must help the poor, the huingry, the sick,
or burn in hell.
Yet helping the poor is an idea that makes todays far right
self propclaimed Christians drool and turn red in the face
and yarp about being taxed too much.
And yarble on about socialism.
Jesus tells us not a jot nor title of teh Laws of Moses
shall pass as long as Heaven and Eath exists.
Christian solemnly tell us they are no longer bound
to the laws of Moses.
Acts, 2 and 4, god via the Holy Ghost informs us that
we are to live in holy communism, see Acts 4:31-7.
All Christians pretend not to know these verse or
understand them.
Christ tells us to love one another, then who slavery, the civil
war, ugly racism, Jim Crow lwas, segregation, lychings and hate?
We are still fighting racism.
If anybody has coopted Jesus it is the incompetent right.
Read Matthew 25:31-45. Help the poor or burn.
Now, listen to the right wingers yap and yarp about too many taxes, wasted
on the poor, and tirades about liberal socialists giving away THEIR money
to waste on the poor.
There are no true xians on the right any more.
None.
--
Apes bad! Dust good!
Apes bad! Dust good!
21st Century American Christianity
in a nutshell.
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	10 Dec 2004 03:21:47 PM

wbarwell wrote:

Wall of Sleep wrote:

Bluntly, I don't think you know anything about the teachings of Jesus.

I know the teachings of Jesus very well thank you.

Sell all you have and give to the poor.
Take no thought for the morrow, what you will eat, what you will drink,
what you will wear.
Luke 14:36,
So likewise, whosoever he be of yoy that forsaketh
not all he hath, he cannot be a disciple of mine.
Luke 14:26
If any man come to me and hates not his father, and
mother, and wife, and children, and bretheren and sister,
yea, and his own life alos, he canot be a disciple of mine.
Prayer is to be done strictly in private, not in public.
Make no religous oaths.
Matthew 25, one must help the poor, the huingry, the sick,
or burn in hell.
Yet helping the poor is an idea that makes todays far right
self propclaimed Christians drool and turn red in the face
and yarp about being taxed too much.
And yarble on about socialism.
Jesus tells us not a jot nor title of teh Laws of Moses
shall pass as long as Heaven and Eath exists.
Christian solemnly tell us they are no longer bound
to the laws of Moses.
Acts, 2 and 4, god via the Holy Ghost informs us that
we are to live in holy communism, see Acts 4:31-7.
All Christians pretend not to know these verse or
understand them.
Christ tells us to love one another, then who slavery, the civil
war, ugly racism, Jim Crow lwas, segregation, lychings and hate?

We are still fighting racism.

If anybody has coopted Jesus it is the incompetent right.
Read Matthew 25:31-45. Help the poor or burn.
Now, listen to the right wingers yap and yarp about too many taxes, wasted
on the poor, and tirades about liberal socialists giving away THEIR money
to waste on the poor.

There are no true xians on the right any more.
None.

You are picking and choosing scriptures that fit your agenda. You must
take *context* into consideration when studying the teachings of Christ.
Who was He talking to?
When He talked to the rich young ruler, he knew that the man had a
problem with greed, so He said "One thing you lack...". He knew the
Pharisees did much of their "religion" out of greed also - and condemned
them for it.
He also said to be angry with your brother was to commit murder, to lust
after a woman was to commit adultery... etc. Jesus required a total
commitment. If your problem is greed - give to the poor. If your problem
is lust - give that up, anger - stop it.
Do you honestly think no one can be a Christian unless he sells all his
possesions? Jesus spoke to people where they were, about their
particular problems.
I wholeheartedly agree with you that American Christianity is in sad
shape. Greed is a problem - so is lust, envy, strife, gossip,
unforgiveness - the list goes on and on. These are problems with
American culture in general. Citing scriptures that deal with greed
only, while ignoring all those that don't help your agenda is spurious
reasoning.
As for the Law and Jesus' statement that it would not pass away - that's
true, but it is also true that Jesus said He came to *fulfill* the Law.
That means He met all the Law's requirements and paid OUR penalty for
sin. It is *central* to the doctrine of Christianity that we are no
longer bound by the *Old* Covenant if we have accepted the *New*
Covenant. If you refinance your house, do you still have to make
payments to your old mortgage company? No, the new contract (covenant)
supersedes the old one.
.

User: "Cary Kittrell"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	10 Dec 2004 03:42:03 PM

In article <Lroud.7327$iZ.2535@news01.roc.ny> Wall of Sleep <vol4@sabotage.com> writes:

wbarwell wrote:

Wall of Sleep wrote:

Bluntly, I don't think you know anything about the teachings of Jesus.

I know the teachings of Jesus very well thank you.

But I'm always curious what sort of omniscient being, the unchanging source
and referent of all that is eternally good and perfect in virtue, would
suddenly declare a new deal right in the middle of the game. Not
only does this seem unfair to all who got stuck with the old contract,
it makes me wonder what kind of Perfect Being would seem to need to improve
on His first attempt.
Or why, for that matter, God is bound by all this legalism: if He wanted
to delcare a blanket amnestity, He most certainly could have done so
without having to balance some kind of cosmic books by sacrificing
Jesus. If He ethically can say "OK, we're starting over", then
He can also change the rules He set up in the first place, these
rules that you seem to be implying require that the Cosmic Virtue books
have to balance out, or else .... well, I don't know or else what.
-- cary
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	11 Dec 2004 03:40:50 PM

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <Lroud.7327$iZ.2535@news01.roc.ny> Wall of Sleep <vol4@sabotage.com> writes:

wbarwell wrote:

Wall of Sleep wrote:

Bluntly, I don't think you know anything about the teachings of Jesus.

I know the teachings of Jesus very well thank you.

But I'm always curious what sort of omniscient being, the unchanging source
and referent of all that is eternally good and perfect in virtue, would
suddenly declare a new deal right in the middle of the game. Not
only does this seem unfair to all who got stuck with the old contract,
it makes me wonder what kind of Perfect Being would seem to need to improve
on His first attempt.

Or why, for that matter, God is bound by all this legalism: if He wanted
to delcare a blanket amnestity, He most certainly could have done so
without having to balance some kind of cosmic books by sacrificing
Jesus. If He ethically can say "OK, we're starting over", then
He can also change the rules He set up in the first place, these
rules that you seem to be implying require that the Cosmic Virtue books
have to balance out, or else .... well, I don't know or else what.

-- cary

Yes you raise a good point. Man has struggled with that question for ages.
There *are* answers, but they are spiritually discerned. I know it
sounds cliche', but you must be born again to begin to understand God.
The process of being born again basically means God plants a spiritual
seed inside you - a part of Himself - and spirtual things start to make
sense to you. Until that happens, it's all kinda jibberish - at least
for me it was.
As for suddenly declaring a "new deal", this new deal was actually
promised by God in the OT (see Jeremiah 31:31-34). In fact, if you know
what you're looking for, the entire OT is predicting Jesus - the way He
was to be born, where, how long His ministry would last, what He would
say, how He would die - it's not like God changed His mind midstream,
this was the plan all along.
Let me give you an example of the OT predicting Jesus (this is one of
the less obvious ones)
In the book of Exodus, Moses leads the childern of Israel up to the
Jordan river but God refuses to let him lead them across the river into
the promised land because Moses had committed *one* sin. Instead Joshua
leads them in.
Now Moses is a type of the OT Law - which required perfect righteousness
and *even one sin* disqualified you from favor with God. Joshua
represents Jesus (same name: one's hebrew, one's greek) and the Jordan
represents baptism, or the washing away of sins.
So right there you have the whole gospel story - that Jesus came to do
for us what we could never do ourselves - since all of us are lawbreakers.
Now before you dismiss all this as just something I was taught in church
and have blindly believed - let me say it isn't. I distrust most of what
I've heard in church over the years (in fact I haven't attended church
in about five years). No, I came about this mostly on my own. I think if
anyone seriously wants to know God and believes enough to ask Him, He
will reveal Himself to them.
.

User: "Bob LeChevalier"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so is the left.	11 Dec 2004 04:41:00 PM

Wall of Sleep <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote:

Let me give you an example of the OT predicting Jesus (this is one of
the less obvious ones)

This is an example of looking for a known patterns in a large volume
of data, just as in numerology. You can find *anything* in the OT if
you want to find it.

In the book of Exodus, Moses leads the childern of Israel up to the
Jordan river but God refuses to let him lead them across the river into
the promised land because Moses had committed *one* sin. Instead Joshua
leads them in.

The problem with this is that Joshua had committed sins himself.
There were no sin-free people. So the allegory you think is there, is
flawed.

Now Moses is a type of the OT Law - which required perfect righteousness
and *even one sin* disqualified you from favor with God.

But it didn't, because Moses had committed other sins earlier in his
life and still found favor with God. There was one particular sin,
for which God damned a whole generation.
There are many other OT examples where God found favor in people who
committed sins.

Now before you dismiss all this as just something I was taught in church
and have blindly believed

I dismiss it as the same sort of overanalysis that led to kabbala
mysticism and numerology. You are just trying to make the Bible more
than it really is.
lojbab
--
lojbab

Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.

User: "Wall of Sleep"
Title: Re: Gospels, the Religious Right is most often wrong - but so isthe left.	13 Dec 2004 12:03:18 PM

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Wall of Sleep <vol4@sabotage.com> wrote:

Let me give you an example of the OT predicting Jesus (this is one of
the less obvious ones)

This is an example of looking for a known patterns in a large volume
of data, just as in numerology. You can find *anything* in the OT if
you want to find it.

The problem with this is that Joshua had committed sins himself.
There were no sin-free people. So the allegory you think is there, is
flawed.

Now Moses is a type of the OT Law - which required perfect righteousness
and *even one sin* disqualified you from favor with God.

But it didn't, because Moses had committed other sins earlier in his
life and still found favor with God. There was one particular sin,
for which God damned a whole generation.

There are many other OT examples where God found favor in people who
committed sins.

Now before you dismiss all this as just something I was taught in church
and have blindly believed

I dismiss it as the same sort of overanalysis that led to kabbala
mysticism and numerology. You are just trying to make the Bible more
than it really is.

Hardly. If this were an isolated case, then yes, I'd agree with you -
but the OT is full of predictions of Christ - some much more specific
than the one I mentioned. Just doing a quick google search, I came up
with this brief summation of just *some* of the more obvious ones:
http://biblia.com/jesusbible/prophecies.htm
Prophecies of the OT Fulfilled in Jesus Christ:
There have been described in the Old Testament 300 prophecies of
the first coming of the Messiah and 500 of the second coming, all of
then made hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus and fulfilled to
the letter in Jesus Christ, the Messiah.
George Heron, a French mathematician, calculated that the odds of
one man fulfilling only 40 of those prophecies are 1 in 10 to the power
of 157. That is a 1 followed by 157 zeros. Compare it to this; your odds
on winning the state lottery are 14 followed by 6 zeros.
Another mathematician, Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, claims the odds of
being fulfilled only 60 of them by the only person who claimed to be the
Son of God, and who died on a "tree" on Calvary, and who rose the 3rd
day are astronomical!... not just one in one trillion, but one out of
ten to the 895th power. That is a one over a one followed by 895 zeros.
And still more, because every page of the Old Testament talks and
prophecies and characterizes the coming of the Messiah, the Christ in
Greek... so, there are actually thousands of prophecies on the coming of
the Messiah, all of them fulfilled to the letter in Jesus Christ and His
Church as they are shown in this site.
Philip found Nathanael and told him, "We have found the one Moses
wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote--Jesus of
Nazareth, the son of Joseph. (Jn.1:45)
If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me
(Jn.5:46).
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them
what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself. (Lk.24:27)
He said to them, This is what I told you while I was still with
you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of
Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. (Lk.24:44).
He told them, This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and
rise from the dead on the third day, (Lk.24:46).
Prophecies and types of each book of the Bible fulfilled in Jesus
Christ and His Church, a total of 1,093
92 Prophecies of the Psalms fulfilled in Jesus Christ
121 Prophecies of Isaiah fulfilled in Jesus Christ
Here are just 50 of those thousand Prophecies:
Ancestors:
1- The "seed of a woman": Genesis 3:15.... Galatians 4:4.
Jesus was born of Virgin Mary without any man involved in His
conception (Is.7:14, Mat.1:23, Lk.1:27).
- Gen.3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and
between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will
strike his heel.
- Gal.4:4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born
of a woman, born under law. (Luk.2:7; Rev.12:5)
2- Descendent of Abraham: Genesis 12:3, 18:18.... Acts 3:25,
Matthew 1:1.
- Gen. 18:18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation
and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. (Gen. 12:3)
- Act. 3:25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant
God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, "Through your offspring
all peoples on earth will be blessed." (Mt.1:1; Lk.3:34)
3- Descendent of Isaac: Gen.17:19, Luc.3:34.
- Gen.17:19 Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you
a son and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him
as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him."
-Mt.1:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers. (Lk.3:34)
4- Descendent of Jacob: Numbers 24:17...... Luke 3:34, Matt.1:2.
- Num.24:17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A
star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel. He will
crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the sons of Sheth.
- Lk.3:34 The son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor. (Mt.1:2)
5-- From the Tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10, Luke 3:33.
- Gen.49:10 The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's
staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the
obedience of the nations is his.
- Lk.3:33 The son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, the son of Hezron,
the son of Perez, the son of Judah. (Mt.1:2-3)
6- Heir of the Throne of David: Isaiah 9:7.... Luke 1:32-33.
- Isa.9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there will be
no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that
time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this.
(Isa.11:1-5; 2Sam.7:13)
- Luk.1:32-33: He will be great and will be called the Son of the
Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David,
and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will
never end." (Mt.1:1, 1:6)
Birth and Childhood:
7- Born in Bethlehem: Micah 5:2.... Matthew 2:1.... Luke 2:4-7.
- Mic.5:2 But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among
the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler
over Israel, whose origins are from ancient times.
- Mt.2:1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the
time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem. (Lk.2:4-7)
8- To be born of a Virgin: Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:18.... Luke 1:26-35.
- Isa.7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The
virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call
him Immanuel.
- Mt.1:18 This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: his
mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came
together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.
(Lk.1:26-35)
9- Time of his birth: Daniel 9:25.... Luke 2:1:
- Dan.9:25 Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree
to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler,
comes, there will be seven "sevens" and sixty two "sevens." It will be
rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
- Lk 2:1-2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a
census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first
census that took place while Quirinius was the governor of Syria.) (Lk
2:3-7)
- Mat.2:1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the
time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem
10- Slaughter of the Innocent children: Jeremiah 31:15.... Matthew
2:16-18.
- Jer.31:15 This is what the Lord says: "A voice is heard in Ramah,
mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing
to be comforted, because her children are no more."
- Mt.2:16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the
Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in
Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in
accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. (Mt 2:16-18)
11- Flight to Egypt: Hosea 11:1.... Matthew 2:14-15.
- Hos.11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I
called my son
- Mt.2:14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the
night and left for Egypt. (Mt 2:15)
12- He shall be called a Nazarene: Judges 13:5.... Matthew 2:23.
- Jud.13:5 for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God
- Mt.2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it
might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called
a Nazarene
Passion:
13- Triumphal entry in Jerusalem on a donkey: Zechariah 9:9....
John 12:13-14.
- Zec.9:9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of
Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation,
gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. (Isa.62:11)
- Jn.12:13-14 They took palm branches and went out to meet him,
shouting, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!"
"Blessed is the King of Israel!" Jesus found a young donkey and sat upon
it, as it is written. (Mt.21:1-11; Jn.12:12, Mk.11:7-9.)
14- Entry through the "Golden Gate", that shall be shut for ever
after his entrance: Ezekiel 44:1-2.... Mark 11:7-8.
On Palm Sunday Jesus entered Jerusalem through the Golden Gate.
When you go to Jerusalem look at the Golden Gate, it is shut with stone
and cement, and with a Muslim cemetery in its front, through which a
Jewish Messiah will never pass.
- Ez.44:1-2 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the
sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 The LORD said to me,
"This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter
through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD , the God of Israel,
has entered through it.
- Mk.11:7-8 When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their
cloaks over it, he sat on it. Many people spread their cloaks on the
road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields.
15- Betrayed by a friend, for 30 pieces of silver: Zechariah 11:12,
Psalm 41:9... Mark 14:10, Matthew 26:14-15.
- Ps.41:9 Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my
bread, has lifted up his heel against me.
- Mk.14:10 Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the
chief priests to betray Jesus to them. (Mt.26:14-16; Mk.14:43-45)
- Zec.11:12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but
if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver. (Zec.11:13)
- Mt.26:15 And asked, "What are you willing to give me if I hand
him over to you?" So they counted out for him thirty silver coins. (Mt
27:3-10)
16- Money to be returned for a potter's field: Zechariah 11:13....
Matthew 27:6-7.
- Zec.11:13 And the Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter"- the
handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of
silver and threw them into the house of the Lord to the potter.
- Mt.27:6-7 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is
against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money."
So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial
place for foreigners. (Mt.27:3-5,8-10)
17- Judas's position to be taken by another: Psalm 109:7-8.... Acts
1:18-20.
- Ps.109:7-8 When he is tried, let him be found guilty, and may his
prayers condemn him. May his days be few; may another take his place of
leadership
- Act.1:18-20 (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas
bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his
intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they
called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
"For, " said Peter, "It is written in the book of Psalms, "'May his
place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, "'May
another take his place of leadership.'" (Ac 1:16-17)
18- Accused by false witnesses: Psalms .27:12, 35:11.... Mt
26:60-61, Mk.14:57.
- Ps.27:12 Do not turn me over to the desire of my foes, for false
witnesses rise up against me, breathing out violence. (Ps.35:11)
- Mt.26:60-61 But they did not find any, though many false
witnesses came forward. Finally two men came forward and declared, "This
fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in
three days.'"
19- Silent to accusations: Isaiah 53:7.... Matthew 26:62-63,
Mark.15:4-5.
- Isa.53:7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his
mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before
her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. (Ps.38:13-14)
- Mt 26:62-63 Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Are
you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are
bringing against you?" But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said
to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are
the Christ, the Son of God!" (Mt 27:12-14, Mk.15:4-5)
20 - Spat and struck: Isaiah 50:6, Matthew 26:67.
- Isa.50:6 I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to
those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and
spitting.
- Mk.14:65 Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him struck
him with their fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and
beat him. (Mt.26:27, Mk.15:17; Jn 19:1-3; 18:22)
21- Hated without reason: Psalms 69:4, 35:19, 109:3-5....
John.15:24-25.
- Ps 69:4 Those who hate me without reason outnumber the hairs of
my head; many are my enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy
me. I am forced to restore what I did not steal. (Ps.35:19, 109:3-5)
- Jn.15:23-25 He who hates me hates my Father as well. If I had not
done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin.
But now they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both me
and my Father. But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law:
"They hated me without reason."
22- Soldiers divided his garments and gambled for his clothing:
Psalm 22:18... Matt.27:35 (2 Prophecies)
- Ps 22:18 They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my
clothing.
- Mt.27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments,
casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did
they cast lots (Mk.15:24).
23- Crucified, "pierced through hands and feet": Zechariah 12:10,
Psalm 22:16.... Matthew 27:35, John 20:27.
- Ps.22:16 Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has
encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet. (Zec.12:10)
- Mt.27:35 And they crucified him.
- Jn. 20:25-26 Now Thomas (called Didymus)... he said to them,
"Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the
nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
(Jn.19:37, 20:27)
24- Crucified with malefactors: Isaiah 53:12.... Mark 15:27-28.
- Isa.53:12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his
life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore
the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
- Mt 27:38 Two robbers were crucified with him, one on his right
and one on his left. (Mk 15:27-28; Lk 23:33)
25- Agonized in Thirst: Psalm 22:15.... John 19:28.
- Ps.22:15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue
cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
- Jn.19:28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now
accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.
26- Given gall and vinegar: Psalm 69:21.... Matthew 27:34, 48, John
19:19.
- Ps.69:21 They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst.
- Mat.27:34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and
when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink (Jn.19:29, Mat.27:48).
27- No bones broken: Psalm 34:20.... John 19:32-36.
- Ps 34:20 He protects all his bones, not one of them will be
broken. (Ex 12:46)
- Jn 19:33 But when they came to Jesus and found that he was
already dead, they did not break his legs.
28- His side pierced: Zechariah 12:10.... John 19:34.
- Zec.12:10 They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and
they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve
bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.
- Jn 19:34 Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a
spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.
29- Deserted by God: Psalm 22:1.... Matthew 27:46.
- Ps.22:1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so
far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?
- Mat.27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice,
saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why
hast thou forsaken me?
30- Vicarious Sacrifice: Isaiah 53:4-5, 6, 12.... Matthew 8:16-17,
Romans 4:25, 5:6-8, 1 Corinthians 15:3.
- Isa.53:4-5 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our
sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and
afflicted. But he was pierced for transgressions, he was crushed for our
iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by
his wounds we are healed. (Is. 53:6, 12)
- Mt.8:16-17 When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were
brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all
the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet
Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases." (Ro 4:25,
5:6-8, 1Cor 15:3)
31- Buried with the rich: Isaiah 53:9, Matthew 27:57-60.
- Isa.53:9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the
rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in
his mouth.
- Mt.27:57-60 As evening approached, there came a rich man from
Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus.
Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus' body, and Pilate ordered that it be
given to him. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He
rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away
32- Deserted by his followers: Zechariah 13:7.... Mark 14:27.
- Zec.13:7 smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered:
and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
- Mk.14:27 And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended
because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd,
and the sheep shall be scattered.
33- Time of his death: Daniel 9:25.... Luke 2:1, Matthew 2:1:
- Doing the proper computations, the Messiah was supposed to die on
April 3, of the year 33 AC (Open Bible pag.833)
34- Resurrection of Jesus: Hosea 6:2, Psalms 16:10, 49:15..... Luke
24:6-7, Mark.16:6-7.
- Hos.6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will
raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
- Lk.24:6-7 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake
unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be
delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third
day rise again.
35- Other dead raised with Him: Isaiah 26:19, Ezekiel 37:7-10.....
Matthew 27:52-53.
- Isa.26:19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body
shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is
as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
- Ez.37:7-10 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I
prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came
together, bone to his bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the
flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was
no breath in them. Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind,
prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come
from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they
may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into
them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
- Mat.27:52-53 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the
saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his
resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
36- Ascension to Heaven: Psalms 68:18, 24:3.....Lk 24:50-51, Acts
1:11, Mk.16:19.
- Ps.68:18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity
captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also,
that the LORD God might dwell among them.
- Ps.24:3 Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall
stand in his holy place?
- Lk 24:50-51 When