Yesterday, the Rev. Ken Hutcherson celebrated MLK Day by threatening to boycott companies that oppose discrimination. As it turns out, this spirit of inclusiveness, tolerance, and sensitivity to minority communities is entirely in character.
In a radio interview with the Australian Broadcast Corporation back in February of 2004, Rev. Hutcherson spoke effusively about Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, describing how it “totally impacted my whole faith….”
“I think it’s going to be controversial to those believers who don’t want to admit the suffering that Christ had to go through to pay for our sins. I think it’s going to be controversial to the whole view of the Jewish nation. The truth is that they did push to have Christ crucified. That’s just plain truth… that’s Biblical truth.”
So… the Jews killed Christ, huh? That’s the type of preaching we can expect from Rev. Hutcherson?
Hmm. From my reading of the New Testament, I kinda came away with the impression that it was the Romans who nailed Jesus to the cross. But even if you want to pass the blame by arguing that Jews “did push to have Christ crucified,” one should at least make the distinction that it was some Jews, not the Jews or all Jews, or even most Jews. And certainly not any Jews I’ve ever met.
See… it’s not a literal reading of Scripture that Jews like me object to, but rather that self-righteous blowhards like Rev. Hutcherson have chosen to pound it into their congregant’s heads for the past 2000 fucking years! Surely, some parishioners, constantly reminded that it was The Jews who murdered their savior, can’t help but feel a little pissed at all us Golds and Steins walking around denying their faith.
And what is it with this “the Jewish nation” crap, anyway? Exactly what “Jewish nation” is Rev. Hutcherson talking about? Israel?
I don’t think so. In the context of this interview, I believe Rev. Hutcherson is talking about the international nation of Jews that lives amongst us (well… amongst you,) but is never really, truly a part of us (well… you.) By referring to “the Jewish nation,” I think that Rev. Hutcherson is making a clear distinction between real Americans (you know, Christians) and us Christ-killing, Messiah-denying, hell-bound nonbelievers who also happen to live here too.
Or maybe I’m reading too much into this?
What I do know is that for Rev. Hutcherson to fight so hard to maintain the legal right to discriminate in housing, employment, and insurance against a minority group that practices a lifestyle contrary to the teachings of his faith, shows a total lack of tolerance for anybody who might stray from his interpretation of the Good Book. As I’ve written before on the subject (“Am I the Antichrist?“), if Christians like Rev. Hutcherson so fervently believe that my sins have surely doomed me to suffer the eternal fires of damnation in the next world, how can I expect them to respect my rights as an American in this world?
The truth is… I can’t.
Hey Klake REED THIS!
One day a fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living. All the typical answers came up fireman, mechanic, businessman, salesman, doctor, lawyer, and so forth.
But little Justin was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he replied, “My father’s an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes in front of other men and they put money in his underwear. Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go
home with some guy and make love with him for money.â€
The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement, hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and then took little ! Justin aside to ask him, “Is that really true about your father?†“No,†the boy said, “He’s the Rev. Ken Hutcherson, but I was too embarrassed to say that in front of the other kids.â€
I TRUELY FEEL SORRY FOR LITTLE JUSTIN
oh yea, someone needs to tell that PIECE OF GARBAGE “Rev. Ken Hutcherson”
THAT JESUS was JEWISH TOO! Ken Hutcherson, a real ASSCLOWN!
And shithead Hutcherson, as well as Pat Robertson,(and other right wing “TV” preachers) need to practice what Jesus says in “THE GOOD BOOK” “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s”
Translation for bozos like Hutcherson/Robertson; Keep religion seperate from government” or maybe old Ken Hutcherson needs to pay some back taxes to the IRS over some property he’s been claiming exempt. Anyone have a friend in the IRS who can look into this?
OK, I’ll take your bait,,,,,,,and your point is???????????????????
4
3
Hutcherson. What a joke. I wouldn’t be suprised if the guy isn’t the most biblically ignorant man of the cloth.
Keep in mind that Pastor Hutcherson’s church is aggressively tied to young-earth creationists such as Ken Ham. The guy’s nutbar ratio isn’t confined to gay rights. He’s a barrel of laughs.
Lenny Bruce
More ominous, genuinely frightening, was his skit about Christ and the Jews:
“. . . you and I know what a Jew is–One Who Killed Our Lord. I don’t know if we got much press on that in Illinois–we did this about two thousand years ago–two thousand years of Polack kids whacking the shit out of us coming home from school. Dear, dear. And although there should be a statute of limitations for that crime, it seems that those who neither have the actions nor the gait of Christians, pagans or not, will bust us out, unrelenting dues, for another deuce. “And I really searched it out, why we pay the dues. Why do you keep breaking our balls for this crime?
“Why Jew – because you skirt the issue. You blame it on the Roman Soldiers.”
“Alright, I’ll clear the air once and for all, and confess. Yes, we did it. I did it, my family. I found a note in my basement. It said:
‘We killed him. signed, Morty.’ And a lot of people say to me, “Why did you kill Christ?”
“I dunno . . . it was one of those parties, got out of hand, you know.” We killed him because he didn’t want to become a doctor, that’s why we killed him.”
(Link)
Goldy,
get off the “look at me, I’m a jew” soap box.
do you eve go to temple?
The Supreme Court upheld Oregon’s assisted suicide law today. That’s a lot more significant than the ramblings of this religious zealot.
BTW, the Romans killed Christ. Crucifixtion was one of their methods of executioin.
Libertarian & Goldy,
“BTW, the Romans killed Christ. Crucifixtion was one of their methods of executioin.”
you two are idots
Of course this presupposes that Jesus Christ actually existed anyway.
You folks need to get your life in focus, and start sharing it with your friends.
Click on this website: http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/
Click on view presentation after you turn on your speakers and now enjoy! For you slow readers it is ok to play it more than once.
Rabbit you will enjoy it the most with your state of mind. Those of you who do not believe in any God please disregard this post.
Roger you will enjoy this JOKE! repeat: JOKE! do not get your tail out of joint.
Exotic Dancer
One day a fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living. All the typical answers came up fireman, mechanic, businessman, salesman, doctor, lawyer, and so forth.
But little Justin was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he replied, “My father’s an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes in front of other men and they put money in his underwear. Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go
home with some guy and make love with him for money.”
The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement, hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and then took little ! Justin aside to ask him, “Is that really true about your father?” “No,” the boy said, “He works for the Democratic National Committee and is helping to secure the nomination of Hillary Clinton, but I was too embarrassed to say that in
front of the other kids.”
Klake @ 9 – Get ready for some nasty words coming your way once a few of the regulars read your joke.
prr,
I’m dazzled by your thoughtful analysis. Please elaborate.
Shitbird…
Here’s an analysis.
After 2,000 years, you want to dispute the simple theory that, Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus. They accused him of blasphemy, and had Jesus arrested.
A Roman governor named Pilate tried Jesus. He wanted to release Jesus. But when the Jews threatened to riot, Pilate condemned Jesus to death on a cross.
After reading Thomas Paine’s book Age of Reason I think I tend to believe what many of our Founding Fathers thought about religion.
I really agree with #1. Hutcherson seems so ignorant, as do so many other preachers who profess the christian faith.
If he truly understood and believed what the crucifixion is all about, he would know that (christians profess) Christ was crucified by each and every one of us. (I should stop preaching…it’s my first post at HA)
He and Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, the Wildmons, Phelps, et al have created their own angry little hell on earth already. Just watch them on TV with the sound turned off – it’s hard to miss!
Klake @ 9 – Get ready for some nasty words coming your way once a few of the regulars read your joke.
Comment by Libertarian— 1/17/06 @ 3:37 pm
Libertarian I have been beat up by the best. The regulars need to lighten up and smell the roses.
If memory serves, many of the framers of our government were Unitarians, believing that Jesus, while an important religious figure, was not he son of God. Neither was he divine.
The early church decided Jesus was the was the son of God (and thus divine) at the Council of Nycea, which happened in about 386 AD. So, it took about 400 years for Jesus to move from religious philosopher to the son of God.
I have to agree with GSB on this one: Jesus was a very inmportant religious leader, but most likely not the son of God. The Christians out there probably violently disagree with me on this one, but, after all, religion is a personal matter.
He and Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, the Wildmons, Phelps, et al have created their own angry little hell on earth already. Just watch them on TV with the sound turned off – it’s hard to miss!
Comment by downtown dogs— 1/17/06 @ 4:11 pm
They are PC compare to the Hell and Fire sermons that heard when we sit on hard pews in Church. The Southern Baptist preacher would put those folks in Hell for not following the word of God. Now they are a bunch of lambs.
klake @ 17
Re: those Baptist preachers.
I wonder what kind of hope “hell and hire” offers to anyone.
Salvation by coercion and following a strict set of rules doesn’t cut it. But – each to his own, I guess.
Case in point: prr @ 12 demonstrates exactly what Goldy’s talking about:
Not, say, a group of rabble-rousers rounded up by the Pharisees, but “The Jews” collectively—each and every one in Jerusalem, Israel and the world from then until forever.
Thanks for being such an excellent example, prr.
Libertarian @ 16: Your memory is not faulty. (Most of the Founding Fathers were Deists, who did not believe there was a God actively involved in the affairs of men.)
Hey Klake:
A country doctor is suturing a laceration on the hand of an old farmer.
Old man: “All you need to know about politics is that young George Bush is a post turtle.”
Doctor: “Oh? What is a post turtle?”
Old man: “When yer driving down a country road, and ya come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top? That’s a post turtle. Ya know he didn’t get there by himself, he don’t belong there, he cain’t get anything done while he’s up there, and you just want to help TAKE HIM DOWN.”
@12
“After 2,000 years, you want to dispute the simple theory that, Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus. They accused him of blasphemy, and had Jesus arrested.
A Roman governor named Pilate tried Jesus. He wanted to release Jesus. But when the Jews threatened to riot, Pilate condemned Jesus to death on a cross.”
As a Catholic (non-Christian, of course) you used the word “theory” when describing the above…a slip of the tongue?
Do non-christian Catholics accept Jesus as the son of God?
Just curious…
Is Ther hope for the Democrates? Read the whole story.
http://www.newsmax.com/archive.....shtml?s=et
Carville: Democrats Have a ‘Disease’
Paul Rodriguez
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006
White House: Al Gore Is a Hypocrite
James Carville: Democrats Have a ‘Disease’
Bill O’Reilly to Viewers: ‘Bring It On’
Warren Buffett to Buy Business Wire
DeLay Tries to ‘Beat the Press’ in Texas
Political strategist James Carville believes the Democratic Party “has a disease” that must be rectified –- and soon -– if the party has a chance of gaining back the White House or the Congress.
In an exclusive interview with NewsMax, Carville is touting his latest book, co-authored by CNN’s Paul Begala, titled “Take It Back: Our Party, Our Country, Our Future.” Both are savvy strategists who helped Bill Clinton earn a come-from-behind victory that brought him from Little Rock, Ark., to the White House in 1992. Later, the pair were architects of Clinton’s successful 1996 re-election.
Today, they have changed roles from insider Beltway operatives to pundits who are warning that their party -– today out of power in every branch of the federal government — needs emergency resuscitation. Surprisingly, both authors argue that the party needs to change its dogmatic thinking on abortion rights, gun control and environmental concerns.
WHat this is referring to is collective guilt based on a verse in the bible, in Matthew where the Jews in the crowd apparently accept guilt for Jesus death oin their heads and on their children. (Matt 27:25)
This was the source of a lot of historiocal (hysterical) jewish persecution for centuries, but it is not a commonly taught or accepted teaching now except by certain extremeists like Jack Chick whom most christians disavow
The Catholics also formally struck this from the catechism and in 1965 with the Vatican II council.
The reading of it indicates that the crowd made the call, and that crowd cannot be presumed to be all Jews.
Did the Jewish elders of that time turn him over for crucifixtion? Sure.
But to ascribe it to all jews historically and collectively is wrong and frankly stupid.
As a former Baptist, 4 Square and Charismatic, none of my churches ever taught this. As a Catholic now, the Church does not.
Any that do are as far as I can see a rabid minority, and as I said in another post, preachers like Hutch are a minority that appeal to a fringe, they do not represent mainstream christianity, whether liberal orthodox catholic or protestant.
klake @ 8 (“theinterviewwithgod.com”):
Cool. Pretty. Lots of good “think about how you’re living” messages with very little religious overlay (except for the talking-to-God conceit). I doubt even atheists would be offended.
The music is awfully repetitive, but the photos are gorgeous.
Old man: “When yer driving down a country road, and ya come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top? That’s a post turtle. Ya know he didn’t get there by himself, he don’t belong there, he cain’t get anything done while he’s up there, and you just want to help TAKE HIM DOWN.”
Comment by Larry the Urbanite— 1/17/06 @ 4:43 pm
Larry, I am sure many people agree with you on that point.
The music is awfully repetitive, but the photos are gorgeous.
Comment by David— 1/17/06 @ 4:52 pm
I am glade you enjoyed it, I sure did, and I hope Roger will see what he brings into everybody life. We all need to reflect about why we are here on this planet.
Let’s see — it would be fair to say that the Jewish theocratic leadership in Jerusalem wanted to have Jesus put to death. They didn’t have that legal authority to impose capital punishment under Roman law, which was controlling the area at the time. So they had to convince the Roman authorities that Jesus had committed a capital offense under Roman law, namely that of insurrection by claiming to be King of the Jews.
All that said, it would be more accurate to say that the “Germans” were responsible for killing the Jews of Europe during the 1940’s — since the “Germans” controlled their own government and had (de facto at least) authority to impose capital punishment (more like wholesale extermination).
Furthermore, people don’t hate modern day Germans for what their ancestors did to millions of innocent people 60 to 65 years ago. So why should people hate modern day Jews for what some members of their faith wanted to happen to one innocent person 2,000 years ago?
So if Goldy or myself says that the Germans killed millions of Jews about 60 or 65 years ago, no one accuses us of anti-German hatred. Why should Ken Hutcherson be accused of anti-Jewish hatred for pointing out that some Jews urged the execution of Jesus by the Romans 2,000 years ago?
damn mesa, you beat me to it :p
and klake: Harsh words: That joke barely rated a wry grin… Try a bit harder would ya?
Lib:that good enough?
PS: maybe PRR really IS a nazi! We already had the fascism… and here comes the anti-semitism. Now all we need is an obsessive desire for land out east (Spokane I guess) and its a trifecta!
This is good news for the good guys. These far right wingnuts usually do more to move Americans AWAY from the theocratic GOP and toward the Democrats who wisely have avoided getting in bed with the fools who beat their Bibles and threaten us with damnation.
If this idiot Hutch was on fire and I had to piss like a motherfucker, I wouldn’t piss on him to put him out!
prr @anywhere
You transcend normal, or even aberrational, troll behavior. You are now on my list, which presently has only one other: JCH. I’m sure JCH will welcome your company, given the symmetry…
Sven, sorry I missed you on the Gore thread, you partisan rightwingtrollfuckGOPshilltalkingpointspoutingasswhipe! Go away! We only want OUR opinions to register here!
Actually, sven, since I have seen you post for a month or longer, I have a tough time associating you with any philosophy (R-L-Center). And that is not a personal slam, I hope. Rather, that you are doing something better than the rest…
Isn’t it funny how when one lefty brands you a hack/shill, they all begin to groupthink? It is akin to the bandwagon fallacy, I think. If one respected member labels you, the rest fall all over themselves distancing from you.
RP, look at the quote again. How would you react if priss said
“I think it’s going to be controversial to the whole view of the German people. The truth is that they did push to have 6 million Jews exterminated.”
See the connection “German people… did push to have 6 million jews exterminated.”
Not so innocent a comment when you actually read it.
mesa, I am curious. What is a “non christian Catholic”?
Donna @33
As I recall, that is prr’s take on Catholics. That is, they don’t believe in Christ. Actually, windie would have a better recollection of the view in its entirety…
I see… thanks marks. Seeing how it came from the brilliant keyboard of prriss, I think I know what it means now.
Donna @ 32
Wouldn’t a more correct substitution make the quote say something like this:
“I think it’s going to be controversial to those folks who don’t want to admit the suffering that European Jews had to go through in the 20th century. I think it’s going to be controversial to the whole view of the German nation. The truth is that they did push to have six million Jews exterminated. That’s just plain truth… that’s historical truth.”
Rev. Hutcherson did use the term “Jewish nation”, and not “Jewish people”. There was a “Jewish nation” in Palestine at the time Jesus lived and died. Granted, they were only semi-autonomous and were under the vassalage of Rome (including Roman occupying troops and Roman governor). And the political-religious authority of this “Jewish nation” — namely the Sanhedrin — did push to have Jesus crucified.
The present day “Jewish nation” — namely Israel — claims to be the historical successor of the “Jewish nation” some 2,000 years ago. And I would say that Israel has appropriately dealt with the issues regarding the execution of Jesus 2,000 years ago, just as Germany has appropriately dealt with the issues regarding the extermination of millions of Jews 60 years ago. I would note that Christian groups have excellent relations with Israel today, just as Jewish groups have excellent relations with Germany today.
I figured you would, Donna…It does not take much, does it…
RP, I wont quible with your language substitution, but it really is just as offensive. The German Nation did not push to have 6 million Jews exterminated. It was done by a few in charge. It is equally offensive to claim that the “Jewish Nation” pushed to have Jesus killed (And that is EXACTLY what Hutcherson claims). It was done by a few in charge (of at least the power they held under Roman occupation)
But more interestingly your last paragraph further damns Hutcherson
So what the hell is wrong with Hutcherson that he still plunges at “the Jewish Nation”? Just as any sane Jew knows that the “German Nation” did not execute 6 million Jews, any sane individual (Christian or otherwise) knows that the “Jewish Nation” did not execute Jesus.
“did not execute Jesus.” should read as “did not push for the execution of Jesus.”
Richard Pope @36
I understand the reasoning, but it would be more, umm, comforting, I guess, if Rev. Hutcherson actually said that in the context you gave it. Are you representing him?
The “religious right” is neither.
The crucifixion? That was a long time ago. I’m still trying to get over the insane christians who started WWI and killed millions. Catholics, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans…those murderous bastards!
They should all be banned from country clubs.
I think Rev. Hutcherson mainly had an unfortunate choice of words. He said:
“I think it’s going to be controversial to the whole view of the Jewish nation. The truth is that they did push to have Christ crucified. That’s just plain truth… that’s Biblical truth.”
When he should have said something like this:
“I am afraid that any historically accurate portrayal of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ will stir some misguided people towards feelings against the Jews. The truth is that the Jewish religious and political leaders of the time did push to have Christ crucified. While it is totally wrong to blame this on all the Jews from back then, or on any Jews from today, some hateful folks will attempt to use this film to promote anti-Jewish feelings.”
At least Rev. Hutcherson isn’t as tactless and clueless than the speech this prominent Democrat gave for Martin Luther King Day this year:
“And as we think about rebuilding New Orleans, surely God is mad at America, he’s sending hurricane after hurricane after hurricane and it’s destroying and putting stress on this country. Surely he’s not approving of us being in Iraq under false pretense. …
We ask black people: it’s time. It’s time for us to come together. It’s time for us to rebuild a New Orleans, the one that should be a chocolate New Orleans. And I don’t care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day.
This city will be a majority African-American city. It’s the way God wants it to be. You can’t have New Orleans no other way; it wouldn’t be New Orleans.”
[Link]
Ken Hutcherson is a prime example of what some call the American Taliban. He is preaching hate and things that are contrary to the generally accepted tenets of his religion. He is twisting and perverting religion to suit his political views. He is preaching in ways similar to those of militants and fanatics of other faiths.
The last time I checked, the Bible didn’t tell its readers to disciminate against those who are different than they are. And that’s what HB 2261 tries to eliminate: discrimination of gays and lesbians in financial institutions, housing and employment.
And yes, I have met with Pastor Hutcherson and spent the better part of 2 hours watching him express his faith.
Tell you what, Richard. You get all lathered up and outraged at remarks by Falwell, Robertson, and Coulter (just to name a few), then I will join in the outragefest about the Mayor of New Orleans.
I note that I would also have been correct, up till recently, in terming Jim West a “prominent republican”. That’s nice to know.
Just trying to nail down the ground rules here.
“You two are idots”, wrote prr breathlessly and, apparently, in a great deal of haste.
Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Anne Coulter have never been elected to any public office.
Neither have Cindy Sheehan, Al Sharpton, or Louis Farrakhan.
So referring to any of those folks as mainstream representatives of the Republicans or Democrats would not be appropriate.
Ray Nagin, on the other hand, is an elected official. The Democrat mayor of one of the most historically important cities in this country. And someone who was voted into office by a fairly broad coalition of his city’s residents.
Similar things could, of course, be said about Jim West. However, once his sexual predation became common knowledge, most Republicans supported West’s outster (from office that is, as opposed to from the closet).
It remains to be seen whether the Democrats will condemn Nagin’s recent hateful and clueless remarks.
THE MAYOR OF NEW ORLEANS IS A SILLY STUPID TWIT.
HIS BRAIN DEAD LEADERSHIP COST MANY LIVES AND MUCH UN-NEEDED MISERY.
THE STATE OF LA. AND THE CITY OF ADMIN. OF NEW OR. BOTH SUCKED.
I WOULD NOT TRUST THEM TO SLOP HOGS, LET ALONE REACT WITH LEADERSHIP IN A CRISES.
STUPID RAY DID NOT HAVE THE SENSE TO LIBERATE ALL THE FOOD STOCKS TO THE PEOPLE SUFFERING FROM NO FOOD OR WATER. INSTEAD SENT COPS TO GUARD CORPORATE AMERICA, THREATEN TO SHOOT FORAGERS TRYING TO TAKE FOOD TO FAMILIES IN PERIL, THE VERY YOUNG AND OLD DYING OF STRESS DAY AFTER DAY.
DISGUSTING PERFORMANCE FROM RAY – HIS MOMENT HAS PASSED. RAY, GET A JOB PUMPING GAS.
dumb post
other than Pope’s stuff, this topic brought out the worst batch of dimbulbs in months…
come on goldy, give the christian bashing a break. Or is next post about catholic priests, rest of our other messed up bretheren.
16, that isnt totally accurate, he was consider son of God earlier, in fact while he was alive made the claim, and his followers beliefved it.
The gospals proclaimed him as such and they were written up until 90 ad.
All the council of Nicea did was confirm it as dogma as part of establishing consistent doctrine, as I understand it anyway.
Sharkansky’s recent posting about the Seattle City Council’s refusal to seriously consider Jewish applicants for Jim Compton’s vacant seat is a lot more humorous than Goldstein’s pathetic (and repeated) attempts to stir up the demon of anti-Semitism:
Seattle’s Judenrein City Council
The Seattle City Council has announced the 14 semi-finalists for the seat vacated by Jim Compton. (Names and resumes here). After the Councilmembers announced that they would be most interested in a “woman of color”, the 14 semi-finalists (out of a pool of 101, list and video here) include 9 women and 5 men, 6 blacks, 3 Asians, 3 Latinos and 2 whites (both female, one openly lesbian). Not a single white man in the bunch. It’s easy to laugh at this lame-ass version of “diversity” where you can have 14 minorities with identical opinions and all but exclude 2/3 of the population. But it’s actually more sinister than it appears — it’s thinly veiled anti-Semitism. Even though half a dozen or so of the original applicants have Jewish names, not a single one was picked in the first cut. Not that I really care about the ethnic background of my City Councilmen, but ethnic diversity was the most important selection critieria that the Councilmen themselves raised. No legislative body since the Nuremberg Party Conference of 1935 has been so obsessed with classifying people by race. The fact that they excluded all Jews from further consideration (and refused to accept the application from one particular Jew) confirms that their underlying motivation is anti-Semitism, rooted in Nazism.
This recent photograph of Councilman Peter Steinbrück, with his telltale haircut, moustache and stiff-arm salute, tells you everything you need to know about where these guys are coming from
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/005571.html
Thank you Richard Pope. I can’t believe what a total loon Sharkansky has sunk to being and it’s all too disturbing to see how far you’re willing to sink with him.
“if Christians like Rev. Hutcherson”
Goldy, what makes you think this guy is a Christian? Because he calls himself one? If someone callled me a Republican, would that make me one? (God, dear God, I hope not!!!)
Meethinks Hutcherson got tackled a few times too many.
Before I forget, prr is a nazi.
Where is Mr. Cynical? Is he taking a break from HA to spend more time with his goat?
The last time I checked, the Bible didn’t tell its readers to disciminate against those who are different than they are. And that’s what HB 2261 tries to eliminate: discrimination of gays and lesbians in financial institutions, housing and employment.
And yes, I have met with Pastor Hutcherson and spent the better part of 2 hours watching him express his faith.
Comment by Ken Camp— 1/17/06 @ 8:26 pm
Some of you folks really like calling people names when they disagree with you on a subject matter. The emotions that you express give me the impression that you have a family member or friend who is gay. Calling someone a bigot or wrong head does not make your statement more correct than anyone else’s. Few days ago, I post on this same subject and it was removed by Goldy for some strange reason. The law you all talk about may not get the results you want, it could open Pandora’s Box. There are two sides to this story and one side is not being told by anyone. After this becomes a law you it be will handled like people of color have been, and they will list their sexual preference on their job application. This could become a real problem for closet gays today that cannot deal with their personal sexual identification. Now you put them where they may not want to be which could cause a tragedy for them and their family. To disregard this problem would make you instinctive to their plight.
It is a shame to turn their life style into a political game to advance someone else goals.
57 – I thought it was an equine boyfriend in Enumclaw.
52
“ethnic diversity was the most important selection critieria that the Councilmen themselves raised”
Hmmm … interesting … Sharansky not only can’t spell his own name correctly, but also misspells common English words and is ignorant of common English grammar.
He meant to say, “ethnic diversity was the most important selection criterion that the Councilmen themselves raised.”
Criteria = plural
Criterion = singular
I’m just a bunny, but even I know that!
You talk about your rights and yet isreal practices genocide against the Palestinians. Im not to concerned about some religious nutbar. I find it more disgusting what isreal is doing to Palestine. I’m tired of listening to jews yap endlessly about everything that ever happened to them ever. Yet they are no better than the nazi’s in their treatment of Palestine. Truly disgusting
I’m sure you’ll all have a great rant at me for being anti semitic. I’m not. I just don’t support ANY genocide. So maybe learn a little from the holocaust. Deliberate murder and repression of ANY group of people is wrong. Stop worrying about dickheads like hutcherson, and do something to stop your own religious pogrom and policy of genocide against Palestine.
Lib @16 and Karl @51 Well, it turns out you are both right in a sense. Christ was seen as divine before the 4th century. He was also held to be a prophet and philosopher as well.
The thing is, both of these views – and many more – were all held by people who were Christians. The ultimate mistake many make is in looking for ONE Christianity. There never was one at any point in time that we know of.
Each individual denomination can and will trace itself back to the one and only true belief, but the facts are that they were always one among many views of the divinty of Christ and pretty much every other issue as well.
Any group can pick some arbitrary set of beliefs and they say that anyone who does not or did not follow them is a heretic, non-Christian or the like, but it does not mean much.
I don’t know the true mind of God and I can’t stand people who have so much pride in their hearts that they think they do. Tolerance and love are about your only safe bets.
OK smart one…who did kill the Christ????
Richard Pope @52:
What’s going on with you? Do you really think it intellectually defensible and politically viable to position yourself as a bigot who takes some shamelessly cheap shots?
Come on, Richard, it just doesn’t wash to imply that (straight affluent) white guys are being oppressed in Seattle, particularly in relation to their proportion of the population. Furthermore, are you really so blind to the differing issue concerns of individual ethnic groups that you could argue with the a straight face that 14 minority candidates have “identical opinions”?
And what’s with the silly charge of anti-Semitism and Nazism . . . replete with the link to the photo? I’m sure this got you a good laugh from bigot fringe at SP, but do you really think this is going to help your electoral aspirations? Like it or not, the bulk of the electorate is moderate. It rightfully shies away from such shrillness.
I may not have always agreed with you, but I used to think you at least tried to be reasonable. No more.
Bill & Hillary… of course
Any group can pick some arbitrary set of beliefs and they say that anyone who does not or did not follow them is a heretic, non-Christian or the like, but it does not mean much.
I don’t know the true mind of God and I can’t stand people who have so much pride in their hearts that they think they do. Tolerance and love are about your only safe bets.
Comment by Nindid— 1/17/06 @ 10:36 pm
Nandid read the new testement and pay close attention to what Jesus says. Jesus said to know him is to know the father. The best way to know Jesus is to read what he said.
RUFUS@ 64 – I am just guessing here, but I will bet that I have read it a bit closer than you have. I don’t want to get into an exegetical pissing match, but let’s just leave it at the fact that the Gospels are complex and vague enough that people of equal faith and belief have been arguing about their proper interpretation for about 1900 years now.
Perhaps God has blessed you with ultimate wisdom and you can settle the issue once and for all. Or, perhaps not.
Nandid – You need to take the word at what is says literally in the New testament. You have got to have faith. The Holy spirit will guide you not man. Just read it with an open heart.
Chuck@ 62 – Not sure if you meant me here… but undeniably the Romans killed Christ. Everything we know about the period – politically, socially, etc. points to that fact.
Beyond that it is really hard to say… People who want to blame the Jews will emphasize the Gospel ‘Matthew’ wrote because it is pretty consistently the most anti-Jewish of the Gospels. For example, Matthew is the only one to have Pilate wash his hands of the affair and have the Jews of the story say “His blood be on us and all our children.” So, if you want to go after Jews, you preach that and point out that they themselves asked for it.
It really is only one example of a long line of points in Matthew where he does similar things. It is just one of the points he wanted to emphasize. Scholars have speculated that it is because the followers of Jesus were losing/had lost the debates in the synagogues over whether or not Jesus was the messiah and Matthew was showing his displeasure – but this is just conjecture.
Let me put it this way – the Romans did not need an outside excuse to kill Jesus. The mere fact that he may have been a populist leader who was or had the potential to cause trouble in Jeruselem at the height of Passover would be enough to get him executed by the Roman terror state. Jesus’ execution would have been pretty much par for course for the Romans and they wouldn’t have batted an eyelid. That is the end you would expect for a man who led the type of path in Palestine that Jesus led. You don’t need any evil Jews for that.
RUFUS – I am not sure why I try and take you seriously when you resort to childish crap like misspelling people’s handles… but let me give it one more try.
Please explain how I am supposed to take “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed” literally. There are a lot of ways to take that figuratively, allegorically, and even anagogically. But literally is a little tough….
… and say that I do read it literally with an open heart and God guides me towards udnerstanding that passage in a certain way. What if that interpretation should differ from yours? Or, if you rather, it differs from what your priest/pastor/spiritual guide and mine tells us we should think?
Does that mean that we should both whip out our faiths and compare thier size to determine the winner and who is going to hell?
No. Diversity of belief and practice has always existed in Christianity precisely because these texts are not so straight-forward. Heck, it is really a strength of the religion that it can adapt its interpretations to a wide variety of circumstances.
People like Ken Hutcherson have fallen to the greatest sin in Christian belief – that of pride.
Statement of Governor Daniel J. Evans (supporting Gay civil Rights Bill, issued Tuesday)
Tuesday, January, 2006
I support this important legislation. The extension of the
Anti-Discrimination Law to include gay and lesbian individuals is a crucial
step in our society’s continuing efforts to make everyone equal under the
law.
Our state prides itself on its diversity. Amending the Washington State
Anti-Discrimination Law to include “sexual orientation” will set a positive
tone of tolerance throughout the state, from local neighborhoods to
out-of-state businesses, who understand the economic value of a diverse
community.
Seeing this legislation signed into law would be a victory for our state.
What encourages me even more is the increasingly bipartisan support and I
applaud the leadership that has made this progress possible. Discrimination
is an issue for us all and is best confronted together.
This reform is long overdue. For too long a group of our citizens has been
left without the legal protection we all deserve and expect. The result has
been a group relegated to second class status. That is unacceptable.
I support this legislation because it’s time that everyone be treated
equally.
RP @ 43 Amazing re-write of Hutcherson’s “unfortunate words”.
But the plain fact is that Hutcherson’s real intent was to raise hatred toward Jews.
He never would have used your “re-written script”.
And @ 44 that “prominent democrat” was a life long republican, until he needed to gain leadership in a Blue city. And you left quite a bit out of your snippet. But, I admit, even the parts you left out were stupid, and very much “republican”.
For my money:
The Penultimate Sin is imposing your view of Hell on another.
The Ultimate Sin is imposing your view of Salvation. . . .
The comments by Hutcherson betray a lack of understanding of one of the basic principals of Christianity: we are all responsible for the death of Christ. He died as a sacrifice to pay for all our sins. Our symbol of acceptance of his sacrifice is in the communion, where we symbolically consume of his flesh and his blood (in the form of bread and wine). The execution of Christ was initially ordered by the Hebrew government (the San Hedron Council), and then authorized and carried out by the Roman authorities, so both Jew and Gentile were equally guilty (and all – Hebrew and Gentile – are eligible to receive the mercy earned by that sacrifice.
I know, I know, I’m getting too preachy for what is basically a political weblog. I just get frustrated when ordained preachers, who should know better, are wrong on such a basic understanding or their own religion.
“Jesus died for somebodies sins, but not mine”
– Patti Smith
Just an FYI
i’m hoping the people who believe in the rapture get caught up in it as soon as possible. i can’t stand any of them and i think the rest of the world would be better off if they ( the “rapturites”, as they were called by the maccabees ) were kept busy singing hossanahs for eternity to an old body-builder in a robes with a white beard and a wooden staff. The old-body builder must also be carefully backlit, sidelit and frontlit so as to cast no shadow and seem to be exuding a white light.
are you rapturites getting excitted to go? i sure hope you are!
Okay,
I’ve been taking a lot of heat on this subject.
For the record:
Are Roman Catholics Christian?
Are Roman Catholics Christians? They are if they have trusted in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of their sins. However, if they believe that the are saved by God’s grace and their works, then they are not saved — even if they believe their works are done by God’s grace — since they then deny the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice.
Being a Christian does not mean being a member of the Roman Catholic Church. It means being a member of the body of Christ which is accomplished by faith and trust in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of your sins. It means that you do not add your works to His work. Sincerity doesn’t forgive sins. Membership in a church doesn’t forgive sins. Doing works of penance doesn’t forgive sins. Praying to Mary doesn’t forgive sins. Forgiveness is received in the faithful trust and acceptance of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. You must trust Jesus, God in flesh, for the forgiveness of sins, not a man made ritual and certainly not the catholic saints. Even though Roman Catholic Church affirms the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and His physical resurrection, it greatly errs in its doctrine of salvation by adding works to salvation.
The official Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation is that the grace of God is infused into a baby at baptism — making him/her justified before God.1 This justification can be lost through sin and must be regained by repeated participation in the many sacraments found in the Roman Catholic Church. These sacraments increase the measure of grace in the person by which he or she is enabled to do good works which are in turn rewarded with the joy of heaven:
“We can therefore hope in the glory of heaven promised by God to those who love him and do his will. In every circumstance, each one of us should hope, with the grace of God, to persevere ‘to the end’ and to obtain the joy of heaven, as God’s eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ,” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1821).
“Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification,” (CCC, par. 2010).
No one can say whether a Roman Catholic is truly a Christian or not since we cannot know people’s hearts. But, if anyone, Catholic included, openly denies essential doctrines2 then he is not saved, and this is the problem. It appears that the Roman Catholic church is denying the essential doctrine of justification by faith. It says…
“If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.” (Canon 9, Council of Trent).
“If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.” (Canon 14, Council of Trent).
For more on this, please see Council of Trent. Canons on Justification.
Notice that justification by faith alone is denied and heaven is the reward for doing good works. This is the problem. The RCC does not teach the biblical doctrine of justification by faith. It teaches justification by faith and works. If you want to see more on this, go to The Roman Catholic view on justification.
If a Roman Catholic believes in the official Roman Catholic teaching on salvation, then he is not a Christian since the official RCC position is contrary to scripture. Therefore, as a whole, Roman Catholics need to be evangelized. They need to hear the true Gospel. They need to hear that they are not made right before God by being in a church, or by being baptized, but by receiving Christ (John 1:12), believing that Jesus has risen from the dead (Rom. 10:9), and that justification is by faith (Rom. 5:1) and not by our deeds (Rom. 4:5). It is only true faith that results in true works (James 2), not the other way around. Roman Catholics, like anyone else, need to trust in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of their sins and not the Catholic sacraments, not the words of the priest, not the pope, not Mary, not the saints, not penance, not indulgences, not the rosary, etc. Jesus alone is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6).
Finally, I believe that there are truly regenerate Christians in the Roman Catholic church. But, they are truly Christians in spite of official RCC theology and in spite of the ritualistic offerings of this ancient church which has had too many hands meddling in it through the centuries, gradually moving it away from orthodoxy and into apostasy. Yes apostasy. The Roman Catholic Church is no longer representing true Christianity.
Jesus alone saves. Jesus alone is Lord. Only Jesus’ sacrifice can cleanse us. Only by faith are we made right before God. Justification is by faith, not by anything we do.
____________
1 “Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ. It is granted us through Baptism. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who justifies us. It has for its goal the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life. It is the most excellent work of God’s mercy,” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2020).
2. In short, the essentials are the deity of Christ, His physical resurrection, and justification by grace through faith. Related to these are the Trinity, the virgin birth, and, of course, the gospel itself. For more information on essentials, please see the Doctrine Grid.
priek, theres a basic problem that theres a long history of anti-Catholic bigotry in this country. Most Catholics would find it a harsh insult for you to say they’re not Christian.
That being said, I’m not Catholic, but I have no problem calling them Christian. Altho your unsourced “cut and paste essay” above is interesting, its not compelling. Its coming from the premise that they’re not, and then going to prove it. A christian is, literally, a follower of Christ. thats what the word means. I don’t know why prr wanted to insist he wasn’t Christian (he claims to be catholic, but with him, who knows?) and I also don’t know why you are.
Of course this is all irrelevant beyond the fact that PRR is a moron who doesn’t understand the basis of his own faith (I’d say he might be a ‘cult of mary’ person, but he’s to misogynistic)…
Evangelical sectarianism is… just that.
Windie@81 Really, the comments at 80 are as wrongheaded as the thinking that says if you do not accede to papal authority you earn eternal damnation.
Gog, and I do mean God, haven’t we had enough bloodshed and wars over this sort of nonsense.
priek @ 80 –
That’s the best advertisement for converting to Neo-Paganism that I’ve read in a long time.
It really comes down to what your deifinition of hristian is…
More cut and paste for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian
… from 1933-1939, German Christians looked at Adolf Hitler with completely different eyes. He claimed to be Christian. He regularly invoked the name of “God” and “Lord”, he regularly called upon “faith in the Almighty”, and he regularly stated the importance of the Christian faith as a foundation for the entire nation! Hitler fooled so many sincere German Christians at least up until World War II began in 1939; however, during that terrible and bloody war, he retained the the support of too many Christians.
A quick quote will serve to place matters in focus before we begin our study. A good German Christian woman of some means wrote a letter to a friend just weeks before Hitler committed suicide in 1945. This lady expressed outrage and emotional distress, for she had finally come to believe the rumors, that the “SS” had been systematically murdering Jews all during the war. This lady said, “This is totally outrageous and must stop. Why, someone should tell Adolf”!
priek: it comes down to the fact that I’m unwilling to accept the very closed definition that came up when the American Evangelical movement went bad.
Prr
Anyway, I was half right in calling you a CINO..it’s just you are a “Catholic In Name Only”…and a sect of one at that…It’s all Us and Them either way.
Nindid: What is your fascination with Matthew when in Acts, Peter and John confronted the Sanhedrin in the temple? Read the words from the Good Book. I realize for you donnageddon, being an athiest, this post will burn your eyes!
3:12 When Peter saw this, he addressed the people, “You Israelites, why are you amazed at this, and why do you look so intently at us as if we had made him walk by our own power or piety?
13 The God of Abraham, (the God) of Isaac, and (the God) of Jacob, the God of our ancestors, has glorified his servant Jesus whom you handed over and denied in Pilate’s presence, when he had decided to release him.
14 You denied the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you.
15 The author of life you put to death, but God raised him from the dead; of this we are witnesses.
16 And by faith in his name, this man, whom you see and know, his name has made strong, and the faith that comes through it has given him this perfect health, in the presence of all of you.
17 Now I know, brothers, that you acted out of ignorance, just as your leaders did;
18 but God has thus brought to fulfillment what he had announced beforehand through the mouth of all the prophets, that his Messiah would suffer.
19 Repent, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be wiped away,
20 and that the Lord may grant you times of refreshment and send you the Messiah already appointed for you, Jesus,
21 whom heaven must receive until the times of universal restoration of which God spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old.
22 For Moses said: 11 ‘A prophet like me will the Lord, your God, raise up for you from among your own kinsmen; to him you shall listen in all that he may say to you.
23
Everyone who does not listen to that prophet will be cut off from the people.’
24
Moreover, all the prophets who spoke, from Samuel and those afterwards, also announced these days.
25
You are the children of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your ancestors when he said to Abraham, ‘In your offspring all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’
26 For you first, God raised up his servant and sent him to bless you by turning each of you from your evil ways.”
4:1 While they were still speaking to the people, the priests, the captain of the temple guard, and the Sadducees 1 confronted them,
2 disturbed that they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.
3 They laid hands on them and put them in custody until the next day, since it was already evening.
4 But many of those who heard the word came to believe and (the) number of men grew to (about) five thousand.
5 On the next day, their leaders, elders, and scribes were assembled in Jerusalem,
6 with Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly class.
7 They brought them into their presence and questioned them, “By what power or by what name have you done this?”
8 Then Peter, filled with the holy Spirit, answered them, “Leaders of the people and elders:
9 If we are being examined today about a good deed done to a cripple, namely, by what means he was saved,
10 then all of you and all the people of Israel should know that it was in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarean whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead; in his name this man stands before you healed.
11 He is ‘the stone rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.’
12 There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved.”
13 Observing the boldness of Peter and John and perceiving them to be uneducated, ordinary men, they were amazed, and they recognized them as the companions of Jesus.
14 Then when they saw the man who had been cured standing there with them, they could say nothing in reply.
15 So they ordered them to leave the Sanhedrin, and conferred with one another, saying,
16 “What are we to do with these men? Everyone living in Jerusalem knows that a remarkable sign was done through them, and we cannot deny it.
17 But so that it may not be spread any further among the people, let us give them a stern warning never again to speak to anyone in this name.”
18 So they called them back and ordered them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus.
19 Peter and John, however, said to them in reply, “Whether it is right in the sight of God for us to obey you rather than God, you be the judges.
20 It is impossible for us not to speak about what we have seen and heard.”
I guess Peter tells us all who killed Jesus!
Peter tells us here:
3:12 When Peter saw this, he addressed the people, “You Israelites, why are you amazed at this, and why do you look so intently at us as if we had made him walk by our own power or piety?
13 The God of Abraham, (the God) of Isaac, and (the God) of Jacob, the God of our ancestors, has glorified his servant Jesus whom you handed over and denied in Pilate’s presence, when he had decided to release him.
14 You denied the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you.
15 The author of life you put to death, but God raised him from the dead; of this we are witnesses.
And here:
Then Peter, filled with the holy Spirit, answered them, “Leaders of the people and elders:
9 If we are being examined today about a good deed done to a cripple, namely, by what means he was saved,
10 then all of you and all the people of Israel should know that it was in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarean whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead; in his name this man stands before you healed.
11 He is ‘the stone rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.’
12 There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved.”
This clarifies the topic perfectly! The people in Chapter 3 and the leaders in Chapter 4. God’s Word is PERFECT!
priek,
You could have simply linked to the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry directly: http://www.carm.org/catholic/saved.htm . They request that you do so when copying their material. You could do something like this:
From http://www.carm.org/index.html :
CARM is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization whose purpose is to equip Christians and refute error. It is well documented. Come here and learn about false teachings such as Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Islam, the New Age, etc., as well as provide counter arguments for evolution, atheism, relativism, abortion…and much more.
I decided to visit the Internet to see what URLs discuss this topic. Knowing multiple URLs could send my blog entry into Goldstein’s crematorium, here is one URL on the topic: http://www.biblequestions.org/archives/BQAR067.htm
Before you wave your keyboards of Internet think accusations, I diligently read your thread comments and waited to post URLs. Most of this thread commentary is really dull. Now this URL is interesting: http://www.outreachtojudaism.net/whocruci.html
klake @ 8
Thahnks. I bought the Interview with God wall calendar and the Interview with God screen saver. They’re very inspirational.
Oh, um, not.
This will be my last URL (for now)! Not due to lack of material, but when people rely too much on the Internet, where are their personal beliefs? http://www.beliefnet.com/featu.....trial1.asp
klake @ 9
You’re only held harmless from culpability for the sentiment behind your “joke” (that working for the DNC is less honorable than prostitution) if you don’t believe it. Otherwise you’re just trying to get off the hook for your slur. Do you think that working for the DNC is less honorable than prostitution? That would be a yes or no question.
MWS “I realize for you donnageddon, being an athiest, this post will burn your eyes!”
I have read the bible many times. Never sortched my eyes, but did make me a more certain atheist.
Richard Pope @ 28
“So if Goldy or myself says that the Germans killed millions of Jews about 60 or 65 years ago, no one accuses us of anti-German hatred. Why should Ken Hutcherson be accused of anti-Jewish hatred for pointing out that some Jews urged the execution of Jesus by the Romans 2,000 years ago?”
I don’t know, could it be 2000 years of persecution of jews by various Christian parties, including the Christian-based Nazis (and/or the Russian state)?? Both Russia and Germany, as outstanding examples among others, used then-present-day accusations of wrongdoing mixed with propaganda of the “Jews killed Christ” variety to emotionally manipulate their Christian populations into supporting or condoning the progroms and the Final Solution.
Does this make the Nazi party and Kenny Boy not so far apart? Decide for yourselves.
klake @ 58
That’s the silliest “slippery slope” argument I’ve seen in in a long time. No one would have to list their sexual orientation on a job application; it would be their business. IF someone were discriminated against for their sexual orientation, THEN they might have to establish as a finding of fact in court that they are in fact [whatever orientation]. Your concern for their feelings is heartwarming. But the very people who are calling for and supporting this Act are the ones who would have to worry about that. Why not let them look out for themselves?
BTW, a het could be discriminated againt because they were perceived as being homosexual, and they would still be covered by the Act as I read it. It is the discrimination that is the crime.
What most people are missing on this thread regarding Christianity, particularly the ridiculous anti-RCC rehtoric, is that the birth, death, and reseruction of Jesus didn’t happen by some whismical accident.
It was preordained by God. Who killed Jesus, why they killed Jesus is not the point. The point is the Good Word of God brought to Earth by Jesus to be spread throughout the world is the point any follower of Christ should be focused on, including the Roman Catholics.
Have to laugh though about the Roman Catholics NOT beng Christians, since they are the only Church of Christ that traces its roots to Pentecostal Sunday.
@ 16:
Many, if not most, of our Founding Fathers were not Christians, they were in fact Deist. They believed in an Almighty God, who created Heaven and Earth and gave certain inalienable rights to man.
Many of them, in fact, did not believe in Christianity, Judaism, or Islam although they did acknowledge that there were many followers of those particular faiths.
Some compelling thoughts from Thomas Paine’s works. I encourage you to read them to understand the thinking and reasoning of our Founding Fathers’ views on religion.
“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
“Each of those churches show certain books, which they call revelation, or the word of God. The Jews say, that their word of God was given by God to Moses, face to face; the Christians say, that their word of God came by divine inspiration: and the Turks say, that their word of God (the Koran) was brought by an angel from Heaven. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all.
When Moses told the children of Israel that he received the two tables of the commandments from the hands of God, they were not obliged to believe him, because they had no other authority for it than his telling them so; and I have no other authority for it than some historian telling me so. The commandments carry no internal evidence of divinity with them; they contain some good moral precepts, such as any man qualified to be a lawgiver, or a legislator, could produce himself, without having recourse to supernatural intervention.
When I am told that the Koran was written in Heaven and brought to Mahomet by an angel, the account comes too near the same kind of hearsay evidence and second-hand authority as the former. I did not see the angel myself, and, therefore, I have a right not to believe it.
When also I am told that a woman called the Virgin Mary, said, or gave out, that she was with child without any cohabitation with a man, and that her betrothed husband, Joseph, said that an angel told him so, I have a right to believe them or not; such a circumstance required a much stronger evidence than their bare word for it; but we have not even this — for neither Joseph nor Mary wrote any such matter themselves; it is only reported by others that they said so — it is hearsay upon hearsay, and I do not choose to rest my belief upon such evidence.
It is, however, not difficult to account for the credit that was given to the story of Jesus Christ being the son of God. He was born when the heathen mythology had still some fashion and repute in the world, and that mythology had prepared the people for the belief of such a story. Almost all the extraordinary men that lived under the heathen mythology were reputed to be the sons of some of their gods. It was not a new thing, at that time, to believe a man to have been celestially begotten; the intercourse of gods with women was then a matter of familiar opinion. Their Jupiter, according to their accounts, had cohabited with hundreds: the story, therefore, had nothing in it either new, wonderful, or obscene; it was conformable to the opinions that then prevailed among the people called Gentiles, or Mythologists, and it was those people only that believed it. The Jews who had kept strictly to the belief of one God, and no more, and who had always rejected the heathen mythology, never credited the story.
So much for the neo-convicts argument that this country was founded on Christian / Judea values, huh?
I am glad to see this blog thread is settled. The Word of God has clarified who killed his Son! Can we move on to something more interesting?
Mike Webb, nothing IS more interesting than freakish rightist Xtians insisting that their myths and fabrications rooted in the sectarian squabbles, science, and world view of classical era barbarians and provincials are a sound basis for policy and legislation in contemporary America.
The more I read, the more certain I become: nobody killed Jesus because he was never really alive.
MWS @ 101
Move over to (un)SP if we’re a little too boring for you here. We won’t miss you.
priek @ 80
“justification by grace through faith” is the cornerstone of Protestantism, not Christianity. Crack a freakin’ book sometime. Start with Martin Luther.
http://www.primechoice.com/phi.....djesus.htm
“William Nichols a former Anglican minister, and founder of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of British Columbia, wrote a book Christian Antisemitism, A History of Hate, in which he discusses what historical evidence tells us about Jesus. Nicholls argues that not only may the oral tradition upon which the authors of the New Testament based their written works have been unreliable but in addition the authors may have editorialized based on their own theological outlook. Dr. Nicholls points out that if there was no editorializing and embellishment one would expect that the earlier accounts of the life of Jesus would have more detail than the later accounts. The opposite is true. ”
“The books of the New Testament about Jesus’s life were written anywhere between 60 and 200 years after Jesus’s death. A close examination of these books shows up many direct contradictions as well as pagan myths. In addition some manuscripts of the same Gospel omit accusations against the Jews that other manuscripts have suggesting that the manuscript was modified from the original (Who Crucified Jesus by Solomon Zeitlin, p176). There are even contradictions within the same manuscript. For example, according to one passage of Acts Peter says to the Jewish rulers: be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth whom ye crucified. But in another passage of Acts Peter accuses the Jews only of delivering Jesus “to the court and denied him in the presence of Pilate”. Solomon Zeitlin writes: All the Four Gospels agree that Jesus was crucified by the order of Pilate and the Roman soldiers nailed him on the cross. Therefore, it is quite evident that the expression, “ye crucified Jesus” could not be applied to the Jews.”
Who killed Jesus?
Another Who killed Jesus?
My faith tells me that all this “Word of God” stuff is bunk.
Comment to flake at #58
Flake – you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about at all. Your ignorance of GLBT people is clearly coming through along with your religious fanaticism. Any attorney could tell you that the next time your nice little church going self has a gay man for a boss, that he cannot discriminate against you for having made the choice to live the “heterosexual lifestyle”.
Fanatical Christians are going to be the downcoming of this country, period. They’re no different than any of the fanatics in any other religion. Has Ken Hutcherson taken his meds today?
It’s the Christianity, Stupid!
Two things I find ironic about Rev. Hutcherson’s boycott and general condemnation of gay people:
1) I understand from a techical type that can determine these things, that the good Reverend’s church website was written using Microsoft Frontpage and is hosted on a server using Microsoft Server 2000 software. It will be interesting to see what happens with his boycott when it comes time to renew his licensing agreement. I also wonder what kind of printer he uses to print out his church material. HP maybe?
2) Reverend Hutcherson, an African American man, is married to a woman of Germanic descent. Excuse me, but wasn’t this illegal just a few short decades ago? If you look at the arguements used against interracial marriage then, they are nearly identical to what we hear from the Reverend today against homosexuals. They used text from the Bible as “proof” that interracial was immoral. They worried about the harm done to the innocent children born into these “unnatural” marriages.
It funny, yet so sad. One can only hope that in a short time from now, we will look back on groups such as the Mr. Hutcherson’s, and they will be filed in the same catagory as the KKK, the neo-nazis and other extreme fringe elements.
One other thought on interracial marriage…. This actually IS a choice.
Amen, Splinter….
robin @108 (fanatical christians are going to be the downfall of this country)
AMEN! They are blind to it; but it’s happening every day.
Pity…
I thought Bush was the Anti-Christ.
MWS,
If you read both Acts 3 and 4 carefully, Peter is saying that the priests were the ones who killed Jesus. Indeed, if there is any lesson to learn from those two chapters, it is the lesson that priests have always been the root cause of any persecution of the righteous.
The irony of this ought not escape mention. In attempting to justify the persecution of a present-day priest, you’ve supplied scriptural authority for precisely why Christians ought to condemn Rev. Hutcherson’s ramblings–indeed Rev. Huthcerson himself for having displayed a character precisely equal to that of the priests who condemned Jesus to death.
Mr Schaut: I neither condone or condemn Pastor Hutcherson. His words are his own. He spoke them, he is an adult, and he has to live with the consequences. I used God’s Word, the Bible, as a reference to what Peter said based on the arguments proffered by left thinking bloggers. Peter told the people outside the Temple in Chapter 3, and the priests in Chapter 4. But that being said look at Acts Chapter 2:21-25.
Splinter: Didn’t interracial marriage laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, hence they were struck down? (http://academic.udayton.edu/ra.....alouis.htm) Why does your side ejaculate in the press how the right is racist when you, a lefty, are the first to elevate his nationality and his wife’s skin color? Why did you go there with Hutcherson? Are you a racist? Have you seen the wife? Maybe he has game! What do you think of Tiger Woods and his Swedish wife? (She is beautiful by the way.) Did you know she and he twin sister were au pairs to Jesper Parnevik, another Swede and a pro golfer, and he introduced each other at a tournament? Are you jealous of that too? Everyone knows Tiger has game. Before you insert foot into your mouth, perform a mental check.
Well, holy crap…I do believe this is the very first time I’ve seen the word “exegetical” used in a political blog. How ’bout the rest of ‘yall?
A couple of observations:
One, the founding fathers predated the mid-19th century emeergence of the Darbyite nonsense that now proclaims itself to be the only thing that qualifies as “Christianity”. Therefore it seems highly doubtful they held the same belief system as is being pushed by Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, Hutcherson et al.
The story of the Passion is about Christ’s absorbing the worst of humanity’s actions and intentions, with all of humanity–past, present and future–being represented by who was present at that particular time and place. Those present were Jews and Romans. As Mel stated in one interview, “there didn’t happen to be any Norwegians present”.
If true “Christianity” were represented by the likes of “Reverend” Hutcherson, I’d be more than happy to declare myself a Jew. Of course, if Judiasm is truly exemplified by Daniel Lapin, maybe I should consider taking up Wicca.
Mike – Regarding your comment, “Didn’t interracial marriage laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, hence they were struck down?”. Yes, the anti-miscegenation were determined to be illegal by the Supreme Court in 1967 in the case Loving v. Virginia.
My expectation is that laws denying a *state* granted marriage license to gay people will also be struck down… sooner or later. What can be any more basic than getting to decide who you have as a spouse in this life?
Your other pathetic attempt to paint me as a racist is really just that: pathetic. I have no problem at all with interracial marriage. My problem is the obvious hypocricy and lack of historical perspective on the part of Ken Hutcherson. He’s using the exact same arguements against gay people that “good Bible believing Christians” would have used to deny Ken Hutcherson’s a marriage license less than 50 years ago.
Now why don’t you make your best attempt at explaining why you think as a gay man I should not be allowed to decide on who I have as my spouse. Exactly what “harm” am I causing you by marrying someone of the same gender? Please… this should be good.
Splinter @ 118
That’s a big thumbs-up, bro! Very well put indeed.