Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Acts 1:8, Jul 23, 2004.
It doesn't get much worse..
My question would be this--
Why bother even reading the New Testament at all?
These "scholars" just make up some perverse fairy tale and masquerade it as genuine scholarship. That doesn't even require a reading of the text!
Ok, we have the feminist Jesus. We have the gay Jesus. We have the communist Jesus. We have the anarchist Jesus. ------WHAT IS GOING ON HERE????
All this stuff is absolutely absurd! I'd believe that Joseph Stalin died for my sins sooner than I'd accept this heretical garbage.
I sent these folks an email with the link:
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 12:46 AM
To: '[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]
Subject: Just making it up as you go along?
Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier if you just wrote your own Bible?
Whats going on you might ask?
"For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home--these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
I read it about halfway and stopped. This is liberalism taking its natural course.
True liberals feel free to interpret the Bible anyway they please because they believe it is full of errors and not reliable for doctrine.
From my experience, it does no good to quote Scripture to them when debating an issue. What is even sadder is that many of them know the Bible better than you or me.
Interesting example of totalitarian tactics in action...
Notice how Mohler doesn't bother to isolate this kook to the looney bin or even to make a specific statement about the idiocy of pro-gay Christian scholarship as a whole. "Gay" doesn't appear in the title of the editorial.
He simply broad-brushes this scholar as symptomatic of what he calls "liberal theology" in general, which in Mohler-speak means anyone who doesn't believe in a strong view of Biblical inerrancy (with a Calvinist flavor, of course). As such, scholars who believe Jesus was gay and people who ordain female pastors are packaged together as dangerous "liberals".
Mohler is just like the "Music Man". Once you've convinced the churchgoers that there's "trouble in River City", you can stifle legitimate debate at the Convention and convince a majority that anyone who disagrees with you agrees with a "gay Jesus scholar".
So what else is new under the sun.
The article was wasted time and energy. Anyone ever read about Mohler sharing his faith?
Know how to tell a crooked stick? Lay a straight one next to it.
You never know.
Unfortunately this type of interpretation is becoming more common. Some "historians" are taking different approaches to history in light of the poststructuralist philosophers.
They see history not as something which occurred factually and is relevant in THAT WAY - rather as something which becomes relevant when only when someone applies it to his/her own life - thus history is plastic and its significance is dependent on the reader!
The above raping of scripture is unfortunatle a very typical modernist approach.
I got halfway through the article and had to stop--made me ill!