Posted on 01/19/2015 7:47:57 AM PST by SeekAndFind
In the Gospel of John, we read a story where a group of Jewish Torah teachers and Pharisees (members of a legalistic sect of Judaism) bring to Jesus a woman whom they caught in adultery, asking Him what punishment He thinks the woman deserves. Masterfully — as He always did — Jesus answers the scholars with a simple, yet profound statement: “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her” (John 8:7, NIV).
Recently, Newsweek featured a cover article on the Bible in which author Kurt Eichenwald — not a Biblical scholar but a business writer with a clear agenda — lets forth on how Christians misinterpret the Bible. In his piece, Eichenwald throws the first stone, not even pretending to mask an agenda against conservative Biblical scholarship:
They wave their Bibles at passersby, screaming their condemnations of homosexuals. They fall on their knees, worshipping at the base of granite monuments to the Ten Commandments while demanding prayer in school. They appeal to God to save America from their political opponents, mostly Democrats. They gather in football stadiums by the thousands to pray for the country’s salvation.
They are God’s frauds, cafeteria Christians who pick and choose which Bible verses they heed with less care than they exercise in selecting side orders for lunch. They are joined by religious rationalizers—fundamentalists who, unable to find Scripture supporting their biases and beliefs, twist phrases and modify translations to prove they are honoring the Bible’s words.
Eichenwald goes on for another roughly 8,400 words, relying on leftist Biblical scholars to refute what he finds wrong with the Bible. However, Christian leaders like Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, poked holes in Eichenwald’s salvo against evangelical Christianity.
For example, Eichenwald cites the very Biblical account I referenced to open this post, attempting to deem it manufactured:
It’s a powerful story, known even by those with just a passing knowledge of the Bible. It was depicted in Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ and is often used to point out the hypocrisy of Christians who denounce what they perceive to be the sins of others. Unfortunately, John didn’t write it. Scribes made it up sometime in the Middle Ages. It does not appear in any of the three other Gospels or in any of the early Greek versions of John. Even if the Gospel of John is an infallible telling of the history of Jesus’s ministry, the event simply never happened.
Furthermore, with reference to the woman caught in adultery, Eichenwald states: “Unfortunately, John didn’t write it. Scribes made it up sometime in the Middle Ages.” But the fact that the account is not found in the older manuscripts of the Gospel of John does not mean, in any credible sense, that scribes simply made it up in the Middle Ages. Eichenwald seems unaware of the very category of oral tradition.
Eichenwald goes on to deny the divinity of Jesus, as well as the doctrine of the Trinity, and then manages to refute the entire idea that God created the universe. It’s all pretty heady stuff, and it’s clear that Eichenwald is ready to point his finger as generations of Christians – and Jews (because he has daggers for both the Old and New Testaments) and tell them that their most cherished and deeply held beliefs are wrong because a handful of scholars agree with him, as opposed to the centuries of scholarship that point to the veracity of the scriptures.
Yes, it’s abundantly clear that Eichenwald wrote his piece with a clear agenda, despite the fact that he claimed that the article was “not intended to advance a particular theology…” It’s just too bad his agenda relies on such faulty scholarship.
Another thing Eichenwald gets wrong, or simply ignores, is the fact that leftists have cherry picked and misinterpreted verses plenty of times over the years. I wrote a post for NewsReal Blog a few years back that pointed out some of the most egregious examples of the Left getting the Bible just plan wrong. In it, I cited examples such as Al Gore completely botching Jesus’ admonition that “where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” to advocate extreme environmentalism, radical pastor Jim Wallis using a prophecy about heaven to claim that God supports a higher minimum wage, and entire movements built around using government to fulfull Jesus’ mandate to care for “the least of these.”
I also noted:
One of the most insidious and troubling areas in which politicians have co-opted scripture is the “social justice” movement. Since the 19th century, Leftists have attempted to use particular passages from the Bible to achieve progressive and often radical or statist ends. From communitarians to eugenicists toearly 20th century progressives to New Dealers, evangelists of various strains of the Social Gospel have attempted to utilize the Bible to justify their views.
[...]
[T]he Left often stretches Biblical passages or takes them out of context to fit an agenda of “social justice.” Often, Leftists do so by inaccurately applying personal scriptural truths to governments and societies.
Indeed, the Bible is a guidebook for our personal lives, and society only changes for the better when individuals apply its principles in their own everyday living — not when governments mandate “social justice” reforms from on high. Alas, in the eyes of Kurt Eichenwald, the only people who get the Bible wrong are the ones who disagree with Kurt Eichenwald.
It’s unclear what beef Eichenwald has with evangelical Christianity — in fact, Mohler wonders:
What is really going on here? Did some fundamentalist preacher run over young Kurt Eichenwald’s pet hamster when the reporter was just a boy?
What is abundantly clear is that Eichenwald approached his study of Biblical scholarship with some sort of anti-evangelical bent, and he didn’t care how one-sided his writing looked or how much he relied on flimsy scholarship to make his point. What a shame, because a truly thoughtful examination of the Bible could have been much more interesting.
—
Je Suis Bible Thumper.
With a name like ‘Eichenwald’ he cannot be pro-Christian and must deny Christ’s divinity or else he would have to convert to Christianity.
It’s in the “cover story” link of the actual article.
The huge amount of comments is at the “cover story” link with the entire article.
The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin
By Kurt Eichenwald / December 23, 2014 6:54 AM EST
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/01/02/thats-not-what-bible-says-294018.html
Oh, my!!
Guess Eichenwald's less-than scholarly piece means tomorrow night's "address" can't/won't include any scriptural justification for the "fair share" politics of so-called "progressives."
Anyway, those who study the history of liberty versus tyranny understand that "fair share," when used by politicians, is just "slavery" by another name. Government "masters" buy votes in exchange for retaining their "master redistributionist" status, while their "voters" yield up freedom for themselves and future generations.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C. S. Lewis
All who doubt the wisdom of Lewis, as well as a bit of proof that the "Left" "picks and chooses" scriptures, might watch the video of a National Prayer Breakfast a few years ago. There, a President arrogantly misappropriated Jesus's spiritual challenge to individuals, claiming those words as validating and authorizing abusive use of coercive power by himself and his cronies to "take" from some in order to buy votes and accumulate more power to themselves--all in the name of "helping" the beneficiaries of such unconstitutional "takings."
Hear Samuel Adams:
"Is it now high time for the people of this country to explicitly declare whether they will be free men or slaves. It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in this event. For wherever tyranny is established, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent, it is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice.” - Samuel Adams
And:
“The utopian schemes of leveling and a community of goods, are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown. These ideas are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government unconstitutional.” - Samuel Adams
I’ve always found the end of that story to be very interesting. She didn’t ask for forgiveness, but he gave it to her anyway. He did that a few times in the Gospels. Why? Isn’t it a tenant of Christianity that we must ask for His forgiveness?
A perfect description not of fundamentalists, but of progressive "christians" who only got into christianity in order to "reform" and politicize it.
The Pharisees broke at least 3 laws.
What’s a “Newsweek?”
RE: What’s a “Newsweek?”
LOL, I knew this question would pop up sometime.
In fact, whenever I post a TIME magazine article, the question: What’s a “TIME” eventually pops up.
Looks like Newsweek is well on the way to being out of business.
At 5:46 the question is asked about islam allowing Women to be stoned to death.
She said that Stoning Women to death comes from the Bible.
At 5:46 the question is asked about islam allowing Women to be stoned to death.
She said that Stoning Women to death comes from the Bible.
When the Pharisees brought the woman to Jesus after”catching her in the very act”, they neglected one minor detail.According to Old Testament both parties were to be stoned. WHERE’S THE DUDE?
What is lost here with the way the writer opens the article is that the Pharisees brought the woman to Jesus as a ploy to get Jesus in trouble with the Magistrate.
Remember, this is propaganda.
It is laying the ground work for the Roberts’ court to start banning orthodox Christians by saying they are not “real” Christians.
Expect number of church leaders to go pro gay marriage real soon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.