Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the Left Moved into Religion
The American Thinker ^ | March 11, 2012 | Mary Nicholas

Posted on 03/11/2012 12:04:25 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

It is the year of the "ethics of energy," according to the National Council of Churches (NCC).....

.........Formerly overt supporters of communism, the NCC recast itself as a leader of the 'religious left.'" While the U.S. was fighting the Cold War, the NCC funded communist regimes in.... The NCC considers the U.S. "an oppressor, both at home and abroad"....

... Candidates should feel comfortable explaining their religious convictions to voters." But..."there is a point when an emphasis on religion becomes inappropriate and even unsettling in a religiously diverse society such as ours."...

........ReverendWright admired LouisFarrakhan....,and often praised him both in sermons and in his church's magazine, the Trumpet. Through carefully distorted biblical passages, black liberation theology portrays.....

A key link of the religious left to Obama was a 1998 BlackRadicalCongress in Chicago. ReverendWright shared a panel with CornelWest and MichaelDyson of the DemocraticSocialistsofAmerica (DSA) and Socialism Commission. The title of the panel was "Faith as a Weapon: Spirituality and the Role of the Church in the RadicalMovement" (Loudon,BarackObama and the Enemies Within,......

.....Another link of Obama to the religious left is his spiritual advisor, JimWallis. Wallis is the founder of Sojourners, which describes itself as a" biblical call to social justice, inspiring hope and building a movement to transform individuals, communities, the church and the world." Originating in Chicago, Wallis was lured to Washington by Institute forPolicyStudies....

...In an interview in 1979, Wallis expressed the hope that "more Christians will come to view the world through Marxist eyes." Wallis, funded by Soros, has served on Obama's White House Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnership since 2008.

It is clear that the religious left has penetrated organized religion for decades.... More important, they worship a Marxist State instead of God. Are they using "faith as a weapon" to destroy religion?

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: communism; ethicsofenergy; jimwallis; lefistchurch; lordmonckton; marxism; monckton; ncc; obama; religion; religiousleft; socialjustice
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: GladesGuru
Having been raised in a very Conservative synagogue, which became less so as it became more affluent, I can understand how Jews changed to “get along”, to be seen as more similar to teh Christians.

LOL, have you read Solomon Shechter's ordination papers? Pure Sabbatean. Antelman translated them in his book.

41 posted on 03/11/2012 10:40:43 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Go to almost any church website, and you’re never more than two clicks away from site with a communist, socialist, collectivist or outright racist and violent outlook.

That speaks more eloquently to the the corruption of our religious institution than anything else. The company they keep is the judgement I make.


42 posted on 03/11/2012 1:10:46 PM PDT by Noumenon ("I tell you, gentlemen, we have a problem on our hands." Col. Nicholson-The Bridge on the River Qwai)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon
I think you might appreciate posts 34 & 35 above.
43 posted on 03/11/2012 6:10:06 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon
Go to almost any church website, and you’re never more than two clicks away from site with a communist, socialist, collectivist or outright racist and violent outlook.

Glad stated "almost".

Not likely to find such material on (or linked from) congregational web sites of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS); the Lutheran Congregartions in Mission for Christ (LCMC); the North American Lutheran Church (NALC) or any of the various Orthodox jurisdictions.

44 posted on 03/11/2012 6:20:39 PM PDT by lightman (Adjutorium nostrum (+) in nomine Domini--nevertheless, Vote Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: narses; SJackson

Ping!


45 posted on 03/12/2012 12:17:19 AM PDT by Absolutely Nobama (NO COMPROMISE! NO RETREAT! NO SURRENDER! I AM A CONSERVATIVE! CASE CLOSED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Contrary to the beliefs of MANY FReepers, the 18th Century Enlightenment was infused with a distaste if not outright hostility to Christianity. Science had convinced the bulk of philosophers of that time, from Diderot to Hume, to Locke, Smith, and Rousseau, that the Church was to be at best placated if not outright disregarded.

It was this infatuation with the forbidden pleasures of pagan Roman philosophers that led to our structure of government and its iconography. When such philosophers were speaking of "God" it certainly wasn't that as defined in Torah, but varied from atheism to a confused sort of pantheism. Many of their references to "God" were out of reticence to attack Christianity directly in of fear of reprisal. Many of their parallel references to morality were, instead, cleverly built upon the Roman idea of manly virtue, leaving the listener to believe that they were talking specifically about Christian virtue. That ambiguity has led to a huge number of what are effectively 'God and Country' misquotes.

Preach it, brother! The "enlightenment" is/was/shall ever be nothing but sheer unadulterated poison, and unfortunately many of our nation's founders were infected with it.

There is a very common fault on the Right to (as it were) "deify" the founders of a country. While more ancient nations have primal blood-and-soil mythologies, Americans have only the eighteenth century the the likes of Thomas Jefferson. The "nature's 'gxd'" Thomas Jefferson invoked in the Declaration of Independence is not the Biblical G-d but the "gxd" of deism--the notion that a "gxd" of some sort created the world but then did nothing more, which meant all revealed religions were frauds (deism was popular because prior to Darwin outright atheism didn't quite make any sense). If the eighteenth century deists had had something like "natural selection" to work with they would have been atheists--period.

By making our rights come from "nature's 'gxd'" rather than from the Biblical G-d Jefferson was laying the groundwork for the atheistic concept of "rights" that was to come after Comte and Darwin. Thus the poison was in our system from the very beginning.

It is only natural and laudable to applaud our founders and acknowledge their greatness. But they weren't perfect, and it is not wrong or unpatriotic to point out the flaws in their philosophy.

(Methinks you are also a reader of Rabbi Antelman? He's goes a little far out sometimes, but he's certainly interesting!)

46 posted on 03/12/2012 5:58:12 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
There is a very common fault on the Right to (as it were) "deify" the founders of a country. While more ancient nations have primal blood-and-soil mythologies,

With the Constitution as its graven image. Yep.

While more ancient nations have primal blood-and-soil mythologies, Americans have only the eighteenth century the the likes of Thomas Jefferson.

When I was in Holland on our honeymoon, I had to explain to one Dutchman why Americans bought and restored old buildings, "We don't have any 'old.'"

TJ was neck deep in that Enlightenment "philosope" crowd (to use Peter Gay's word). So was Franklin. Adams less so. Washington the politician. Henry, now there was a Christian patriot.

Methinks you are also a reader of Rabbi Antelman? He's goes a little far out sometimes, but he's certainly interesting!

Yup, Gershom Scholem is another. Rabbi Antelman filled in a lot of gaps in the ol' History of Western Civ narrative, didn't he? Especially helpful to me was providing a motive for the evils of Marxism in his citation to Sanhedrin 98a. I think there's a lot more to his research into colloidal silver than the desire to make money. The man is a Jew's Jew, a true humanitarian.

We live in a world run by eschatological maniacs. We do what we can to stem that toxic red tide.

The study of associations from without will always have its uncertainties. Rabbi Antelman did better than most at digging out the source documents to prove his point. There are leaps in his case, but that's just part of that type of work. You can't know what to look for without a hypothesis, but you won't have the passion to get there without believing it. It's the honesty to reconsider when one runs into outliers that is the difference between good and bad researchers.

It is only natural and laudable to applaud our founders and acknowledge their greatness. But they weren't perfect, and it is not wrong or unpatriotic to point out the flaws in their philosophy.

True. Nor is it a bad thing to point out critical flaws in the Constitution, which I have done here from time to time.

Similarly, IMHO it's not a bad thing to point out discord within Judaism. By virtue of its (understandably) monolithic defensiveness and by not acknowledging or informing the Christian world of its internal divisions, the Jewish people get treated like a monolith when the acts of reprisal are rendered evil: without justice, compassion, or intelligence.

Nothing makes me angrier than to realize that the NAZI war machine was provided startup cash with (culturally) Jewish money (the Sabbatean bund). Yet is was Jewish doctors, scientists, artists, and shopkeepers, decent people who loved the Lord with all their hearts, who suffered and died unspeakably while the atheist thieves of the world laughed up their sleeves and gorged on depravity.

It has been on my heart to help, and I think I have found something Israel truly needs to understand. The last few years is centered on the almost mechanical logic of the year of Shemitta. By translating tishm'tena un'tashtah in Ex:23:11 literally, as 'release it and abandon it' (the land not the crop), I can explain every single blessing and curse in Lev. 26 by normal military, economic, social, and environmental metrics. There's no mystery to it at all and there is very good reason why the practice during the Second Temple Period as described in the Talmud Yerushalmi Tractate Shvi'it was circumscribed from the original intent in Exodus. BTW, the founding verse for the Sabbath for the Land is not mentioned, at all, in the entire two volumes of Tractate Shvi'it, for which there was VERY good reason. Had the rabbis been teaching the true extent of Ex. 23:11 under Persian, Greek, or Roman rule, it would have been suicidal. The rabbis would have been arrested and killed, and the Torah would have been lost.

IMO, Isreal's survival depends upon understanding the long lost meaning of this ancient law. The partial measures prescribed in the Talmud won't cut it. If that causes you any distress, I am truly sorry.

I've since gone back to re-translate Genesis 4 and, yes, it does make clear the rationale for the Sabbath year. But before we continue this conversation further, I should inform you that I am a Torah-observant Christian (although my grandfather was probably a full-blooded Jew). I wouldn't want you consulting my work without knowing that.

Baruch HaShem.

47 posted on 03/12/2012 7:15:15 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Placemark.


48 posted on 03/12/2012 10:11:34 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

I know exactly what you mean — a green-collective-social-justice doctrine.


49 posted on 03/13/2012 12:55:38 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Thomas Jefferson was not only up to his neck in the enlightenment, his loose constructionism and bankophobia has made him the darling of every anti-Jewish conspiracy theorist in the country for two hundred years.

Personally, I've long held that the "Bill of Rights" was a grave mistake. Alexander Hamilton said the same thing, though his reason was not the same as mine (and his logic a bit specious).

Only "Orthodox Judaism" is Judaism, though a Jew is a Jew whether he is observant or not (Halakhah determines "who is a Jew"). Unfortunately, the true rulers of Israel (Gedolei HaTorah) are unknown to the non-Jewish world and the Orthodox have allowed the "alphabet agencies" to become the "official" Jewish voice. These organizations have no Halakhic authority whatsoever and cannot be spokesmen for `Am Yisra'el.

As a Noachide, I do not feel free to critique traditional Judaism as you perhaps do, so I'm not going to tell the Rabbis that they've gotten anything wrong--though I've certainly been loud on the default Jewish position of internal fundamentalism and external liberalism.

When I say Antelman is a bit "out there," I am referring to some extremely controversial positions he holds with regard to traditional Jewish practice, not to any conspiracy theories. He believes the 'Af-Beri passage in the prayer for rain recited on Shemini `Atzeret and the much loved Unetanneh Toqef prayer recited on the High Holy Days are actually heretical and should be suppressed. I'm not touchin' that with a ten foot pole.

As a Noachide, I am also leery of any conspiracy theory that implies that there is a "gxd of this world" separate from HaShem ("The Devil") who runs this world until G-d "comes back." HaSatan is simply an angel of G-d doing his job, HaShem is in total, absolute, sole control (with no metaphysical enemy or evil counterpart), and "Lucifer" as a "fallen angel" is a chr*stian myth. The fact that there may be powerful people who believe in Lucifer and expect him to "enlighten" them doesn't change a thing.

50 posted on 03/13/2012 7:42:43 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Thank you for your post.

Personally, I've long held that the "Bill of Rights" was a grave mistake.

It gave too much power to the courts to decide what was or was not a "right."

Alexander Hamilton said the same thing, though his reason was not the same as mine (and his logic a bit specious).

Hamilton was the king of specious logic in service to ruse.

As a Noachide, I do not feel free to critique traditional Judaism as you perhaps do, so I'm not going to tell the Rabbis that they've gotten anything wrong-

Please hear me on this: The rulings in Tractate Shvi'it were clearly under duress. Now that Israel is in the land, they should be reconsidered.

Here is a linguist's review of Shemitta (the only one who would write it down). The book has been reviewed by several Orthodox rabbis, including an Orthodox Shemitta law expert in Israel (one of the few who speaks English). He told me that it was "amazing" and "there is nothing wrong with it" but that's a far cry from getting him to put it in writing. He promised to get it to bar Ilan University, but the rabbi he was considering has taken ill. There has been no progress since.

-though I've certainly been loud on the default Jewish position of internal fundamentalism and external liberalism.

I wish there were more like this guy.

When I say Antelman is a bit "out there," I am referring to some extremely controversial positions he holds with regard to traditional Jewish practice, not to any conspiracy theories.

I think his citations to Hitler being the progeny of a Rothschild by raping a scullery maid on Tisha b'Av and others like it were, (although certainly conceivable) a bit thin by way of evidence. Interesting no less.

HaSatan is simply an angel of G-d doing his job, HaShem is in total, absolute, sole control (with no metaphysical enemy or evil counterpart), and "Lucifer" as a "fallen angel" is a chr*stian myth. The fact that there may be powerful people who believe in Lucifer and expect him to "enlighten" them doesn't change a thing.

Given Genesis 21 I shouldn't expect any other answer, nor am I looking for one. To me, haSatan is a fallen angel who witlessly does G_d's intent but is eventually punished for his attempted usurpation. In any event, if you do respect the teaching of Hillel, then you might be interested to find there is confirmation of my hypothesis on the Sabbath Year in Matthew 25. THAT would indicate that the real meaning and import of Exodus 23:11 was known to the rabbis of that time, but that it would have been suicidal to put it in writing.

Some things just don't seem to change. :-)

51 posted on 03/14/2012 9:42:49 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
"So many dots and connections. Well researched and written. Worth a full read."

Yes, it is!

Unfortunately, your thread has attracted some of FR's "opposite end of the extreme" religious nutcases.

52 posted on 04/02/2012 8:25:12 AM PDT by Matchett-PI ("Andrew loved the battle and he knew the stakes." ~ Mark Levin 3/2/12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson