Ya think? : )
Posted on 01/12/2003 2:44:07 PM PST by Remedy
Meanwhile, ACLU worked overtime to take Christ out of Christmas and PBS celebrated Islam
A week before Christmas, MSNBC talk-show host Phil Donahue used his program as a vehicle to show his contempt for foundational Christian beliefs - particularly that salvation comes only through faith in Jesus Christ.
The December 17 program - titled "Do You Have to Be a Christian to Get into Heaven?" - was a follow-up to Donahue's December 3 show during which he asked Christian evangelist and Liberty University founder the Rev. Jerry Falwell if he (Donahue) had to accept Christ in order to go to heaven. The Rev. Falwell replied that the only way to heaven was "what Jesus said in [the New Testament Book of] John 14:6. He said, 'I am the way, the truth, the life, no man cometh unto the Father - no man - but by me.'"
When many in the audience applauded the Rev. Falwell's statement, Donahue expressed disdain for their reaction and evidently decided to hone in on the topic with theological guests from both sides.
For the December 17 program, Donahue assembled the Rev. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky; Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, national talk-radio host and author of "Judaism Is for Everybody"; Michael Brown, a Messianic (Christian) Jew; Dr. Joe Hough, president of the Union Theological Seminary in Manhattan; and evangelist Flip Benham. Mohler, Brown, and Benham support the Biblical viewpoint while Rabbi Boteach and Dr. Hough hold opposing views.
Donahue first posed the question of "who goes to heaven" to the Rev. Mohler, who answered that a person goes to heaven only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Donahue showed his scorn for Mohler's statement by replying, "I just think that [view] has the potential, and already has caused an awful lot of havoc here among the Lord's people. If you tell me that I'm not going to heaven, then why should you respect me? If the Lord doesn't respect me, why should you?"
The Rev. Mohler replied: "Well, the Lord respects you enough to have sent Jesus Christ, his son, to assume human flesh, to die on Calvary's cross for your sins." Unimpressed, Donahue asked Rabbi Boteach to respond:
Well, Phil, sadly, Rev. Mohler is a spiritual racist. And it's not enough for him for Jews to be at the back of the heavenly bus, and not only can they not drink from the good old water fountain, he wants nothing less than a spiritual lynching. … [T]hink about how perverse this is. You take a Middle Eastern Jew named Jesus, one of the greatest teachers the world has ever known. You give him blond hair and blue eyes. You then put a Ku Klux Klan outfit on him with a hood and a white sheet, and you make him into the chief enforcer of anti-Semitism the world has ever known.
Phil Donahue then tacitly agreed with the rabbi's vitriolic assessment of Christianity, noting, "And he [the Christian Klansman] goes to heaven. The guy in the sheet goes to heaven, I think is what he's saying."
Although the Rev. Mohler vehemently disagreed with the association of Christianity with the Ku Klux Klan and anti-Semitism, Rabbi Boteach continued his comments, asserting that Mohler's views transcend the issue of "just people making decisions about faith. We are talking about Jews being persecuted, slaughtered ... massacred, turned to bars of soap because of 2000 years of Christian anti-Judaism. The Holocaust didn't take place in Buddhist Europe or in Hindu Europe. It took place in Christian Europe."
To the assertion equating Nazi and Christian worldviews, Donahue responded, "I agree with you."
As the program continued, Donahue chastised a female audience participant who expressed her view that the Bible says Jesus is the only way to heaven. Donahue:
Aren't you concerned about hurting the feelings of all those other people of other faiths? And isn't it a little arrogant to say, you know, I know and you don't. …[W]e're happy that you believe that. And I am very proud, as you are, to live in a country that you're allowed to believe that. But you're imposing something else there. You're not only saying Jesus is my way. You're saying he's for everybody, and if you don't accept him, you're not going to heaven. I have problems with that.
Donahue then introduced Dr. Michael Brown, who identified himself as a Messianic Jew - a member of the Jewish faith that accepts Jesus Christ as the Messiah and fulfiller of Old Testament prophesies. Upon hearing Dr. Brown's statement, Donahue said sarcastically, "Boy, oh, boy, you're breaking the hearts of a lot of very, very devout faithful Jewish folk with that. I mean, really. You don't think it's an oxymoron?"
Dr. Brown replied, "He [Jesus] came to fulfill what's written in Moses and the prophets. So either…the whole world should believe in him or reject it." Rabbi Boteach then called Brown "a spiritual bigot" and mocked the notion that Jesus is the only way to heaven.
Donahue ridiculed Dr. Mohler for suggesting in his writings that Islam is a faith that "lies about God" and presents a false gospel. "I mean, please. You're going to be sending how many people to war if you keep up commentary like this? You don't see the un-Christian nature of that comment?"
The Mohler replied: "It's not an un-Christian comment, because it is the gospel. And also, well, let's put it this way. If you have a true Muslim who understands what we believe about Jesus, he believes that we are wrong. And you [as a Christian] have to have a basic respect for truth."
Donahue then said, "But I don't know if he [a Muslim] is out there really throwing mud and calling names to people who believe otherwise. I think we can lose just a little less devotion and [have] more love and understanding and reaching out." He called on Dr. Hough to respond:
The basic problem here, I think, is that God is too small. So for me, I'm passionately Christian. I am a Christian. I believe in Jesus as the One who showed me the way. But I would be the last person to be so arrogant as to assert that my God has so little imagination, that she or he could not reach out to other people in other cultures in other ways. I'm happy about that. [Emphasis added.]
Donahue agreed and said, "You speak for me. When I see a holy person, I'm happy about that."
Christians as 'Bigots'
Throughout the program, the views of the Rev. Mohler, Dr. Brown, and the Rev. Benham were characterized as bigoted, ignorant, hateful and unenlightened, about which Donahue typically agreed. Perhaps the most telling moment in the broadcast came when one audience member asked Boteach, "Rabbi, I was wondering what you believe. … Who is going to hell? Because it seems everybody believes everybody's going to heaven, and that cannot be the case."
The rabbi responded:
Do you realize that I really don't give one darn if I'm going to heaven or hell? I didn't have children so they look after me when I'm a doddering old fool with drool coming out of my mouth! I had them because I love them! I serve God because I love him! Whatever he does with me. Why are you so fixated with heaven and hell. … [I]t's not a valid question because I'm means-oriented!
Later in the conversation, Rabbi Boteach showed his complete misunderstanding of sin, God's grace, and forgiveness: "If heaven is a place riddled with murderers who believed in Jesus, and hell is a place riddled with victims who had died with the wrong faith, I would choose hell every, any single day. I prefer to be with the innocent victim than to be in a heaven riddled with murderers."
In other words, the rabbi doesn't even believe in heaven, hell, judgment, grace, or forgiveness, but nevertheless is hypercritical of Christians who do. Furthermore, essentially all religious faiths practice exclusionary principles regarding salvation and the eternal destiny of the human soul. The rabbi readily confessed his unbelief; Hindus and Buddhists believe in repeated reincarnations until the soul is relieved of its bad "karma" through good works, at which time the soul simply sheds its existence; Muslims believe in a works-based judgment and that only those who accept Allah as the one true God may achieve a Paradise of abundant sensual pleasures, while nonbelievers will suffer the torments of hell.
It is a uniquely Christian belief that works cannot earn a person salvation, as St. Paul notes in Romans 3:23: "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." For Christians, acceptance into the heavenly kingdom comes only by God's grace and entering into a personal trust relationship with the Living God, Jesus Christ, whose sacrifice on the cross served as an atonement for sin. Thus believers are justified in the eyes of God.
By focusing exclusively on Christianity and ignoring the beliefs of other faiths, Phil Donahue's primary motivation was to ridicule the beliefs of Bible-believing Christians, whom he regards as intolerant to his own ultra-liberal views. Unfortunately, he missed an opportunity to present a reasoned discussion of Christian doctrine concerning salvation, which could have served to enlighten his viewers and sweep away the misconceptions raised by the audience's questions and shared by some panel members.
Perhaps Donahue's open contempt for Biblical truths and the Christian faith helps explain his dismal ratings. His MSNBC program is reportedly losing the ratings war to more conservative talk shows on the FOX network.
'Twas the Season Without a Reason
In retrospect, the 2002 Christmas holiday season can perhaps be best remembered as "the season without a Reason." Holiday greetings, which were once universally expressed as Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, have long since been replaced by the generically acceptable, Happy Holidays, while millions of schoolchildren who used to look forward to 'Christmas vacation' now simply enjoy their 'winter break.'
Even though Christmas is a federal holiday that celebrates and reflects the nation's Christian heritage, anti-Christian organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have been remarkably successful in eliminating Christmas symbolism from the public arena - most often by threats and intimidation without legal merit. This past Christmas season showed a continuation of this relentless assault. Among the more outrageous examples were:
PBS Shills for Islam
The media, which once offered a multitude of Christmas-oriented programs, are now almost devoid of serious Christian themes. The Public Broadcasting Service did present a serious religious program shortly before Christmas - a two-hour discourse on the life of Muhammad produced by Muslim convert and apologist for the Islamic faith, Alex Kronemer. "Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet" aired on most of the 349 PBS affiliates nationwide beginning December 18, while the Washington, D.C., PBS station broadcast the program on December 26.
Kronemer, who has a master of divinity degree in theological studies from Harvard Divinity School, recently wrote an article for the religion Web site Beliefnet.com called, "Was Muhammad a Terrorist." In the article, Kronemer credits Muhammad for ending the "Biblical period" of violence: "By today's standards, Muhammad engaged in an appalling amount of violence - but he brought peace to the Holy Land." [Emphasis added.] Muhammad also brought a repressive code of 7th century religious laws that continues to enslave a large portion of the world to this day.
If, indeed, Muhammad brought "peace to the Holy Land" by the violent conquest of its inhabitants, it was quite obviously short-lived, which Kronemer later admits in his article: "Christianity and Islam have challenged and competed with one another ever since. The relationship has spurred both civilizations to greater creativity, but has also been the source of conflict over the centuries, which is now re-ignited on both sides of the divide."
Daniel Pipes, director of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum, called the PBS documentary "an outrage … an airbrushed and uncritical documentary of a topic that has both world historical and contemporary significance. Its patronizing film might be fine for an Islamic Sunday school class, but not for a national audience."
Mr. Pipes was also critical of taxpayer support of the film:
The U.S. government should never fund a documentary whose obvious intent is to glorify a religion and proselytize for it. Doing so flies in the face of American tradition and law. On behalf of taxpayers, a public-interest law firm should bring suit against the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, both to address this travesty and to win an injunction against any possible repetitions.
PBS has supplemented its documentary by offering educational materials on its Web site about Islam and its relationship to women, jihad, and other religions, as well as offering a "virtual Hajj" (the Muslim's sacred pilgrimage to Mecca), information about the Koran, and a discussion forum.
That is so true; in much the same way that it is impossible to be physically strong if you don't eat, to draw a parallel. There has been a trememdous change in many Catholic churches though. I am Episcopalian, but have worked closely with many Catholics in Bible studies and various ministries and these were very spiritual and Biblically grounded folks. The same situation exists throughout much of the Episcopal church. You have those who are devoted to Christ, read their Bibles and "study to show themselves approved unto God," and those whose idea of being good Episcopalians or good Catholics is going to church, paying the "pew rent" and being members in good standing of the "right" groups within the church. I have often heard it said that the Catholic church was the "whore of Babylon" but I never believed that. I believe that it is rather those of ANY denomination who subscribe to a brand of "churchianity" to the exclusion of true faith in Christ.
Hehehe....isn't it neat how FReepers converge in so many ways. We are definitely a little out of the ordinary I would say.
Ya think? : )
I really have no idea why the Catholic Church doesn't promote more Bible reading. I like reading the Bible (and I'm Catholic)
Ironically, this is true even if the atheists are right.
Some day ALL will know the truth.
OH MY GOD!
"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God...and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." (John 1:1-2, 14)
Christ has always been, even before the world was made and because God anticipated the choice that man would make to turn from Him, He made provision for his redemption. The faithful under the old covenant did not experience Him in the same way, but they believed in God's promises. God spoke to His people throughout time and those who believed trusted His way. Job, the oldest book in the Bible, was not written in Job's time. For many generations, people did not have the written Word and yet God spoke to them. He gave them what they needed upon which to base their faith. In that context, this statement of Job's is quite profound and revealing:
"I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth." (Job 19:25)
Neither did Abraham have the benefit of the written Scriptures and yet when God told him that he would have a son in his old age with his wife well past the age of child-bearing the scripture says that
"he believed God and He counted it to him as righteousness." (Genesis 15:6)
"For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness..." (Romans 10:10)
Later when God asked Abraham to take his only son, the son of that promise, and offer him up as a sacrifice, he obeyed. I expect that on his way to the mountain that God had showed him that he agonized over the testing of his faith as any parent would, and yet deep in the heart of Abraham he knew that the God who had fulfilled His promise in the birth of Isaac had also promised that He would make of Isaac a great nation through which all the nations of the earth would be blessed (the promise of the coming of Christ), a promise which could not be fulfilled if Isaac were dead. So Abraham went forth to do God's will having faith that God was good for His word and would do something even if it meant raising Isaac form the dead.
Though the King James version is not the best translation from the original in many instances, there is one verse here where it is absolutely right. When Isaac questioned his father of the whereabouts of the lamb for the burnt offering, Abraham said:
"...God will provide himself a lamb..." (Genesis 22:8a)
David also recognized God's hand of deliverance:
"For great [is] thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell." (psalm 86:13)
I think this is one place the Catholics have it right (insofar as Catholic doctrine is different than much of protestant doctrine). In the writings of Dante and C.S. Lewis I see this picture of hell as various "levels", not all of which are equal. Dante paints the upper levels of hell as being almost carefree, albeit still separated from God. The writings of the Old Testament are filled with promise and hope of redemption and some level of recognition of the savior "slain before the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8b). When Christ was crucified he descended to the place of the dead and released those who had died in faith. On the day of Pentecost when Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke of the fulfillment of the prophecies in the death and resurrection of Christ he quoted these words of David:
"I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." (Acts 2:25-27)
Finally, Christ Himself speaks to John in Revelation 1:18 saying:
"I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."
It is reasonable to draw from these verses, and many others, that part of Jesus' work of the cross was to descend to the dead and release those whose faith had been their righteousness.
Here is something to think about. Now mind you, I am not offering this as a theological doctrine, but merely as a "what if".
As I mentioned in a previous post, there were many generations of people who did not have the benefit of the written scriptures, yet God spoke to them. This was before the time of the Israelites as the chosen people. So why did God choose Israel? Was it because there was something special about them or because God only wanted certain people to be saved? Of course not. Maybe the only thing that made them special was that some of them were listening and nobody else was and because of that God set them apart and fulfilled His Word through them.In that respect it might even be said that many other peoples had rejected Christ even before the birth of Jesus.
Don't like that? Here's another more widely held view, though I don't think it is mutually exclusive. He taught us to go into all the world and preach the gospel, the great comission, and Christians have been doing exactly that since the beginning. That makes US His messengers and there is virtually no place in the world untouched by the gospel except by choice. Do I believe that someone is condemned to hell who lives under a tyrannical ruler but seeks the truth? No I don't, because God says that those who seek Him will find Him if they search for Him with all their heart. (Jer. 29:13) That's the key. There is a part of all of us that knows our Creator and we can either seek Him and His truth in which case He will reveal Himself in some way or through someone, or we can turn away from Him and seek our own way, continuing to follow the path of original sin by trying to be god of our own lives.
Absolutely! And for those whose hearts and minds are open there may be the added benefit of seeing these liberal fools as the agents of Satan that they are.
That is making the assumption that such a person recognizes that he is condemned and needs salvation. Many are blinded by pride or by false teaching. Look at how our own society has been infected by humanism/socialism/liberalism; all deny the true God by their very nature.
Anyway, the libs have recently begun scoffing at the Jews. (Of course, Lieberman will still ride high. After all, he is a Jew--but an excommunicated one!)
If there were a lifetime achievement award for sucking, Phil Donahue would get my vote. As the father of the daytime talk show, Phil Donahue is the Marco Polo of trash TV and the reason that modern presidential elections are won by the candidate who causes the most autoerotic secretions by women watching Oprah. It was Phil Donahue who birthed a television format where one day his audience could watch an abortion and the next day stick a dollar in the crotch of a Chippendale dancer. In its 29-year-run (1967-1996), there were nearly 7,000 Phil Donahue shows. Shows that brought to the surface a subclass of human existence so vile and ignorant that it should have been left unnoticed, free to rot away in oblivion. But Phil Donahue needed ratings. Phil Donahue had an agenda. An agenda so radically leftwing that it made Thomas Eagleton look sane in comparison.I couldn't have said it better Nathan, Boom Boom sucks bigtime.Since 1996, Donahue has mercifully been removed from the scene, overwhelmed by the spin-off monsters he created. Thanks to Phil Donahue, the likes of Rosie, Springer, Jones, and Oprah pollute our airwaves with their mindless dribble. So I am amused and repulsed at the news that Phil is set to step back in front of the camera to remove any doubt—if some existed—that he is an asinine, conceited, obnoxious mass of human tissue. To the unaware or uninitiated Phil Donahue may come across as an earnest liberal who is confident in his beliefs. But there is a fine line between being confident and obnoxious, and Phil Donahue has been on the wrong side of that line for a long time.
How liberal is Donahue? He once said, "I don't know if there's an issue the ACLU takes I disagree with." Like most liberals, Donahue touts tolerance while parading his intolerance before the world. Complaining of Catholicism, Donahue charged, "The Church has always thrived on ignorance and oppression." One would think he was applying for a position at Bob Jones University. I'm surprised he didn't accuse the Church of being a cult...oh, that's right, he did accuse it of being a cult. Anyway, if any institution or ideology can be accused of thriving on ignorance and oppression it is the institutional ideology of Phil Donahue's style of liberalism.
Of the military, Phil opines, "Supporting the military ought to mean supporting our uniform personnel, improving their housing and their lifestyles...instead of buying all these things that go boom, that make profits for Fortune 500 companies."
Isn't the purpose of the military to defend us? What better way to do that than by blowing up shit? In a Phil Donahue military our bombers will drop flower petals and our missiles will be de-targeted from those non-existent threats of China, North Korea, and Iraq and aimed at the real threat to America; the Fortune 500 companies. And while you're at it, Phil, how about retargeting some of those big-boom missiles toward the homes of daytime talk show hosts.
The 'things that go boom' phrase is classic Donahue. He has been using that line for decades and it exposes his outright hostility to all things military. In a 1988 exchange with Pat Buchanan, Phil said, "You and the Reagan ideologues have spent us into oblivion—our children are going to have to pay this bill—and you step forward, like some religious figure saying, 'more bombs, more bullets’." Phil, I cannot believe that out of 100,000 sperm, you were the quickest. As is so often the case, you didn't have a clue then as to what you were talking about, and I’m certain your new show will prove you don't have a clue now. You are living proof that if an imbecile is given a microphone and put in front of a camera, someone somewhere will take them seriously.
Need a clue as to how close to the insane asylum Phil Donahue is? Phil said of Ralph Nader, "I believe he is America's No. 1 private citizen of the 20th century." Okay, Phil, so real heroes like the Wright Brothers, Jonas Salk, Albert Einstein and Edwin Hubble all take a back seat to the guy who became a millionaire destroying the Corvair. These men were true geniuses who through their work changed the entire course of history for the betterment of mankind. And Ralph Nader? If Nader and Donahue had been spreading their brand of socialism in the early 20th century they would have attacked the Wright Brother's machine as too dangerous to fly, the polio vaccine as too risky to use, Hubble's research as a waste of money better spent on a single-payer health care system, and the many accomplishments of Albert Einstein would have been ignored as Donahue attacked him for being infatuated with things that go boom.
I believe that you, Phil Donahue, bear a great deal of responsibility for the tawdriness of television talk shows, the sensationalism of the evening news, the coarsening of our culture, and the erosion of standards of decency in television programming. So in my book, that puts you damn near the bottom on the list of America's private citizens of the 20th century. Down there with Ralph Nader, Leopold and Lobe, and the guy who decided the Brady Bunch Variety Show should see the light of day. I long for the day your head goes boom.
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.