Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Readers Write: The Religious Left Fights Back

By Jackie Mauro, AlterNet. Posted August 10, 2005.


Van Jones' essay about Rabbi Michael Lerner's 'Spiritual Activism' conference provoked a multi-faceted debate among AlterNet readers.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Jackie Mauro

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In The Religious Left Fights Back, Van Jones referred to Rabbi Lerner's 'Spiritual Activism' conference, encouraging Lefties to open up to the (marginalized) religious folks among them.

In their comments, some AlterNet readers responded with enthusiasm, but others remained unsure.

The conference -- held the week of June 25 -- was Lerner's launch pad for the Network of Spiritual Progressives (NSP). The NSP aims to unite "religious, spiritual and 'spiritual but not religious' progressives" across the country around shared progressive goals. Lerner hopes to "end 'religio-phobia' among progressives," overcoming the Left's mistrust of religious ideas. He also aims to halt the Right's monopoly on religion, and their abuse of it in the political sphere.

Jones adheres passionately to Lerner's goals. As a Christian African-American progressive, he wrote of being outraged by the "shocking levels of anti-religious bigotry" encountered among progressives.

Religion has played a prominent role in the Left's victories throughout history, Jones argued. He remembered the Civil Rights struggle as the last great victory of the Left, and reminds us of how "heroes and she-roes came marching boldly out of church-houses." Likewise, the Underground Railroad was run largely by Quakers, and religious congregations were at the head of the Sanctuary Movement, which opposed Reagan's immigration policies.

The religious Left, according to Jones, is already on the move, with "previously apolitical 'spiritual types' getting involved as activists for the first time." Smaller-scale efforts are springing up around the country, such as Rev. Frances Hall Kieschnick's Beatitude Society. These mini-movements, if brought together, will form what Jones sees as "the only type of progressive movement that stands a chance in a country as religious as ours."

Many AlterNet readers agreed with this assessment of America's current political and social atmosphere. One reader in particular was especially open to Jones' assessment, affirming that "the Spiritual Covenant could give the Democrats and the Greens a coherent and spiritually-sensitive platform" which would lend them the unity they need to take back the country. He is also encouraged by the fact that many on the Left are spiritual people; they merely lack "a supportive environment to articulate that spirituality and to connect it to a progressive political agenda." The reader was Michael Lerner himself.

Another reader, Marcos, shares Jones' belief that religion motivates for good. Referring to the Teologoia de la Liberacion, a movement the reader observed firsthand in Colombia where he saw priests and nuns living with and helping the poor, he says: "People saw the need for change and worked with all the tools at hand. It was just that for many Christ was an enormous well of energy for creating that change."

Many feel that the Right has been manipulating Christianity for their own ends, perverting the message of Christ. Billdake writes: "Cold hearted Christian Conservatives should read the Gospels of Christ and apply Christ's teachings to their life, instead of searching the Bible to spin off whatever works for them." Beetruetoyou asks: "Why do these folks only speak of their faith in terms of judgment, hatred, exclusion, power, wealth, the 'Gospel of Greed' as Jim Wallis has called it?"

True Christianity for a number of readers is very far removed from the Christianity of Pat Robertson or George W. Bush. For them, it's about "the truly radical message of Jesus….remember?… love, mercy, forgiveness, generosity, compassion, being with the outcasts of society, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, and on and on" (beetruetoyou). Many readers believe that Christian ideals are progressive ideals.

Some of the progressive religious types Lerner wants to include also weighed in. Paulb describes himself as "a christian who is a 45 year old white male who could not agree with this more."

Bookwoman, a politically moderate Christian, relates her frustration at "being dragged down by the tirades of the Christian Right." Krotos, a Hicksite Quaker and "research scientist who fully accepts that life evolved," denounced the Left's anti-religious sentiment that Jones and Lerner describe: "A lot of liberals, sadly, seem to be too cynical or intellectually lazy to recognize that 'Christian' and 'raving, Bible-thumping wingnut who wants to force his religion on everyone else and return society to the Middle Ages' are not synonymous."

Many readers, on the other hand, did not agree so wholeheartedly with Jones' article. A few readers denied that the Left harbors any intolerance towards religion. Bornxeyed insists "In my experience it is the religious that are the intolerant, close-minded individuals," and adds "It's very rare I see an atheist walk down the street stopping people in an attempt to convert them to athesim or knocking on doors to announce they have witnessed the lack of a god and they are duty-bound to stand in your doorway spewing 'nonsense' until you agree or, at the very least, contribute a few bucks so they can continue to harass the neighborhood."

Joshy1234 believes that accusing the Left of hostility towards religion is not only false, it is actually harmful: "Michael Lerner, Van Jones and others, while clearly providing an important voice for the left, unwittingly amplify the right's bullshit by repeating the charge ad nauseum."


Digg!

Jackie Mauro is an intern at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
WHO'S THE BIGOT?
Posted by: LMNOP on Aug 10, 2005 2:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"As a Christian African-American progressive, he wrote of being outraged by the "shocking levels of anti-religious bigotry" encountered among progressives."

Anti-religious bigotry? The religious invented bigotry. I for one am offended at being called a sinner and a heathen on a daily basis, damaged goods, because I don't buy into their random and arbitrary susperstitions. I am described and thought of by members of these cults as a reject of the Creator, a spiritual and intellectual deformity, morally corrupt, a sick soul worthy of eternal torment. Them's fightin' words!

And I am expected to contain my contempt and refrain from being offensive to them? You know what? If that's how you view me, F**k you.

They try to invade every aspect of my life and force me to conform to their bizarre values and standards, and then call me anti-Christian for trying to keep their hocus-pocus confined to their homes and churches.

And I'm the bigot and the oppressor?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: Ellie1
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: errandchild
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: nakis
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: errandchild
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: errandchild
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: grumbler
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: errandchild
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: Justwayne
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: humanity101
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: ILoveyou
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: errandchild
» RE: WHO'S THE BIGOT? Posted by: LMNOP
» Calm down buddy ! Posted by: rodrigo_c
» RE: Calm down buddy ! Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Calm down buddy ! Posted by: Larry
I invoke Sanhedrin and the Talmudic Method
Posted by: nietgal on Aug 10, 2005 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Joe Lieberman, Orthodox Jew, talmudic, says:
The Declaration of Independence justifies God in the Constitution.

Now I'm not a lawyer or Supreme Court eligible USA citizen, but I know this much law: two principles:
intent
time is of the essence.

So tell me all of you, how can the Declaration of Independence prove the Constitution contains God.
For me, the two principles of law alone prove quite the opposite.

Ask your favorite trustworthy lawyer about just this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My response
Posted by: sondjata on Aug 10, 2005 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
can be seen here:
Garvey's Ghost


wuz, sent to Alternet, sorry portions didn't make it to this article since it dealt specifically with issue Von Jones brought up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Faith Is Private
Posted by: laime22 on Aug 10, 2005 7:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These comments augment my belief that discussions about public issues should never be faith based. If one's faith is the basis of one's conclusions, that's fine, but that should never be the primary basis of discussion. People are inspired to advocate for, say, justice by many different philosophies and beliefs. To acknowledge those roots is one thing, but a personal belief does not prove or disprove the righteousness of the cause. The religions of the world have inspired many admirable actions and many shameful actions. Whatever happened to logic and reason as the tools for debate?
No one should be either included or excluded on the basis of faith. The question is: what does their REASONING add or detract from the issue at hand?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Faith Is Guessing Posted by: LMNOP
Liberation Theology
Posted by: sausage on Aug 10, 2005 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I seems to me that the recently deceased, and on the fast track to canonization, Pope John Paul II put the kibosh on liberation theology at the behest of Ronald Reagan. And I think the saintly old pope's righthand man in stamping out liberation theology is the current Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger.

Good luck in getting this corpse back on its feet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liberation Theology Posted by: joyartist
» RE: Liberation Theology Posted by: LaVieja
» RE: Liberation Theology Posted by: nakis
Find the way to life, not contension
Posted by: texshelters on Aug 10, 2005 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want to reiterate somethings I wrote when the orignal artical first appeared:

1. Why are religous folk so adamant about putting religion into politics? Are they so insecure about their beliefs they need another venue to boost their ideology?

2. You don't need religion to be moral, and moralizing gets in the way of true morality. Being moral without God directing you is perhaps a stronger stance, is it not?

3. If you need God to be a good person, amen, God bless, Shalom, Salom, etc.

4. Any people that politically choose the way to life over the way to death and put the needs of people first can join me in this cause regardless of their religious or non-religious affiliation.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am intollerant.
Posted by: redfrog on Aug 10, 2005 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am glad the people on the "religious left" are taking on the "religious right"; it is high time. So what is it you want from the rest of us who do not subscribe to your particular cult? Understanding that resistance is difficult? You got it. Kudos for joining the fray? Get real. In your long years of disorganization and cowardly silences, you supported the worst offenders from your religion. Some progressives will give you tea and sympathy, the rest of us are rightfully wary of you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I am intollerant. Posted by: joyartist
» RE: I am intollerant. Posted by: nakis
» RE: I am intollerant. Posted by: kittynboi
Progressives need all the allies we can get
Posted by: oldguy51 on Aug 10, 2005 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For progressives it is obvious that there is what is commonly called a right-wing conspiracy. The neo-cons, who have taken over the GOP, primarily represent the wealthy and corporate interests, but have been particularly adept at enlisting fundamentalist christians as foot soldiers and voters in their cause even though in many ways it is against their (the foot soldiers) best economic interests.

However, fundamentalists only represent a fraction of christians and those others whose lives have a spiritual dimension to them. Those of us who are not fundamentalists can give a place for those that are religious/spiritual to express themselves politically, and even undermine the fundamentalists themselves who have a very narrow range of issues (anti-abortion and anti-gay). They don't have a monopoly on God even though it can seem that way. Jim Wallis and Michael Lerner have some very good things to say.

I don't see how it should matter what motivates someone as long as they share similar views. Let's face it, liberals and progressives are getting their butts kicked, and it is allowing for the rise of something very ugly that I don't think anything short of a movement is going to stop. A movement needs lots of people and I don't see the wisdom of disowning and excluding someone simply because of their religious beliefs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

words of wisdom
Posted by: stippolito on Aug 10, 2005 10:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following is attributed to Chief Joseph Nez Perce

We do not want chuches because they will teach us to
quarrel about god.


How can we take our country back with all this bickering? We
all know what needs to be done...let's get at it. Proof of working...Vietnam.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: words of wisdom Posted by: nakis
Treat politics as a commodity, but don't peddle religion.
Posted by: Sojourner on Aug 10, 2005 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The chief enemy of religion is superstition. When religion is advocated as a way of getting something material, it is being corrupted.

Well, then, what is religion for? It's a way of being; it's being willing to make sacrifices. No, not human blood sacrifices. The story of Abraham and Isaac makes that clear.

Religion is a parent's loving care of one's own and other's children. It is giving to those in need. Visiting the prisoner. Comforting the afflicted. And all that not for some reward (that's superstition's ploy) but because it is righteous (think, 'fully human') to do so.

So, when I hear someone tell me that we can get more votes by being more religious, I groan. Yes, that's what the right wing is doing. Please, don't follow that model. Don't 'use' religion; let it use you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You got it! Posted by: Sojourner
a Bill of Rights for the Brotherhood of Men & Women
Posted by: moorejess on Aug 10, 2005 11:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at the heart of this discussion is what is the heart of reality ... Since Gore loss in 2000, and my recognition that the Right had claimed ownership of the moral compass of the country under the name of god, I have been wondering what is the moral center of the Progressive Movement... without getting too abstract, I came to understand, at the heart of the Progressive Movement, there is a mystic heart, a Heart that "knows' we are all fundamentally of the same fabric, and therefore all deserve to be treated well, with dignity, and as equals when it comes to rights, freedoms and responsibilites. Sound Familar, think the Bill of Rights... in these tragic times, one thing a Progressive Political Movement and a Progressive Religious Movement have in common is this essential recognition "the Brotherhood of Men & Women"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Points well taken
Posted by: revsuzanne on Aug 10, 2005 11:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as we, as a society, continue to identify with religions and other thought systems that were dreamed up by people 1,000 or 2,000 or 5,000 years ago, we will probably continue to have inter-religious bashing of one sort or another. That applies to members within different sects of each of those religions and between differing religions.
Every religion probably started with good intent -- the intent to actually help people -- but somehow the zealot-greedheads got hold of the reins and steered the whole thing into an excuse for bigotry and control trips.
Small minds like to be regimentalized, while those of a more questioning nature will typically look at the money trail then seek the God-source within. Always look for the money trail... it is very telling. Who profits from this or that?

Our concern here is that a relatively small but vocal segment of the population is seeking to limit personal rights and do their own bit of social engineering without any concept of the possible repercussions. The neocon use of religion and patriotism is just another cowardly control tactic.... if you don't agree with them you are un-American and a terrorist.

People really need to make their own decisions, and in the course of that, should have the ability to "reset" or make corrections. The neocon agenda is to remove individual autonomy while consolidating all of the wealth in the top 2%, and shipping all of the wage-earning jobs south of the border. There is no concept of sustainability in any of their plots. "Plunder everything" is a neocon family value.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A New Dream
Posted by: nietgal on Aug 10, 2005 12:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wish a group of senior citizens who can read Hebrew would get together with a group of Arabic Muslis and Christians in Saudi Arabia and read TaNaK in side by side, each in their own language. Even follow the the Torah selections. Since the Koran mentions Torah 16 times, certainly the Muslims at least should be curious about what Torah is. Since Hebrew and Arabic, oral, are sister languages, it would be fun. Think any senior group in the USA would start this? What fun. Especially for senior who have lived a lot a life and Torah is all about life. That's what I think liberal left is all about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A New Dream Posted by: moorejess
Liberals
Posted by: ILoveyou on Aug 10, 2005 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberals are anti-religious because they want people to believe that there is absolutely no higher authority than government. When you remove the belief in God, then communism can really flourish, and we all know that communism and liberalism go hand in hand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fascists Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Fascists Posted by: ILoveyou
» RE: Fascists Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Fascists Posted by: spyderbaby
» RE: Fascists Posted by: Lazerai
» RE: Fascists Posted by: outsidea
» RE: Fascists Posted by: IndyElliott
» RE: Liberals Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com
» RE: Liberals Posted by: froggeymonkey
» RE: Liberals Posted by: GreenLibbie
Mercy!
Posted by: beetruetoyou on Aug 10, 2005 9:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now this is a discussion folks! It's so great to finally be able to read about things that matter. Hooray for Lerner's article and the gun powder it was to ignite this dialogue. We need more like it.

However, for those of you who hate Christians, please know that there are many of us who are Christian, liberal, and not at all like the ones you hear about. It is not a choice of just being Christian or liberal. I am both although any more I really hate to call myself Christian. I think Jesus Christ must be mortified to see what has happened in his name. This is certainly not the first time. I view Jesus as the ultimate bleeding heart liberal (literally). It truly saddens me that these people have turned so many people away from faith as a result of their polluting and misusing it.

My faith does give me hope that a higher power, karma, or whatever you want to call the force goodness and love in our universe is involved in bringing down the self righteous as happened in the time of Jesus. It will take us being brave, strong,committed and outspoken to help this happen. There is no way the actions of this government can continue without dire consequences. They will have to pay the price eventually. I really do believe that.

God help us all. We need Barak to run in 08!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mercy! Posted by: IndyElliott
» RE:It's your House ... Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com
» RE: It's your House ... Posted by: beetruetoyou
» RE: Mercy! Posted by: froggeymonkey
» RE: Mercy! Posted by: outsidea
Radical Mystics
Posted by: moorejess on Aug 11, 2005 10:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
now if we could combine the intelligent thoughts here with the intelligent thoughts in the blog next door on the Religious Left Fights Back,
We would have an interesting movement ... Michael Lerner has given voice to this in the Network of Spiritual (consciousness) Progressives. Many of us dropped out in the 60's and 70's to explore our own evolution, these last 30 years, and with the happenings of the last 5 years, I for one am in shock … how did our county get so dumbed down ... just Poss. America needs our voices … maybe it is time for us to come out of our consciousness caves, just possibly we are what is needed... the March of Radical Mystics ... isn’t that where we thought the evolution of consciousness was heading until the fundamental religious of the West and Mid-East went into hypermode ... they are attempting to put the genie back in the bottle, and fighting over who is going to control the lid. The question is not just materialism, the fundamentalist are equally at war with the mystics whether Liberal Theology in the West or Sufi’s in the Middle East, both have been under extreme attack by the fundamentalists on both sides. Or is it true, that the hidden secrets of meditation, yoga, and inquiry into the nature of Reality from the desert and jungle are meant to be kept secret, given how things are going it is hard to say...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blog Next Door is Sam Harris's Widespread Ignorance
Posted by: moorejess on Aug 11, 2005 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
opps, the blog Next Door is Sam Harris's Widespread Ignorance

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Party Line
Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com on Aug 11, 2005 12:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There seems to be one:

That Liberals are just so hostile to Christianity, and just so rude about the way they express it.

All liberals
Against all Christians
Even the Quakers and the Unitarians
So Rude
All Liberals
Against all Christians

Therefore:
We should show how liberal we are by embracing Christian Worship in Public Spaces

Now, the truth is during the Scopes Trial, HL Menkin was damned rude in regard to Southerners, Fundimentalists, working people, and just about anyone who did't sit at the Algonquin Round Table.

And oh yeah Sinclair (Ellmer Gantry) Lewis in 1930-whatever , and whoeveritisIforget who wrote Inherit the Wind ...

those are the straw men the Right Wing have been beating on from that day to this ... and the Hustings just love them for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progresive Conversion
Posted by: Olympiada on Aug 20, 2005 4:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would have to say the hardest thing for me is my conversion to Christianity as a political radical, the absolute hardest! And interesting enough, I find the hardest time comes from the religious fundamentalist and traditionalists. My former progressive community kind of shakes their head at my conversion, but figures it just par for the course. But the religious kind of folk I have been running into make my blood go cold. I come running in here to get strength before I go back out into the religious world, strange to say. Here is where I get my voice on before I let be heard in the church where people are sure to knock me down. I find more respect here then I do out there...then again that could be because I am divorcing my husband and that makes everybody angry with me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus Was Not A Christian
Posted by: blacksheep on Aug 27, 2005 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christianity is not some monolithic ideology that can be easily defined. Within the New Testament, which is supposed to be the Christian, as opposed to Hebrew, scripture, we have two contradictory sources of information. On the one hand we have the synoptic gospels, which are the most reliable sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus, who was a Jew.

Christianity, although it likes to use the synoptic gospels in some minimal sense, actually prefers to minimize them and relativize them to the Pauline doctrines. Paul taught original sin and told his gentile converts that Jesus's sacrificial death should discourage us from attempting to follow Jesus's radically virtuous ways, since his death was a redeeming 'gift' from God for an otherwise utterly corrupt human race.

Therefore, to become righteous, we need only obey Paul's sexist, homophobic rules and confess our obedience to him while continuing to be selfish egomaniacs in every other way. Christianity is the concoction of Paul, a megalomaniac Pharisee who persecuted the followers of Jesus until he realised it wasn't working, so he faked a "conversion" and instead decided to misrepresent Jesus's message to the gentiles, thus containing the Jewish reform movement stared by Jesus. Had Jesus been alive to confront him, you can be sure Paul would have been roundly condemned. And by the way, Paul named himself an apostle, he had never met Jesus, unless you believe in ghosts and believe the words of a liar (Paul) who never ceased to boast of (or defend?) his apostolic credentials to his critics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]