|
|
|
include("inserts/navigation_upper.htm"); ?>
|
.
.
with comments by David Bruce
|
| I
receive a lot of e-mail. I am not able to post all the mail. I have
included a good sampling, however. If the subject is the same I might
group the newer messages with similar older ones. Also, my response
may appear a few days after the original posting. I can't do HJ everyday.
You must include your "name" and e-mail address within your comment
if you want it posted, otherwise it will not be posted (there is a privacy
issue here and we respect that). I do, however, encourage you to give
your "name" and e-mail so others can respond to you personally.
|
|
E-mail and Comments:
|
|
This
page was last updated on September 4, 2001
|
|
JOHN
DOMINIC CROSSAN
Subject: Peter_Jennings_Jesus
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
From: "Bob Cochran"
I have recently been
looking into the things said and written by John Dominic Crossan. I first
learned of him perhaps six years ago, when I read Jesus Under Fire.
The most recent reading
I have done includes Would The Real Jesus Please Stand Up, wherein Dr.
Crossan debates Dr. William Lane Craig, and an article called "Almost
The Whole Truth," by Dr. Crossan (it can be found at http://www.westarinstitute.org/Periodicals/4R_Articles/Crossan_bio/crossan_b
io.html).
I have spent some
time puzzling over Dr. Crossan's presumptions, presuppositions and his
agenda. I don't claim to have these figured out.
While Dr. Crossan
has a pleasant public personna with a goodly measure of wit and charm,
and while his words are usually couched in gentility, I am offended by
his claims to intellectual integrity and honesty.
In Would The Real
Jesus Please Stand Up, Dr. Crossan had ample opportunity to coherently
explain why he holds the presuppositions that he does. When he stated
his objections to Jesus' scolding of the Pharisees (mind you, he also
asserted that he didn't believe Jesus really said these mean things, even
expressing regret that such material made it into the Gospels), and impled
that one of Dr. Craig's statements during the debate had the same kind
of mean-spiritedness that Jesus' words had, he could at least have given
a decent argument as to WHY he thinks Jesus probably did not scold the
Pharisees as the Gospels record. Does Dr. Crossan believe it is anti-Semitic
to assert that SOME of the Pharisees in Jesus' time were hypocrites who
deserved a good chewing-out, and that Jesus may indeed have given it to
them publicly?
Dr. Crossan seems
to be one of the chief culprits, if not THE chief culprit in promoting
the revisionistic and now quite popular idea that the Jewish leaders did
not seek to have Jesus executed, but that it was the Romans who decided
to do it. If Dr. Crossan acknowledges Jesus' scolding of the Pharisees
(which was probably done in front of witnesses, thus mightily embarrassing
and infuriating the Pharisees), then he would have to acknowledge that
they had ample reason to want him killed. OH, but that's politically incorrect
-- you can't SAY that these days.
Maybe Dr. Crossan
really believes he is intellectually honest. He occasionally allows for
prejudices he may have. He even offers possible explanations for his prejudices.
I don't believe this
lets him off the hook. He has made many strange assertions about what
is and what is not historical about the Gospels. Many of his assertions
strike me as pure conjecture (conjecture that is offered to support who-knows-what
agenda) disguised as scholarly, well-researched conclusions.
That Dr. Crossan has
spent an enormous amount of time studying the Bible, I have no doubt.
Most of us will never be even knee-high to him in terms of Biblical scholarship.
In reading his resume, one would naturally conclude that he is possessed
of great discipline -- all the more reason he should be held to a high
standard in explaining his odd assertions.
Maybe it is precisely
his arrogance regarding the extent of his studies that makes him think
he can dismiss certain things as symbolical and non-historical with little
or no adequate explanation.
Bob Cochran
|
|
JEWISH
GUYS
Subject: Superman
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
From: Roger
While at times I'm not really sure if the whole web page isn't tongue-in-cheek
(e.g. "Krypton sounds like Tikkum olam") most of your arguments are actually
quite compelling. But why would two nice Jewish boys invent a hero who
is Christ-like? Were S&S Jews For Jesus, perhaps, or do you think that
they didn't realize the parallels themselves, and that somehow God intervened?
Either way, I'm telling all my friends about your site. Thanks!
Response:
It was Mario Puzo, the Catholic, that wrote the movie and not the Jewish
guys. And thanks for the kind words. -David
|
|
LINKS
TO UNEDITED VERSION?
Subject: Jesus the miniseries
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
From: Palma
Hello I currently
own a copy of the above, but apparantly it is not the unedited copy. You
have links on your website to amazon.com to purchase the vhs, how can
I tell if it is the unedited "international" verison of the mini series.
Now that I know that version exists, I would like a copy.
Any help will be greatly
appreciated.
Thank you in advance
Palma
Response:
to get acopy in the U.S. -DavidI wish it was available, but there is no
way
|
|
ONLY
INTELLEGENT SHOW ON TELEVISION
Subject: lefemme nikita
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
From: Marlene
I LOVED LEFEMME NIKITA
AS IT WAS THE ONLY INTELLIGENT SHOW ON TELEVISION FOR THE ADULT AUDIENCE
AND PERHAPS IT GAVE US A CHANCE TO DREAM THAT WE COULD SOMEHOW MAKE THE
WORLD A BETTER PLACE ALBEIT FANTASY LAND.
|
|
RESPONSES
FROM NEWSLETTER 26
PHILIPPIANS
4:8
Subject: About_R-Rated_Newsletter_26
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: David
I only have some questions:
1.How does Philippians 4:8 relate to Mark 7:15?
2.In Mark 7:19, my
version in parenthesis states "(When Jesus said this, he meant that no
longer was any food unclean for people to eat.)" New Century Version.
How does food relate to R-rated movies? (Kosher food,
Kosher eye candy, same principle)
3.Here is an excerpt
from Matthew Henry's Commentary regarding the Mark 7:15-23 section:
Now that which he
goes about to set them right in, is, what the pollution is, which we
are in danger of being damaged by, v. 15. (1.) Not by the meat we eat,
though it be eaten with unwashen hands; that is but from without, and
goes through a man. But, (2.) It is by the breaking out of the corruption
that is in our hearts; the mind and conscience are defiled, guilt is
contracted, and we become odious in the sight of God by that which comes
out of us; our wicked thoughts and affections, words and actions, these
defile us, and these only. Our care must therefore be, to wash our heart
from wickedness. 3. He gives his disciples, in private, an explication
of the instructions he gave the people. They asked him, when they had
him by himself, concerning the parable (v. 17); for to them, it seems,
it was a parable. Now, in answer to their enquiry, (1.) He reproves
their dulness; "Are ye so without understanding also? Are ye dull also,
as dull as the people that cannot understand, as dull as the Pharisees
that will not? Are ye so dull?'' He doth not expect they should understand
every thing; "But are ye so weak as not to understand this?'' (2.) He
explains this truth to them, that they might perceive it, and then they
would believe it, for it carried its own evidence along with it. Some
truths prove themselves, if they be but rightly explained and apprehended.
If we understand the spiritual nature of God and of his law, and what
it is that is offensive to him, and disfits us for communion with him,
we shall soon perceive, [1.] That that which we eat and drink cannot
defile us, so as to call for any religious washing; it goes into the
stomach, and passes the several digestions and secretions that nature
has appointed, and what there may be in it that is defiling is voided
and gone; meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, but God shall
destroy both it and them. But, [2.] It is that which comes out from
the heart, the corrupt heart, that defiles us. As by the ceremonial
law, whatsoever (almost) comes out of a man, defiles him (Lev. 15:2;
Deu. 23:13), so what comes out from the mind of a man is that which
defiles him before God, and calls for a religious washing (v. 21); From
within, out of the heart of men, which they boast of the goodness of,
and think is the best part of them, thence that which defiles proceeds,
thence comes all the mischief. As a corrupt fountain sends forth corrupt
streams, so doth a corrupt heart send forth corrupt reasonings, corrupt
appetites and passions, and all those wicked words and actions which
are produced by them.
How do these thoughts
coincide with your own? Could it be that Jesus is talking about things
that are amoral, but used by the Pharisees to create ridiculous laws?
Food, in and of itself is amoral just as music is (music, not lyrics).
Being neither right nor wrong. (What was about food
in Jesus' day -is about pop culture "food" in our day. The Church
has become the Pharisees -so worried about the leaven of the world -so
worried about the food for the eyes and ears -so worried that that our
works will not merit God's grace -so worried that Rock n Roll will keep
us out of Heaven -so worried that an R-rated movie will put us in Hell.
Yes sir, the Pharisees know how to use guilt, manipulation, suppression,
fear, and condemnation).
While I whole-hearted
agree with you that we should not take ourselves out of the world, Jesus
did admonish us to not be of it (No he did not -John
17 is clear- the action of not being "of" the world is something
God does for us. It is not something we do). When I discuss secular
music with my youth, I approach the subject much as you do. I point out
the lyrics and talk to them about how they can use them to witness to
their friends. I don't listen to secular music (I am
sorry to hear this), because it's just too depressing (and,
I find contemporary baby boomer "Christian" music depressing
-Should I be directed by me feelings, as you are?), but that is
what gives us as Christians such a tremendous opportunity to reach out
with a message of hope. If we can relate these messages on a spiritual
level without having what goes in effect us (I think this is where Mark
7:20-23 comes in), we can have a huge impact for Christ. I will not actively
encourage any Christian to view R-rated movies or listen to secular music
for fear that they are not as strong in there faith as I am (Hmm).
I would recommend your website for insight with how to use these items
as a door to open spiritual conversation. I think you are on target with
how you are relating these movies to Jesus, but without a good spiritual
backbone, seeing R-rate movies may make a weaker Christian stumble (and,
I view idolatrous "family" centered baby boomer churches as
dangerous to those weak in the faith).
I think you are experiencing
the same resistance as groups like P.O.D., Jars of Clay, Six Pence None
the Richer, and Chevelle from the "Christian" crowd because they don't
understand the reason behind the music. These Roaring Lambs understand
that you don't reach the sick by singing to the well. That's my main beef
with Christian Radio. There are only a few stations that "get it right",
RadioU and KADU for example. (You come so close to
the truth and yet you keep an arms length away. How come?)
All this to say, keep
up the good work (Thank you). I will continue
to use it as a resource, but not as a green light to see whatever I want
to see (you are free). If it were up to me,
I'd be watching x-rated stuff (addicting time sumps,
indeed), but I know that it's about what Jesus would have me do,
not my own sinful desires.
Thanks! David
Response:
You are so kind. Thank you. I guess it goes without saying that we 180
degrees different. It seems to me that Christianity has become more about
personal "holiness" and less about Jesus. It is interesting
to note that the first 4 of the Ten Commandments have to do with our relationship
to God, and the last 6 have to do with our relationship with others. There
is not a single commandment about personal issues. It's not about us (me
and my personal issues), it's about others, it's about God. There is a
danger in all these personal "holiness" issues, please read
the two next letters -and weep. -David
YES,
YES AND YES
Subject: Intolerance_at_church_Newsletter_26
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: "maria"
I AM A BELIEVER WHO
MOST CERTAINLY WOULDN'T STEP FOOT IN CHURCH ANYMORE. I HAVE SEEN THEM
ALL. FROM THOSE WHO TOLD ME IT WAS A SIN FOR ME TO WEAR A BATHING SUIT,
DRINK A GLASS OF WINE, AND BE DIVORCED. I HAVE DONE ALL THREE AND DON'T
FEEL CONDEMNED BY MY GOD, JUST BY MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS. AMAZING. I
CONTINUE TO BE WHAT I FEEL GOD WANTS ME TO BE, AND I CONTINUE TO ENJOY
MY WINE AND WEAR MY BATHING SUIT.
SINCERELY, MARIA FROM RHODE ISLAND
Response:
I know what you mean. Can you imagine wine drinking Jesus showing up at
such a church? I can tell you Jesus found very good followship with the
woman five times divorced at the well! -David
Very
impressed with your site for I am a spiritual being who loves God and
does not relate to church
Subject: Victimized_Christian_Newsletter#26
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: maria
I have been around
the block over and over from every denomination under the stars, then
to "The Academy For Future Scientists" , in Los Gatos, California. Then,
back to radically church beings. And, now that I have turned 50 this year,
my view is God made all of us, he even made aliens. Who are we to judge
anyone? You have a wonderful site and I am very impressed. I love God,
although, I dislike his church people, not all, but, those who are so
narrowminded to put others down. How dare any of us attempt to judge each
other.
I am a screenwriter
and probably will one day get hung by some radical christians for what
I am creating. How very sad. Those that do the judging are usually the
ones who have much to be judged. (Not that I'm judging). God must surely
be proud of you! Keep up the great work.
God Bless, love Maria from Rhode Island
Response:
Thank you, I hope others will understand that narrow-minded judgmental
churchgoers are the poison within. It is not R-rated screenwriters that
are destroying the church. We need more R-rated truth and fewer G-rated
lies. God bless you in all you do! -David
|
|
SPECTACULAR!
SPECTACULAR!
Subject: Moulin_Rouge
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
From: Jessica
David, Here's the
site address to Spectacular! Spectacular! I mentioned in my past post.
http://twodiamonddogs.tripod.com
It isn't too much just yet. I'm working on an extensive update on my link
page at the moment.
Sincerely, Jessica
|
|
CHRIST
AND PAGANISM DON'T AMALGAMATE TOGETHER AS YOU ASSERT
Subject: Mithras
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: "Bobby"
Dear
Dave,
The correlation you presume between myth and Christ is an Atheistic Lie
(Hmm!). Their is no such
correlation between the writings of Paul or anyone in the Bible, to paganism,
however it may manifest itself. All paganism you make reference to is
the product of the apostate Catholic Church of the Roman Empire ages.
They incorporated a Sunday sabbath for instance, to unify the pagans and
Christians, and to separate the Christians from the Jews who were dispised
at the time (they were not around). Catholics
instituted paganism not the Bible (actually
the pagans instituted paganism). Christmas,
easter, and any other Catholic precept is not found in the scriptures
(the words Bible, Trinity, are not in the Bible
either). Please clarify exactly what your
intent is here. The Bible has no pagan aspects in it, all are derived
from hebrew theology, the pagan aspects resulted from the Catholic Church.
END OF STORY. (So you are anti-Catholic, anti-Pope,
anti-Mother Teresa, anti-Christmas, anti-Easter, and anti-Sunday, anti-Billy
Graham, anti everything! I'll bet you are a real drag to be around. I
mean, good grief. you probably even hate the cute little Easter Bunny.
I suppose you'd never be a Pagan Santa Claus in the mall. Hate, hate,
hate. Anti-this anti-that. Do you think this somehow gains points with
God?)
May Yahweh bless,
Bobby Aleckson
Response:
The early Roman Catholic Church was sheer genius. They did indeed use
common points in myth to connect people to Jesus. All major myth points
to Jesus. Long live pagan myth. Long live Hollywood. Long live the Catholics.
I love all of it. I even like Christmas (formerly Mithras' birthday) and
I so enjoy eating chocolate Pagan Easter Bunny Easter eggs on that Pagan
Day AKA Easter. I think you are missing all the fun. - David, the Pagan
Christian and myth lover.
|
|
MOVIE
SHOWS THE TRUTH
Subject: Exorcist
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: Stearn
First of all I would
like to say that I love this film. I believe that this is the closest
portrayal of satan that any movie has ever had. Satan is usually portrayed
in movies as some middle aged man walking around in a suit and killing
people. I don't think that is satan.
This film also shows
that even christians have struggles with their faith. (Father Kerras)
I don't think that it shows that christians are weak, and I don't think
it glorifies evil. I believe that this movie shows the truth.
|
|
THE
ANGEL STORY
Subject: The_Pledge
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: "MG
The story is "The
Angel" by Hans Christian Andersen, and can be found at http://hca.gilead.org.il/xref.html.
Reading it we find more clues to the film, including hints about the beginning
and end. "The Angel" tells not only of children who die but of a "poor
field-flower, that once lay withered and cast away on a heap of rubbish
in a narrow, dark street." The film opens with Nicholson walking in a
dry desert, like a "poor field-flower withered and cast away on a heap
of rubbish." His lips move and one might think he is praying. I thought
of Moses in the wilderness. Hovering overhead are birds (doves?) representing
angels and the lost children. As the film unfolds we see Nicholson entering
a different culture, "in but not of" that world. He buys the gas station
to fully enter that culture to bring salvation by waiting for the killer.
He has made a promise by his "soul's salvation" to find the killer. When
he is denied ("vengeance is mine, says the Lord ") he cannot keep his
promise. Nicholson, like Moses, doesn't get to see the "land of promise
" and, we presume, dies in the desert, having come very close to succeeding.
If we apply the ending of the Anderson story to the film, we might feel
better: "Then the Almighty pressed all the flowers to His heart; but He
kissed the withered field-flower, and it received a voice. Then it joined
in the song of the angels, who surrounded the throne, some near, and others
in a distant circle, but all equally happy."
|
|
5 TRUE
SECRETS!
Subject: Blair_Witch_2
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
From: Neil Croke
Watching through the
book of shadows i have found the 5 secrets of Esrever while most of you
seem to be mixed up with the hidden words alot have found. These are all
clearly visions. Rug : When stephen leaves tristans room and reenters
the rug has disappeared. Water : When tristan has the vision in the water
a stick-figure floats into the screen from the right. Grave : When the
group are leaving the cemetary a grave on the left of the screen casts
an impossible shadow of a stick-figure which quickly dissappears. Mirror
: When Josh is being cross-examined at the police station when the sherif
crosses the mirror a false reflection of an old man is reflected. Door
: When the sherif is watching the video of josh hiding erica,s body in
the closet look very closely at the door on the left, in 5 of the small
pains of glass in a sideways U shape are the faces of the 5 tourist victims
who were disembowled by the group. (I may be the very first to find this
:D ) Also on a different note when tristan looks out the window to see
the owl in the screen before hand when you can see the hole window look
closly and you can clearly see a vision of the witch standing looking
in at her. I also know ALOT more secrects, if you wish to know more E-mail
me at ncroke@yahoo.co.uk
Neil Croke
|
|
|
You
are on Comments page 107
|
Index
to all the comments May 03 to Sep 12, 2001
|
For
more recent comments click here
Go to page 109 Sep 08-12, 2001
Go to page 108 Sep 01-07, 2001
Go to page 107 Aug 30-31, 2001
Go to page 106 Aug 26-29, 2001
Go to page 105 Aug 24-25, 2001
Go to page 104 Aug 21-23, 2001
Go to page 103 Aug 18-20, 2001
Go to page 102 Aug 12-17, 2001
Go to page 101 Aug 07-11, 2001
Go to page 100 Aug 03-06, 2001
Go to page 99 Aug 01-02, 2001
Go to page 98 July31, continued
Go to page 97 July28-31, 2001
Go to page 96 July 20-27 2001
Go to page 95 July16-19, 2001
Go to page 94 July 07-15, 2001
Go to page 93 July
01-06, 2001
Go to page 92 June 23-30, 2001
Go to page 91 June 20-22, 2001 |
Go
to page 90 June 15-19, 2001
Go to page 89 June 13-14, 2001
Go to page 88 June 12, coninued
Go to page 87 June 11-12, 2001
Go to page 86 June 11, coninued
Go to page 85 June 11, 2001
Go to page 84 June 10, coninued
Go to page 83 June 10, coninued
Go to page 82 June 09-10, 2001
Go to page 81 June 03-08, 2001
Go to page 80 June 01-03, 2001
Go to page 79 May 29-31, 2001
Go to page 78 May 24-28, 2001
Go to page 77 May 22-23, 2001
Go to page 76 May 22 coninued
Go to page 75 May 12-21, 2001
Go to page 74 May 06-11, 2001
Go to page 73 May 03-05, 2001
For earlier comments click here
|
|
Your
Comments.
Post your thoughts for all to read.
Please include your "name." I will not post your e-mail
address unless you want me to.
CLICK HERE
Comments_E-mail
Your
Private Comments.
I will not post these comments. What are your personal
thoughts? I also welcome your spiritual concerns and prayer needs.
I will correspond with you, usually within two weeks.
CLICK HERE
Private_Comments_E-mail
Hollywood
Jesus News Letter
Receive the Hollywood Jesus Newsletter FREE.
Sign up here
|
|
| |
|
|