Comments on: More on Thomas Jefferson and Christianity

By: Throbert McGee

Throbert McGee — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:54 +0000

Zoe — bear in mind that neither “Sadducee” nor “Pharisee” was a rank or title of office, such as “Doctor” or “Senator” or “Priest” or “Bishop,” etc. — rather, they were denominational terms, like “Presbyterian” or “Catholic” or “Greek Orthodox,” etc.
Thus, trying to map “Sadducee” onto “Vatican Hierarchy” is problematic because there were in fact Sadducees who belonged to the “laity,” and were not in any sense members of a “clergy” caste.

By: Throbert McGee

Throbert McGee — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:54 +0000

Could we not say that Jesus was the first Evangelical Jew?

Actually, no, since the Pharisees were already “evangelizing” long before Jesus was born — as Jesus himself acknowledges in Matt. 23:15 ! Although, mind you, he says that the Pharisees were doing a sloppy-ass job of it:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.
In plain language, the accusation here is that the Pharisaic Jews were expending a great deal of proactive effort to win converts to Judaism from among the pagans, but evidently their focus was on the quantity of converts, not on the quality of individual conversions — so they ended up with a bunch of “new Jews” who had the stereotypical hotheaded zeal of fresh converts, but with a very poor understanding of the Torah.
From Googling, I get the impression that Jewish proselytizing of Gentiles was definitely going on in the late Second Temple Period (like, say, 200 BC – 70 AD), but there is scholarly disagreement about how common it actually was. So it may be that Jesus was exaggerating a bit when he said that the Pharisees were so eager to get converts that they would travel over land and sea to do it.

By: Emily K

Emily K — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:53 +0000

Sure, Tim, and when people say “that’s so gay” they mean “gay” as in “stupid,” not “gay” as in “homo.” And if you really don’t think there’s anything analogous there, then I’m not going to try to explain it further.
Christians look at their gospels and see them as history books – or at least, windows in time to previous peoples. Too many times Christians have said, “Jesus was turning Judaism upside down. He was a revolutionary.” But this notion, while romantic, is absolutely false. He would have had no more “revolutionary” a place among 1st century Jerusalem than any other sectarian. Even Shammai and Hillel, BOTH Pharisees, had sharp disagreements theologically, to the point of fostering separate schools of thought.
Western civilization is built upon triumphalism – covenant theology – whether one realizes it or not. I’d be a lot kinder in my comparisons if I weren’t surrounded by such utter ignorance most of the time.
You get tired of kindly trying to explain.

By: Gene Chase

Gene Chase — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:51 +0000

Jefferson, would not be comfortable religiously at evangelical churches today

Most Christians from throughout history would not be comfortable with the breezy way in which evangelical churches today treat God as a buddy instead of in holy awe.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:51 +0000

A little joke:-
Q: What is the difference between a religious fundamentalist and God?
A: God does not think he is a religious fundamentalist.