First, allow me to be very clear on several points. I mean this, if you choose to respond, keep these points in mind and spare me insinuation and presumption. I truly do find responding to religious fanatics to be tedious, especially religious fanatics who don't know they are religious fanatics since they don't know what a religious fanatic is.

Okay, the points:

I am not and have never been, a member of any church, sect, cult, denomination, etc. I do not attend any church, this isn't to say that I don't visit churches from time to time (meaning rarely). I am, merely, a Christian.

I don't have a very high regard for 'wealthy' churches, 'mega' churches, or 'popular' churches. I make no particular judgement on any particular church, it is a habit of mine to avoid such institutions. I do tend to have a low opinion of Tele-evangelist, I think the vast majority of them are con-artists, I suspect Hagee is one of those.

I believe that Hell is the absolute separation from God. I believe that the fire and brimstone stuff is a description of the feeling of that separation. I'm educated enough to know how ancient languages work. Those who don't want to be with God are allowed their place in reality. I think the failing is the overlooking by those people of the nature of the Grace of God and how that Grace makes a world that would otherwise be intolerable by a conscious mind, tolerable.

I view the habit of focusing on eschatology, end-times prophesy, and such, to be a distraction for a Christian. Christ told us to focus on now, doing otherwise is disobedient.

Now, I'm going to make an objective, secular, rebuttal of the video. I don't particularly like hit pieces against Christian organizations. This isn't because the targeted organization is or isn't at fault, it is because of the larger agenda so often behind the piece.

We must always keep in mind the fact that one of the primary methods of effecting Marxism is through assaulting religion. This is very important. Thought it certainly isn't always the motivation of the person or group targeting the religious organization, the question must, nonetheless be asked before assuming the piece is itself objective.

I do want to make a few points about Jews before I get into this. One Jew is not the same as another. In the United States, many of the Jews are from what became the western Jews, or Ashkenazim (German Jews). This is the group that speaks Yiddish. These Jews are largely secular, I'm not sure of what percentage, but I'm thinking that it is a quite large percentage. Thus, these Jews are what one could call racial Jews. This can be contrasted with Hasidic Jews who are both racially Jews and religiously Jews. I think this is a big difference, others may not. It must also be noted that many Jews in the world are in fact not racially Jews. Some argue that much of the Ashkenazi are more closely related to the Kazars (the Kazar empire was composed of Turkic peoples who made Judaism the official religion around the ninth century I think). I suspect this is wrong, but it is worth noting.

The secular Jews tend to be Left leaning and many were involved in the Socialist movements of the early decades of the twentieth century. And thus, we return to the Marxist agenda. No, I'm not saying this fellow is a Marxist, I have no way of knowing. I write this as a prelude that those who have miss-assumed a meaning to this gentleman's origin not be confused by his motivation. You cannot know it and there is enough of historical/philosophical evidence to demand a better understanding of it.

Finally, on to the video:

First, belief in the 'Second Coming of Christ' has nothing to do with belief that Armageddon should be 'forced' upon the world by the actions of people. The text is clear that no one will know the time, and thus, obviously, no one can cause the time.

Second, I don't particularly believe that Christians should tie themselves to the modern Jewish peoples. Largely because I don't know that these peoples are in fact Jews. Some are, some aren't. I have no way of telling one from another. I do believe the promises by God to the Hebrews was as racial one (Jews are, basically, members of the tribe of Judea, the tribe of Israel diffused into the populations of the Assyrian empire).

Third, do they lobby Congress for a 'unilateral' attack on Iran? The impression I get from this person is that the Christians are saying that we must just up and attack Iran. I think that is a peculiar insinuation considering that an attack to prevent their gaining a nuclear weapon is certainly an acceptable choice, among a list of choices. I doubt you can find anyone of credible intelligence that believes that Iran having a nuke is good (yes, you can find 'truthers' and other kooks). Most, including Obama, say that a nuclear Iran is not acceptable, and that the military option is there. So, the idea of attacking Iran, is not only not -out there-, but is in fact a reasonable idea.

Fourth, there is organizational policy, and there are the individual opinions of its members. The two do not equate. The gentleman in this video doesn't seem to understand this. That should, I think, be a red light to any viewer.

Hagee's minions? Why cast an evil light if you are trying to convince a neutral audience?

It must be noted that the Jews await the Messiah (by this I mean those who worship). The argument is not that the Messiah will not come, the argument is whether or not Jesus was the Messiah. Jews that don't worship are, in my opinion, just another race. I'm afraid that I don't give people much credence because of their race unless it is a matter of clear racism. I saw none of this here. A Christian proselytizing to a secular Jew is no more meaningful than a Christian proselytizing to a Laotian. Also note, there are Messianic Jews that worship Christ as the Messiah, since, **drumroll** the original Christians were Jews. Also note, that in the very beginning Christians sent support to Israel.

It really bothers me when a Christian says he or she is 'looking forward to Armageddon. We are told in the bible to not do this. Sadly, too many Christians have no real idea what the bible says. Also, I'm not sure I buy the Rapture. It may happen, it may not. I'm, at this moment in my understanding, disinclined to accept this. However, I don't find a problem with people looking forward to the Rapture.

I have no interest in the Left Behind series of books. This stuff is extra-Biblical and thus, on the face of it, of questionable merit. To use such a reference is foolish.

Anti-Christ stuff, like eschatology, is a bad sign. When it comes from a Christian's mouth, I presume ignorance on that Christians part until I see otherwise. THE Anti-Christ mentioned specifically in the bible was likely Nero. Anti-Christs do exist, but all they mean is either, people who are anti Christ, or, world leaders who are the antithesis of Christ. Oh well.

The noting of Lieberman was worthy, but, I think that the tone had greater meaning. The Left is quite busy attacking Lieberman. Much of this comes in the form of marching orders from MoveOn.org, from what I've seen.

The facts of Muslim/Christian and Muslim/Jewish interaction is well documented in history. Yep, I know about Agra, but for every Agra that can be listed I can list a hundred Muslim massacres. The enslavement, rape, and murder, by Muslims, around the Mediterranean shoreline, itself, vastly overwhelms anything Christians have done. I don't even have to go to India, Pakistan, Africa, blech, the list is too long. Any commentary about the danger of Islam by Christians or Jews is perfectly justified.

Personally I could care less who people give their money to. The willingness by anti-Christian groups and media to use this canard to illustrate, well, I'm not sure what they're getting at, is despicable. People give a hundred bucks to go throw up at a rock concert, and thousands to throw up at the Superbowl, fifteen bucks to a religious parsonage is not only irrelevant, it is just. Pay for your entertainment!

Commentary on a man's income is pure Leftist dogma. Why is it that no one begrudges Matt Damon his millions? Does he do something functionally different? The point I hear a person use this argument, I lose all respect for their intelligence. Either the person him or herself isn't to bright, or they are the type who would take advantage of people who aren't too bright.

The relationship between God and the Jews is written in the Torah and elaborated upon in the Nevi'im and the Ketuvim. The man's question is meaningless. Worse, when it is heard by people who have no knowledge of the subject, it poses a serious risk of eliciting an incorrect interpretation. This is, in my opinion, a seriously misleading line of inquiry.

The 'I'm a victim' routine was a fitting end. In my opinion the conference had every right to expel this individual, not because of who he was, but because it was their conference. It appeared they had some woman with credentials lying for them. I liked how they split the shots of that little group up, what craftiness!

Secular Jews in America in many ways are not friends of Israel. Why would they be? Yes, some do send money. But, considering they support a party that is not a friend to Israel, I think that it is safe to say that they don't have Israel's best interest in mind. By my estimation their relationship to Israel is little different than my relationship with Germany. Yes, I'm racially German, but otherwise, I could care less about Germany.

About all I can do in response to this video, on a personal level, is shrug. I think these things need to be done. I like the adversarial system we have and wish more conservative people were like this and were willing to invade Secularist religious conferences. If nothing else, they're more entertaining (I'll prove that in video).

It is very important to understand that you weren't watching an objective reporter do an expository on a subject. It is very important to view this individual as you would a Muslim, or a Buddhist, at a Christian conference. Not because he is a Jew, the only relevance that had to the video was his use of it to feign indignation. Because secularism is practiced as faith it has become a religion. It is Orwellian to allow people who have blind beliefs in dogmas that are logically demonstrable as false, who have a fanciful statement of origins, and who proselytize through force, to continue to present themselves as independent, objective, commentators when it comes to competing religions.

Ask yourself this question, "Why would anyone but a practitioner of a competing religion care about another religion?" A factual atheist would not. That would be about as silly as an atheist saying g*ddamn, which of course in the language of atheism means, nothingdamn, and that is just, well, silly.

Anyway, Hagee has no cred with me. I tend to agree with Hanagraaff about these guys.

http://www.jesus-is-savio...es/john_hagees_heresy.htm

Joel.


image