Author Topic: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist  (Read 800 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
Candida Moss, professor of New Testament at the University of Notre Dame, wrote a critical review of Bill O’Reilly’s best-selling book, Killing Jesus. In a Daily Beast column, Moss slammed O’Reilly for not mentioning the free health care offered by Jesus.

Tonight on The Factor, O’Reilly and Moss went head-to-head over the history of Jesus. She called it an “oversight” that O’Reilly failed to mention Jesus’ insistence that the wealthy give away their possessions.

O’Reilly reminded her that his book is not about the doctrine. He said it’s dramatically clear that Jesus stood up for the poor. Moss fired back, “No, it’s a historical fact that he told people that in order to go to heaven they had to give away their possessions.”

O'Reilly told Moss, “You’re taking it literally when these are parables. If you’re going to sit there, professor, as a theology professor at Notre Dame and tell me that everybody on this earth has to sell all their stuff and can’t have anything, or they’re not going to heaven, I’m going to say you’re a loon.”

Candida disagreed, saying, “A rich man is condemned to hell merely for not giving away his possessions.”

O’Reilly called her out for misreading the gospel. He clarified that people have an obligation to help the poor, and that if possessions rule over you, then you will not go to heaven. “But he didn’t say you gotta sell everything, because then you’re going to hell, I’m going to hell and everybody watching is going to hell.”

 “Jesus is not a free market capitalist,” Moss responded. “I think in your book, […] you misrepresent and cherry pick the facts.”

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/10/02/oreilly-battles-notre-dame-professor-who-claims-jesus-was-socialist

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2013, 12:21:19 PM »
I watched this.first she was an arrogant piece of work... She instincts "render unto Cease" means the rich have to giv up all their wealth... that is not what this means and I pitty kids taking he class and being taught the incorrect meaning of the bible.
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2013, 12:32:10 PM »
I watched this.first she was an arrogant piece of work... She instincts "render unto Cease" means the rich have to giv up all their wealth... that is not what this means and I pitty kids taking he class and being taught the incorrect meaning of the bible.

I watched it, too. She is a professor of the New Testament, yet doesn't comprehend the simplest of Jesus' statements, nor her own hypocrisy.

Online andy58-in-nh

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,721
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2013, 12:38:59 PM »
I always imagined Jesus to be an entrepreneur - He turned water into wine, and fed the multitudes with only a single loaf of bread.
Liberalism isn't really about making the world a better place. It's about reassuring the elites that they are good people for wanting to rule over it.

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2013, 01:32:18 PM »
...yet doesn't comprehend the simplest of Jesus' statements, nor her own hypocrisy.

Shouldn't O'Reilly have asked her if she has given away all her possessions? 
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Offline PzLdr

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,421
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2013, 01:42:44 PM »
I watched this.first she was an arrogant piece of work... She instincts "render unto Cease" means the rich have to giv up all their wealth... that is not what this means and I pitty kids taking he class and being taught the incorrect meaning of the bible.

When you render unto Caesar - Caesar ain't no Socialist.  :smokin:
Hillary's Self-announced Qualifications: She Stood Up To Putin...She Sits to Pee

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2013, 02:51:01 PM »
When you render unto Caesar - Caesar ain't no Socialist.  :smokin:


Exactly.   But liberals have been using this since Alan Colmes wrote his book to try and make the case he was.

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2000/04/What-Belongs-To-God.aspx#

 What Belongs to God?
Jesus' famous 'render unto Caesar' saying flummoxed his opponents and leaves today's Christians scratching their heads

BY: Marcus Borg
 
In a famous passage about taxes, Jesus said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Mark 12:13-17; the same passage appears, slightly modified, in Matthew 22:15-22 and Luke 20:20-26).

Over the centuries, many Christians have based their attitudes toward government on this passage. Some have thought that Jesus' statement establishes two separate realms, Caesar's and God's, and that people should render to each what they ask for in their respective realms. This interpretation strikes many Americans as obviously correct, given our separation of church and state.

Yet in their historical context, these words of Jesus had little to do 
with taxation or political authority in general. Jews in the first century paid several taxes: tithes to the Temple (averaging about 21% a year), customs taxes, and taxes on land. The people identified as Jesus' opponents were not questioning taxes in general. Their question was more specific: "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar?"

Caesar, the emperor of Rome, was the head of an imperial domination system. Rome took control of the Jewish homeland in 63 B.C.E. and ruled it through client kings (such as Herod and his sons) and Roman governors.

This domination system benefited the elites who created it. Wealth in the ancient world came primarily from farms. Through a combination of taxation and ownership of farm land, the Roman and native elites of the first century (and most centuries) extracted about two-thirds of agricultural production. The farmers who produced it (90% of the population) got the remaining one-third, leaving them with a subsistence (or worse) level of existence.

Quote
The tax in question was the annual tribute tax to Rome. Jews were divided about this tax. The Temple authorities and their retainers (including Temple scribes) collaborated with Roman rule and endorsed the tax. But Jews sympathetic to the resistance to Roman authority rejected it. Such refusal was the equivalent of sedition.

The question put to Jesus was a trap. Either a yes or no answer would have gotten Jesus in trouble. "Yes" would have discredited him with those who found the imperial domination system reprehensible and unacceptable. "No" would have made him subject to arrest for sedition.

Jesus avoided the trap with two moves. First, he asked his opponents for a coin. When they produced one, Jesus looked at it and asked, "Whose image and inscription is this?"

It was, of course, an image of Caesar (presumably of Tiberius, the current Caesar). Moreover, its inscription heralded Tiberius as "son of the divine Augustus" (that is, son of a divine being) and would have been offensive to many Jews.

Not all coins in the Jewish homeland had images of Caesar, or any other kind of graven image. Out of respect for Jewish law, coins minted by Herod the Great and his son Herod Antipas did not. Many devout Jews avoided using coins with images. Thus, by eliciting from his opponents a coin with a graven image, Jesus discredited them with at least some in the crowd.

The coin bearing Caesar's image set up Jesus' second move, the famous saying itself: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

In context, the saying is thoroughly ambiguous. The word "render" means "give back." The first half of the saying could thus mean, "It's Caesar's coin--go ahead and give it back to him." We can imagine Jesus saying this with a dismissive shrug. Rather than a pronouncement about the legitimacy of Roman imperial rule or political authority in general, his words might very well have been a brilliant way of evading the trap.

When its second half is added, the phrase remains equally ambiguous. What belongs to Caesar, and what belongs to God? The possible answers range from "Pay your tribute tax to Caesar, and your temple tax to God" to "Everything belongs to God." If the latter, what is owed to Caesar? Nothing. But the text itself provides no clue as to what was meant.

Quote
Jesus responded in a deliberately enigmatic way in order to avoid the trap set by his opponents. His response was never meant to be figured out. Rather, in this passage as in several others, we see his deft debating skill.


Thus this text offers little or no guidance for tax season. It neither claims taxation is legitimate nor gives aid to anti-tax activists. It neither counsels universal acceptance of political authority nor its reverse.

But it does raise the provocative and still relevant question: What belongs to God, and what belongs to Caesar? And what if Caesar is Hitler, or apartheid, or communism, or global capitalism? What is to be the attitude of Christians toward domination systems, whether ancient or modern?
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline mountaineer

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,592
Re: O'Reilly Battles Notre Dame Professor Who Claims Jesus Was a Socialist
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2013, 03:02:53 PM »
She is a professor of the New Testament, yet doesn't comprehend the simplest of Jesus' statements, nor her own hypocrisy.
Not surprising. I knew a religion professor at a small (formerly Christian) college near me who taught the kiddies-with-skulls-full-of-mush that it was a homosexual act when Jesus washed the disciples' feet.   :thud:
Just being unique doesn't make you useful.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf