THE TRUTH ABOUT RELIGION: BOOK 2
ISBN 0-7414-1655-7
1000-WORD EXCERPT:


PROTESTANTS CONSERVATIVE

MATT: If you're going to follow the rules of logic, and the law of non-contradiction, you haven't shown one contradiction tonight. Even the slavery laws are not a contradiction.

MICKEY: Well, I think they are.

MATT: No.

MICKEY: HAH, geez, what would I have to show you!? Give me an example of what WOULD be a contradiction!

MATT: A contradiction is saying one plus one equals two, then saying one plus one equals three. THAT'S a contradiction!

MICKEY: Alright, I'll give you that.

First Chronicles 3:19-20 "The sons of Zerubbabel were " and it gives us one name, two, three, four, five, six, seven. That's SEVEN sons, and then it says, "FIVE in all."

So there's a contradiction. It's saying seven is equal to five.

MATT: OK, wait a minute. Let's see. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven.

MICKEY: That's a contradiction.

MATT: Wait a minute.

[37 seconds of silence]

That's interesting. I'm gonna look this one up.

MICKEY: And there's another one in Joshua [Josh 15: 21-32]. It claims 29 cities, but if you count them, there's 38. And there are other ones like that.

MATT: Hmm. I'm going to look this one up.



PROTESTANTS MODERATE

REV. GEORGE: And so I think that the Christian faith, the biblical faith of a Christian, holds water for the most part. It is not without its problems, but I think that because it holds water so well for the most part as a system of moral living, of good family relations, of being constructive citizens, of a deeply satisfying and challenging worship, I think that it is a reasonable faith position to take.

MICKEY: I think not, because, what you just described there is people's INTERPRETATION of what's in the Bible. Every single passage that doesn't seem quite right, people interpret it in some sort of positive way. But if you take what's actually there, what it actually says, it's immoral.

For example, if somebody, in the Old Testament, commits adultery they should be stoned to death. Is that a good moral position? I don't think so. You always interpret every passage in the most positive way possible, in a sensible way like, adultery is bad, OK but that's NOT what the actual teaching is. The actual teaching is: if I catch somebody in adultery, I should STONE him to death. If I catch a homosexual, I should stone him to death!

REV. GEORGE: Which, interestingly enough, does not carry over to the New Testament. In the Old Testament law, yes, those were the mandates, and, they seem harsh to us, certainly..

MICKEY: ..they WERE harsh. They don't just SEEM harsh, they WERE harsh.

REV. GEORGE: They were harsh. And yet that was God's word.

MICKEY: And now somehow human nature is different? Why should there be a different ethic now?

REV. GEORGE: I think it's clear from the writings of Paul, and also from Jesus, that he said he came to fulfill the law of the prophets. And I think one of the greatest illustrations of that was the woman caught in adultery. She was dragged before Jesus, and the Jewish leaders..

MICKEY: ..but he WASN'T fulfilling the law. He should have let them stone her if he was fulfilling the law he's CHANGING the law.

REV. GEORGE: No, the word he uses is "fulfilling," and I think it's a better word to use. The intent, I believe, of the Old Testament law was to show the severity of the moral guilt of humanity before a Holy God.

But I think the law was put there as a guide and to show the severity of sin and God's hatred for sin. And I think some of the most severe ones were adultery, homosexuality, sexual sin, and behavioral sin, murder and so forth, so that God wanted to show them that some sins are worse than others. Some have worse consequences. And they need to be stopped with severe punishment.

MICKEY: Then, then, why didn't Jesus say to go ahead and stone her, and give me a stone also, we're going to stone this woman to verify what you just said, how serious sin is?



PROTESTANTS LIBERAL

REV. JEFFREY: And one of the people on that search committee, we went out to dinner afterwards, said that they were bothered by the context in which I put Jesus' call. Did I not believe that Jesus was called out from God in the womb when God conceived with Mary. I'm going, "Whoa, are we talking virgin birth here?" And he said, well, of course we're talking virgin birth here! And I said, well, I really don't believe in the virgin birth. I'm trying to think of sort of a nice way of saying it. I just really don't believe in the virgin birth. And that was the end of that search committee. And that was in the United Church of Christ. [Usually liberal]

The president of the seminary called me and asked me what kind of a run-in I had with this delegation from this church in the Chicago suburbs. And so I told him about the discussion, and he said, wow, that just blows my mind. He says, they really were hung up on the virgin birth? And I said, well, I guess so. And he says, do you know that they called me to find out what kind of stuff we're teaching at our seminary? And I said ohh. And he says they have been very generous financial supporters, and now they want to curtail their giving, at least until they have a special meeting of the church to decide where they stand in this.

And I said, well, I'm sorry, but that is what I got out of my seminary education, and he says, well, I understand, I don't think there is anybody who has come out of this institution that subscribes to the virgin birth for 100 years! I'm just surprised we have a church out there that doesn't know this!