Obama makes a brief appearance in ‘The Bible’ to warn of the sequester.

Any television show that simultaneously confounds the pagans and the heretics can’t be all bad. But there’s a basic flaw in the History Channel’s The Bible that makes it hard for the cultural Christian or the spiritual seeker to absorb the message.

This is not to say the program isn’t popular. In fact, it’s wildly popular, but I fear we are preaching to the choir. The opening episode of The Bible attracted 13.1 million viewers, the largest cable audience of the year, and topped both editions of “American Idol” the same week.

Episode two had 10.8 million viewers, more than any other program in the same time period and it finished 11^th overall for the week. The third episode gained viewers, inching up to 10.9 million, and was number nine for the week.

This is even more startling when you recall, as Daniel Wattenberg of the Washington Times pointed out, that The Bible “lacked the ready–made, large scale promotional platform and popular lead–in that can drive strong ratings for a new show on a major broadcast network…” It also lacked the nudity, bad language, obscene cartoon characters and titillation that excites the prurient interest of many cable TV viewers — although it does contain some off­–screen fornication, adultery and murder.

On the other hand The Bible had thousands of mentions in church bulletins and word of mouth to help build the audience. (The program is proving to be a Godsend for youth ministries across America.)

So what’s not to like?

As the program is structured it appeals to Christians who know the Bible or think they know it, yet it answers no questions and puts nothing in perspective for the curious viewer who wants to learn more about the Good Book. In fact, the program runs a very real risk of alienating those viewers.

It is very easy for them to ask: Why does a supposedly loving God command King Saul to kill everyone? Why are the Israelites attacking Canaanites who have done them no wrong and were there first? Why did it take 40 years to get from Egypt to the Promised Land? Why didn’t Moses get to enter the Promised Land? What did the Sodomites do that was so bad? (No pun intended.) If David is such a sinner, why does God love him and not other sinners He had killed? What did a child like Ishmael do to deserve banishment? Why did God toy with Abraham and Isaac?

And those are just the questions from the first two episodes! After about the third killing spree Buddhism starts to look pretty good, to say nothing of Unitarianism.

The Bible is ten hours long but even that length means much is truncated and condensed. (Why couldn’t The Hobbit have dispensed with some of the padding and been only Hobbit I and Hobbit II, giving the excess to The Bible?) The series cries out for a narration to bridge the gap and provide continuity and explanation.

Even better, each episode should be followed by a 15–minute scholarly discussion among experts to put the events into an overall context. I don’t mean the secular culture’s favorite Bible experts: Bart Ehrman, the agnostic professor of religion, and Karen Armstrong, the failed nun who is liable to believe most anything. This duo would chuckle and explain how these blood–thirsty folk tales are a product of their time, with little relevance to today’s enlightened society. If God were commissioning a bible nowadays, the content and teaching would be much different.

No, the overview portion would feature solid, believing scholars who can explain and put the Bible into context. They could observe Genesis concerns the long fall of man and how God intervenes to save the righteous few. Once He sets the Israelites apart from the rest of man, God’s intent is for them to be a pure and holy race: literally the chosen people. He knows man is weak and He does not want the Israelites to be contaminated by the fallen tribes in Canaan, who are sinners that practice child sacrifice; fallen beyond the hope of redemption.

The Israelites spend 40 years in the wilderness because they did not believe God and rejected His command to take the Promised Land. God waited until that generation died out and only the two good spies — Joshua and Caleb — remained. Moses did not enter the Promised Land because he disobeyed God in front of the Israelites.

David was a sinner and a serial sinner at that, but he recognized his sins and begged God for forgiveness. Even at that he paid a price for his transgressions. Ishmael was banished because he was the product of a sin originating with Sarah and was not part of God’s plan for Abraham, but even at that God heard Abraham’s plea and Ishmael fathered a great nation. But it was a nation that contended with the Israelites.

And God tested Abraham’s trust to prove he was worthy to be the founder of the chosen people.

But none of this is evident from just watching The Bible.

The producers could even have had young people ask the questions of the experts in a roundtable setting. It would not be any more unrealistic than an Obama town meeting or episode of Real Housewives of DC and might bring some of the searching to Christ.

No doubt the DVD will have something like this in the ‘extras’ portion. Unfortunately, that will be too late. Only the sold buy the DVD, the browsers have already moved on.

The Atheists Humanists Agnostics (AHA) of Dartmouth College plan to consider Mother Teresa’s character by looking through the lenses of Christopher Hitchens’s Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice. According to Hitchens’s Mother Teresa was anything but “good.”[1] Her love and commitment to the poor was simply a façade. The title of the book itself is a strong indicator of Hitchens’s (err) position. Hitchens uses cheap, vulgar, and double meaning to make his case and it is obvious that his interest is merely in selling his book and bagging the funds. Unfortunately, Dartmouth College students blinded by anti-Christian rhetoric are more than happy to support his pathetic cause. It would be interesting to see how many of them have actually done anything to help the poor in their own communities let alone abroad.

It is easy to cast the stone on a woman, now gone forever, who gave up everything to help those who were in deep need. Perhaps these wonderful atheists should consider taking a trip to India and spend one day doing what Mother Teresa did gladly for most of her life. Life in India is hardly as glamorous as Bollywood would have one believe. For the “enlightened” ones who follow Hitchens and listen to the Deepak Chopras of the world, no, the beaches of Goa do not equate to the slums of Calcutta. The heat in itself is enough to make one insane and that is nothing to say of disease, oppression, congestion, filth, or death.

Of course, the idea would hardly occur to these thinkers since the plight of the poor in India is hardly the objective of their gimmick. Indeed, in this case, their idea is to extend a “healthy debate” sitting atop the cushioned seats of Dartmouth College where they rip Christianity to shreds.  After all, how dare Mother Teresa think she could give up everything, travel halfway around the world, live (and die) in the midst of strangers?  How dare she show compassion and love to the poor, an unfortunate group shunned shamelessly by their own society? Such a notion is apparently inconceivable to these godless students. It is unimportant if the poor in India themselves loved Mother Teresa or were grateful for her service.  What is important is that people should have the freedom to debate, defame and destroy Christianity at any cost.  Yes, we should all listen to these great, godless thinkers of Dartmouth College and follow suit without fail. Right.

The goal of HurricaneSandyVolunteer.org is to match needs of families with resources of church members.

1. Individuals can post requests for assistance on the website in areas such as tree removal, neighborhood cleanup, and home repair.
2. Churches can post needs for members, or upload a spreadsheet of resources, needs, and volunteer opportunities.
3. Volunteers can search a comprehensive list of resources, needs, and volunteer opportunities related to Hurricane Sandy. These needs can also be viewed on a map. The site also pulls in feeds of volunteer opportunities from AllForGood and Serve.gov, in order to have a comprehensive list.

The site offers volunteer opportunities in numerous areas, including:

• distributing food at American Red Cross food pantries
• assessing disaster recovery needs with Red Cross Disaster Services in eastern Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania
• supervising at shelters in New Jersey and New York State
• helping with hurricane cleanup with Serve Rhode Island
• providing training on emergency preparedness

In explaining the vision of the site, Andrew Sears, Executive Director of TechMission, said, “Just like the Internet can connect millions of buyers and sellers, our goal is to connect needs with resources of churches in response to Hurricane Sandy.”

HurricaneSandyVolunteer.org was funded by the Cecil B. Day Foundation and is being provided by the Christian non-profit, TechMission (www.techmission.org).

“Federal government continues to usurp power from individuals, families, and the church and replaces their responsibilities with government entitlements, handouts and regulations,” said Sam Rohrer, President of the Pennsylvania Pastors’ Network. “As we heard Governor Romney say, spending is a moral issue that we must handle effectively for the sake of our children and grandchildren. While the President wants to expand government to meet the needs of the American people — increasing costs and spending even more money — Romney wants to lower spending so that it is more in line with revenues, which he wants to increase through economic growth, while focusing on the private market, individual choice, and personal responsibility, which is more compatible with Biblical teachings.”

Also discussed on the call were the stark differences between the candidates on the role of government in public life.

“As Catholics, we agree with Governor Romney and affirm the dignity and worth of each person,” said Ted Meehan, Executive Director of the PA Catholics’ Network. “Such recognition leads to both democracy and free enterprise. These are the blessings which have brought greatness to America. America’s greatness comes from the virtue and vigor of its people, not from dependence upon its Government.”

Jo Ann Nardelli also gave a powerful account of how, as a long-time member of the Democratic Party who held several prominent offices in Democratic organizations, she recognizes that “the party had left her” and no longer represented her values or beliefs. As a result, she is now a registered Republican.

“I was conflicted over the far-left leanings of the party for the last few years, but when it came to the administration’s stance on same-sex marriage, I knew this party no longer reflected my beliefs and values,” said Nardelli.

The War on Terror has been changed to be something different, but remains the same issue nonetheless. There are those on the Hill who seemingly would like to parade around the terms in an effort to dismiss the severity of the issues.  The Supreme leader of Islam, Ali Khamenei continues to flaunt his ideals suggesting the United States has “rejected” Israel.  He continues: the only real ”obstacle” in the way are the Saudi Royal Family and once they are eliminated Israel can be destroyed.

The hatred of anyone outside of Islam persists with the death of Coptic Pope Shenouda III.  Many Egyptian Muslims displayed their condolences to Christians while Islam Clerics pointed out it is against Sharia Law to offer condolences to the Copts (all non-Muslims are destined and deserving of hell, Koran 9: 113).

Sheikh Wagdi Ghoneim, a former mosque prayer leader from California, called the Pope an”accursed criminal.”  May 17, 2012 he said, “ Thanks be to Allah, the head of infidelity and polytheism, this so-called Shenouda, died—may Allah be avenged on him.  He perished, and all were relieved of him—people, worshippers, trees, and animals; Egypt is relieved of him, for he initiated sectarian strife.”

For more information on Islam read, “Did You Know” which provides verifiable information regarding Islam and its growth within our government.

“I was straight-forward with them and explained that I’m a Christian and that I have very strong convictions.  I chose to be honest about it. They said they appreciated it and left. That was all that was said.”

Childress said her decision had nothing to do with discrimination or the lesbian couple, and stressed this fact by saying:

“It doesn’t have anything to do with them – it was about my convictions. They can get their cake anywhere.”

Childress said money is not the issue, adding:

“I’m being attacked because of my beliefs – my convictions to their lifestyle. I was not rude. I was not condescending. It was matter-of-fact. I told them, ‘I’m sorry, I just can’t do that.’”

The lesbian pair released a statement calling the Christian cake baker a “bigot” and are contemplating filing a discrimination lawsuit against Ms. Childress. More on the discrimination issue later in this piece. The couple ran to the media and started calling a citizen, who I thought had freedom of choice also, a bigot. They threaten legal action, and make a big scene because someone doesn’t want to bake them a wedding cake. How thin skinned can anyone get? They are offended? I am offended that they think they have a right to demand service from any business owner. I am offended that they think a Christian doesn’t have a right to decide who to do business with. If someone doesn’t want my business I just take it elsewhere.

Unfortunately, this reaction is typical of special interest groups, any special interest group. It seems everyone has a “right” to their views, and to be pandered to, except Christians. I wonder what would happen if these same women walked into a bakery owned by a Muslim. Would the owner bake them a cake or chase them out of the shop with a barrage of rocks, or simply hang them for their blasphemy? Stoning, in case you aren’t aware, is one of the penalties for homosexuality in the Muslim world. Hanging also seems to be a popular punishment.

Would these women go screeching to the media about Muslim bias against their “lifestyle”? If they did complain, would anyone make a big fuss or would they just keep out of it for fear of “offending” a Muslim business owner? I hope their next stop is at a bakery owned by a Muslim. I would really like to see the result of that visit. That situation would put the media and all of the “minority” groups in a tizzy. Who would they side with?

Where does this nonsense stop? Why is it that everyone has to bow down to the homosexual lifestyle, or Islam, or the NAACP, or any other “minority” group? Does freedom only apply to those with “issues”? I always thought freedom applies to all of us. Does “diversity” of thought include the thoughts of Christians? Does “diversity” of expression include Christians? Does “freedom of speech” include Christians? Apparently not!!!!!

I am also a Christian who believes homosexuality or heterosexual relations outside of marriage to be wrong. Does being against heterosexual couples living together and engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage make me a bigot also? What does one call that bigotry, heterophobia? Do Christians not have a right to live according to their firmly held religious beliefs? We are certainly expected, by Muslims and many judges and politicians, to allow Muslims to practice their religious beliefs and customs, even the parts that call for stoning of adulterers or honor killings.

Like most other Christians, including Victoria Childress, I don’t condemn others for their lifestyles, I simply disagree with them. Ms. Childress didn’t say anything tawdry about the couple, according to the article. Ms. Childress just expressed her views politely and let it go at that. Also mentioned in the article was a comment from another bakery owner who would be more than happy to bake the cake. Why is this a problem? It isn’t like these two can’t get a cake anywhere, others are happy to have their business.

Read the next couple of paragraphs very carefully and think about the point they make. Find the irrationality of those calling for a boycott of Victoria’s Cake Cottage. As far as a boycott, what will that accomplish? Ms. Childress seems to be boycotting homosexuals, yet that is unlawful according to homosexual activists. Homosexuals are going to boycott a business that doesn’t want their business. Does anyone besides me see the irony in this? I really can’t help but chuckle at this point.

If it is permissible for homosexuals to boycott Victoria’s Cake Cottage why isn’t it permissible for her to boycott homosexuals? Isn’t a boycott a boycott? Shouldn’t this cut both ways? Aren’t these homosexual groups practicing discrimination against Victoria’s Cake Cottage? They claim she is discriminating against them so they turn around and call for a boycott. If they don’t boycott every bakery equally isn’t that the definition of discrimination?

One of the biggest problems faced by this nation today is this very attitude of “tolerance”. We are told we must accept illegal aliens, who have a “right” to be here. We are told we must accept Islam and Sharia Law, because Muslims have “rights”. Christians are told we must accept a lifestyle that goes against our beliefs because these people have “rights”. I find it problematic that the “tolerance boat”, built by Christians who came here looking for freedom of religion, no longer has room for the Christians who built it. What about the rights of Christians to live our lives according to our beliefs? What about our “rights”?

If we are to be a truly tolerant society the tolerance has to go both ways, and it currently does not. If true tolerance were to be enforced, illegal aliens would be required to understand and “tolerate” my views about immigration. In a truly tolerant society homosexuals would be required to “tolerate” the fact that Ms. Childress and I disagree with their lifestyle and would rather they take their business elsewhere. A truly “tolerant” society would say the Congressional Black Caucus is required to admit white members of Congress. Muslims, in a truly “tolerant” society, would be required to accept that America has a Constitution and that Sharia law is unacceptable as it violates nearly every tenet of that Constitution. Muslims would have to “tolerate” our Constitution, and its Judeo-Christian basis, in a truly tolerant society.

If tolerance is not a two way street then it isn’t tolerance it is bullying. Whites are bullied by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on a regular basis. Christians are bullied by CAIR and homosexuals, among other special interest groups. American citizens are bullied by the ACLU, LaRaza and like organizations. Proponents of Right to Work are bullied by unions every day. Tolerance must be equal or it isn’t tolerance. If Victoria Childress and others like her are not allowed to live their lives according to their beliefs then tolerance isn’t anything other than brute force being used against someone these groups disagree with. Isn’t that the definition of bullying? Isn’t that the very thing they are fighting against? Can you spell HYPOCRISY?

I salute Ms. Childress for the way she handled this situation. She was forthright about her stand and refrained from making a big deal out of the situation. She did not “chastise” the couple; she merely chose not to participate in something she finds objectionable. From what I know of this situation she handled herself in a Christian manner with courage and firmness, yet with “tolerance”. She didn’t run to the media, she merely responded with the truth of her beliefs.

I hope that everyone reading this piece will show Ms. Childress their support. If you live in Des Moines or nearby, visit her shop. If not, go to her website and give her words of support. If possible, order something from her bakery and reward her for this stand for freedom of religion. If you live outside of Des Moines order some cookies or something that can be shipped. Let her know you appreciate her courage and her willingness to stand by her values and not be intimidated into surrendering her values or her freedom to live by those values.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
November 26, 2011
The first thing the lesbian couple did was run to the news media, where they knew they and their whining and crying, “woe is me”, “I’ve been victimized” story would be coddled.