|

Is Fox News anti-Christian?

ban-christianity

A question arises:

Are the many religious right-wingers who turn to Fox News for moral as well as political guidance thereby placing their mortal souls in peril?

Andrew Sullivan, a practicing Christian, posits THIS ANSWER:

It has been fascinating lately to watch Fox News go after the Pope for reiterating long-standing Catholic and Christian doctrine about the false god of materialism. By echoing Jesus’ insistence that you cannot know the kingdom of Heaven if you are bound up in wealth and possessions, the Pope drew charges of Marxism (which is anathema to Christians for the same reasons that unrestrained market capitalism is) and engaging in politics (from a channel that has long insisted that Christianity cannot and should not be relegated to the private sphere). Maybe it’s because they have not subjected their own views to anything passing as critical engagement for so long that they have forgotten that Christianity is deeply, profoundly opposed to any system of government that values human beings by the material wealth they create. The worship of money that you see in the incoherent rants of Stuart Varney or Larry Kudlow has no place whatever in Christian thought – and remains a daily assault upon it.

Now comes Megyn Kelly with a flat assertion that “Jesus was a white man, too.”

(Snip)

Now it’s clear this was an ad lib, not really thought through, so we should cut Kelly some slack. But she’s wrong on two levels – wrong because Jesus was not a Northern European white person, but a Middle Eastern Jew. And as a Middle Eastern Jew under the Roman empire, Jesus was at the bottom of the heap in the power-structure of his time. And that’s the point. The Messiah came from the lowest rung, not the highest. The comfort that white people feel when they are a majority in a democratic society is about as far away from Jesus’ experience of the world as it is possible to get.

She’s also wrong in even considering the color of Jesus’ skin – something unmentioned in the Gospels – as relevant. Of the great Pauline statements about Christianity, the following is among the most thrillingly liberating:

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

The categories of race, of gender, and of social class are abolished in the Christian vision. This doesn’t mean they cease to exist as part of the world, for reasons of biology and social construction. But it does mean that Christians will never seek to underline these distinctions, to build a politics out of them, or to identify a nation according to them. Some on the left do this, as do some on the right. But Christians shouldn’t.

When you absorb the constant racial undertones on Fox, and its constant worship of the god of money, when you absorb their long list of fears about the “other”, whether immigrants or gays or the poor, when you recall their glee at the torture of human beings, or their passion for the death penalty, you can’t help but wonder if they are not one of the most powerful forces against Christianity in our culture.

Share:

35 Comments

  1. Jay McHue

    A man who unabashedly has sex with other men in direct opposition to the commands of Jesus and his Father is NOT a “practicing Christian.”

    • What did Jesus about homosexuals?

      • I meant to say, what did Jesus say about Homosexuals? Show us your knowledge of this man born to a virgin, who was crucified and rose on the 3rd day. Two aspects of life that aren’t possible but none the less, show us your knowledge of Jesus Christ. What did he say about homosexuals?

        • Jay McHue

          Do you believe Jesus is God?

          • This response is for expdoc too. I read your man vs myth story. Those supposed experts rely on as the story says, name calling to destroy peoples credibility by calling people conspiracy theorists? Really? For Christ sakes these frauds are defending a man born to a virgin. That’s impossible. They’re defending who was dead 3 days and rose again, that’s not possible. And then he calls people who challenge the whole myth surrounding a conspiracy in itself, conspiracy theorists.. Those supposed experts are frauds just trying to support the unsupportable. It’s all nonsense.

            I don’t believe Jesus is anything but a myth just like the many saviors born before him. Only thing different is this one was able to marketed better, hence the whole establishment of organized tax free religion around his existence. Just like how our govt mfrs lies and markets them to us through the MSM that is filled with cowards who are unwilling to stand up to the lies because they don’t want to lose access to the liars they claim a paycheck for supporting. It’s all about money and power. Was back then and is today.

            http://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-christ-like-figures-who-pre-date-jesus/

      • Nothing. But I am sure he would have loved them like he loved everybody. Unconditionally.

        Hard to believe why billions of people would want to aspire to his ultimate holiness isn’t it Robert?

        • Jay McHue

          Loving someone unconditionally does not equate to approving of their sins.

  2. Jay McHue

    As far as Megyn Kelly’s statement about Jesus, it was an ad libbed JOKE in a mock debate that wryly poked fun at the people complaining about Santa.

  3. This column hits it out of the park. Fox News’ reporting biases run contrary to the values of Christianity as outlined in the Bible and particularly the teachings of Jesus. Sadly, most evangelical Christians today don’t recognize the values in the very book they claim to follow. As more Megyn Kelly’s remarks about Jesus being a white man, it was most certainly not expressed as a joke. Anyone listening to her actual statement in context could have clearly recognized that.

  4. Steverino

    Megyn should have said that Jesus was Caucasian without mentioning Santa and his flying reindeer but once again she tries to tell Fox viewers what they want to hear and when she’s wrong she tells them the same thing.

  5. This is what happens when we have multiple 24 hour “news” networks with airtime to fill. Tempest in a teapot I say.

    You should watch the video on the link to see her comments as well as the comments of other talking heads on this issue.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/TV/2013/1215/Megyn-Kelly-said-Santa-and-Jesus-are-white.-Really-video

    • Jay McHue

      “Scare” “quotes” “are” “awesome” “””””!”””””

  6. The inconsistency that comes from myth based saviors is, believers project onto them whatever kindness or prejudices they want to, usually if not always based on the biased leanings of the one doing the projecting, as evidenced by the original post I responded to.

    • Jay McHue

      Please, spare us your lame attempts to play religion expert. Christians take from the Bible. They don’t add to it.

    • The irony of you saying this ”
      For Christ sakes these frauds are defending a man born to a virgin. That’s impossible.” is delicious.

      Also, I somehow doubt the Apostles were thinking about the implications of establishing a tax free entity when they gave their lives to establish Christianity.

  7. “Myth based savior”

    Cute.

    Humans will always project their bias into any situation.

    But that doesn’t change the nature of the “myth based savior”. It just proves they are human.

    You will find this to be an interesting read.

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/07/the-jesus-debate-man-vs-myth/

  8. LO:.

    Good one!

  9. The title of this article is ridiculous. To be anti-Christian one would need to be purposefully opposed to the Christian faith and smearing it, which FOX NEWS clearly does not. Anyone who watches regularly knows that FOX NEWS often speaks in defense of Christians and their right to express their faith. Does it sometimes have anchors and commentators who misrepresent some Christians beliefs or advocate behaviors and attitudes that Christians might be opposed to? Of course, but it’s not a Christian enterprise. It’s a secular news outlet. And what are we to conclude? That other networks are Pro-Christian? Hardly! Most of them are even worse.

  10. nmarty46@yahoo.com

    The title is apt. “Anti” means opposed to or against. And, as the author illustrated, Fox News often runs stories that are opposed to the values in the Bible.

    • Jay McHue

      Such as…? Oh, let me guess: “Stories opposed to socialized medicine, increasing minimum wage, and the government helping the poor.”

  11. Steverino

    Giving false, fixed and fake news 24/7 is not very Christian.

  12. thehereandnow1

    Maybe Pat and/or Andrew would like to cite where in the Bible Jesus advocates a third party taking money from the wealthy to give to the poor? Or where it says it’s ok to sit on your butt and do nothing while a government body gives you money taken from those who work for it?

    It’s amazing how all these libs are suddenly lauding the praises of a religious leader of a branch of Christianity which as its core believes have that marriage is between a man and a woman and that abortion is murder. Talk about a group of flip-floppers.

    And as always with religious themed posts, let’s give a shout out to Robert, who hates all things religion and is looking forward to a time that when his organic body becomes too weak to sustain him he will either have his conscious transferred into a robotic device or expire into nothingness. Cheers mate.

  13. Just because people receive government assistance doesn’t mean that they sit on their butts and do nothing. That’s a stereotypical myth. Most people receiving unemployment insurance are people who want to find a job. They don’t want to collect a meager unemployment check that barely pays for their basic needs. Frankly, your lack of compassion is antithetical to the teaching of Christianity that you seemingly claim to follow.

  14. How many years after Christ death did they begin to write the bible?

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see Harry Potter become immortalized like JC. He’s certainly go a following. But then again, so does Santa and the Easter Bunny.

  15. Hater’s are gonna hate Robert. But here is a short answer to your question.

    http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2002/09/The-Goods-On-The-Gospels.aspx

    Why did the disciples wait so long to write down the Gospels?

    Actually, the canonical Gospels were written down during the lifetime of one or more of the eyewitnesses. It was precisely the dying off of various of the original apostles and eyewitnesses that prompted the writing of the Gospels, beginning about 35 or so years after Jesus’ death. We need to remember that very few people were literate in antiquity, and the oral or living word was considered the chief proper means of conveying some important truth. Writing things down was seen as a support for the oral testimony. This also explains why things weren’t written down for a while.

    • Interesting? Beginning about 35 years or so after his death? I didn’t know people lived that long back then. I would imagine if they were his contemporary’s, they’d be quite old if Jesus died at 33.

      I remember very little about 35 years ago. Although I do have some memory of my youth, it’s bits and pieces. Those moments that left an imrpint on me and they are just snippits. And what I remember isn’t conversations so much as scenes. But I guess these old timers were all story tellers. I’m reminded of those old fishing tale stories that usually end up being, He said, I thought, It was, in nature. Meaning things get real convoluted and if these apostle’s did get someone to write down their memories, I have to believe they were flavored with their own biases, just like the bible is interpreted to this day.

      You’re not going to change me and I’m not going to change you in how we view things.

      I think its time to move onto the next disturbing column Pat can find to rile us.

      • One more thing, I’ve always thought it would be a very profitable business venture to create a cook book based on food served at the Last Supper. It could be advertised as “Eat like Christ did before he was crucified.”

        Am I bad?

  16. doc: Biblical scholars’ estimates for the dates when the canonical gospels were written vary widely, in some cases by as much as century. The evidence in support of any of the estimates is scanty at best. Interestingly, the earliest surviving complete copies of the gospels have been dated to the 4th century; only scattered fragments and quotations from before then have survived. The historical accuracy of the canonical gospels is difficult to determine, especially in light of the oral traditions of early Christianity. Then, too, the canonical gospels aren’t entirely in agreement on certain details of the life of Jesus. The long and the short of it is that likely none of the canonical gospels is a first-hand eyewitness account of the life of Jesus. There is also the matter of the Dead Sea Scrolls, all of which were discovered in my own lifetime. Scholars are divided on the question of how much the scrolls have shed new light on the life of Jesus.

  17. Here is more on the topic from PBS.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/gospels.html

    L. Michael White:

    Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin
    GOSPELS ARE NOT BIOGRAPHIES
    The gospels are not biographies in the modern sense of the word. Rather, they are stories told in such a way as to evoke a certain image of Jesus for a particular audience. They’re trying to convey a message about Jesus, about his significance to the audience and thus we we have to think of them as a kind of preaching, as well as story telling. That’s what the gospel, The Good News, is really all about.

    The four gospels that we find in the New Testament, are of course, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The first three of these are usually referred to as the “synoptic gospels,” because they look at things in a similar way, or they are similar in the way that they tell the story. Of these then, Mark is the earliest, probably written between 70 and 75. Matthew is next – written somewhere between 75 and about 85, maybe even a little later than that. Luke is a little later still, being written between 80 and maybe 90 or 95. And, John’s gospel is the latest, usually dated around 95, although it may have been completed slightly later than that, as well.

    Paula Fredriksen:

    William Goodwin Aurelio Professor of the Appreciation of Scripture, Boston University
    “RELIGIOUS ADVERTISEMENTS”
    The gospels are very peculiar types of literature. They’re not biographies. I mean, there are all sorts of details about Jesus that they’re simply not interested in giving us. They are a kind of religious advertisement. What they do is proclaim their individual author’s interpretation of the Christian message through the device of using Jesus of Nazareth as a spokesperson for the evangelist’s position. The evangelist is not an author of fiction. The evangelist has traditions that go back through the Greek to the spoken language of Jesus, which was probably Aramaic. In other words, I think there’s some kind of continuity between what Jesus would have been saying to other Jews in 27 to 30 and what the Evangelists in Greek are saying to their own communities, that Jesus said. But, as historians, we have to sift, and go through and try to figure out what corresponds mostly to the period of the composition in Greek and what corresponds to the lifetime of the historical Jesus.

  18. Shawn Robinson

    http://www.businessinsider.com/does-welfare-really-pay-better-than-work-2013-8
    That Cato study sounds faulty. If it’s only used by conservatives at Forbes or Reason then it’s probably justifying a useful stereotype. Working for a living at a full-time job always pays better than living on welfare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>