Re: [A-List] Re: COUP d' ETAT IN WASHINGTON

[Hudsonmi@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 6/26/03 7:33:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, annewilliamson@xxxxxxx writes:


> Michael,
>  
> I don't believe you are a theologan, and your representation of Christianity is deeply incorrect.
> It's nonsense that Christians believe they should act as the avenging arm of God "against
> anybody who would criticize the rich, thereby turning the Bible on its head."  Where do you get
> such ideas?  Not from the Bible, Christ's teachings, or regular Church attendance.  Nor do I
> believe you attend revival meetings regularly, and perhaps stumbled upon one once in your life.  
> Apparently, it was dramatic.
>  
> "Rapture" Christians are an off-shoot of Protestantism, and you should know that the thrust of 
> their beliefs were advanced by a conman named Cyrus Scofield, who spun out the ideas of an 
> obscure early 18th century Reverend Darby, a Scotsman, at the urging and with the support of 
> Sam Untemeyer, a prominent Zionist of the early 19th century - who, in turn, managed to get
> Oxford Publishing to bring out Scofield's Biblical concordance.  This trash document is used
> by Jerry Falwell, who is about the only Christian minister allowed a fulltime television network - 
> and if you turn it on, you will see that most of the programing is concerned with Israel.  Perhaps 
> this is why he flies around in a private jet Ariel Sharon presented to him.
>  
> Currently I am involved in an onrunning legal battle with "rapture" elements, who I believe murdered
> my father.  So you needn't think this message is a defense of those people; they are "angry,"
> self-righteous, disturbed, frighteningly materialistic, alarmingly misguided, and easily "played"
> by likes of Bush, DeLay, Falwell, etc.  But the real story isn't them, but the men who "play" them -
> and that story begins with Darby, Scofield, and Untemeyer, and it involves Zionist aspirations
> more largely than any bona fide Christian tenets.
>  
> But to take the ambitions, activities, and theories of these pathetic, nominal "Christians" and present 
> them as the guiding spirit and the very heart of Christendom is not only inaccurate, but deeply offensive.  
>  
> Anne        
>  
>  


Dear Anne,
       I didn't mean my remarks at all the way you took them.
       Of course I wasn't talking about REAL Christianity. (I am active in Church of England circles, and have given sermons in two churches in London in the past year, worked for many years with the Vatican, and also with various Protestant groups, by the way.) I'm talking about right-wing televangelism and its politics, and I gather from your message that you and I have identical feelings toward them.
       Obviously these guys have hijacked and vulgarized Christianity. My point was how basically different and right-wing these Americans are (and also the Koreans, for that matter) in comparison to the left-wing tendencies of European Christianity - which is why my Christian contacts are all over there, not over here.
       I hope this helps clarify matters. It did not occur to me that you would think that I mistook them for the real thing.

       Michael