Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow


Leave Talk Radio Alone

posted by Jay Sekulow

With each passing day comes more concern about conservative talk radio.  Now, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched an online petition targeting Rush Limbaugh.  That comes just days after President Obama told Republican lawmakers that “they can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” 

What’s troubling here is that I can already see the storm clouds forming over the Democratic-controlled Congress and the growing desire to bring back the ill-fated Fairness Doctrine, a measure that would permit the government to tell radio broadcasters what to air by forcing them to air “opposing views.”  Such a move would muzzle broadcasters and strikes at the very core of free speech.

Barry, you know the way to handle this is the way we handle our radio programs.  On my radio show, you are my frequent on-air guest as we discuss a wide range of issues that we disagree about.  Likewise, you have invited me to take part in your radio broadcast and I have participated with you in on-air debates many times.  That’s the way it should be.  There’s no need to interject the federal government into this process.  We control the content of our own broadcasts and that’s the way it should remain.

But there’s a drumbeat that seems to be getting louder in Washington.  And, there’s likely to be more focus on bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. 

In a recent news report, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi affirmed her support for a “Fairness” policy and Sen. Jeff Bingaman, (D-N.M.) told a radio host:  “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view, instead of always hammering away at one side of the political [spectrum].”

And, now, the new Administration may be thinking about going in that direction, too.  Consider this from the new White House website  – President Obama’s agenda when it comes to dealing with technology:

“Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership: Encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum.”

I certainly hope these aren’t code words for reinstatement of the “Fairness Doctrine.”

We don’t need the federal government to regulate the content of talk radio, Barry. 

Let’s leave the airwaves alone.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(47)
post a comment
Your Name

posted January 28, 2009 at 3:35 pm


I sit here at my desk shocked at the fact that we are discussing even the possibility that our government would censor radio talk shows or any other source of media for that matter. This Country is supposed to be land of the FREE, of the people, by the people. We are a nation based upon freedoms. When the government starts dictating what Christians should say and how they should say it, well… let’s just call it what it is…..one giant dictatorship. Are there not more important matters that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee can focus their attention on, other than Rush Limbaugh? And…to go to the extreme of implementing a Petition? We are a country primarily made up of Christians as a majority religion. We need to stand up for our rights while we still have them. To sit silent and do nothing, say nothing, as our rights are being violated, would be the biggest mistake that could have detrimental consequences lasting for generations to come. So….what are you, as a Christian, going to do about it?



report abuse
 

Lost Left Coaster

posted January 28, 2009 at 3:46 pm


There is no movement to bring back the fairness doctrine. This is a myth that right-wingers are using to drum up anger and donations, nothing more. And why wouldn’t Obama say something negative about Limbaugh? Rush Limbaugh says that he hopes that Obama’s presidency fails (implied in that statement is that Limbaugh hopes that all efforts to save the economy fail, and thus, the nation is plunged into depression, destroying families all over the nation…simply because Limbaugh would rather Obama fail). Also, due to the complete lack of leadership in the Republican party right now, Rush Limbaugh is once again the de facto leader of the Republicans, and frankly, he is leading them down the path of further irrelevance.
Oh, but please, Mr. President, don’t hurt poor Rush’s little feelings!



report abuse
 

Laura

posted January 28, 2009 at 3:52 pm


You’re absolutely right, Jay. The government should have no part in telling radio what it can air and what it can’t. Restricting “Freedom of Speech” (which is guaranteed in our Constitution) is the very first thing that any Third World dictator does in order to silence dissent. President Obama has no right, nor should it be in his power to tell America to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. I don’t listen to him myself, but I have received his newsletter in the past. However, no President or elected official should silence the voice of any radio broadcast show; especially because the Rush Limbaugh show is the most popular radio broadcast show in the country. How many Americans would the President and other elected officials be disenfranchising of their Constitutional rights? All Americans have the right to listen to any radio show that they choose, and just because the most popular talk radio show happens to be owned by a Conservative, they are trying to shut him down. I, myself listen to a Christian radio station for a good part of the day, and it is my lifeline in learning about the Bible, and finding out what is going on throughout the country. If the Fairness Doctrine would be reinstated, this radio station, which is located in my home town, would have to close down because the majority of the American people will not support the liberal viewpoints that it would be required (by our own Government) to air. Every social issue today is deemed “controversial,” and stations would not be able to air the viewpoints that they wish to without having to give equal time to the opposing viewpoint. If someone such as the President, another elected official, or an average citizen “feels” that a certain station has violated the Unfair Doctrine (sarcasm), the lawsuits will be pouring in. No station wants to air opinions under this form of Big Brother. This would be a case of “Government Mandated Speech.” Sounds like the “Change” that many Americans have ignorantly voted for is changing our democracy into an autocracy. Sounds like our country could be “changed” into the New Soviet Union. President Obama stated in plain English that he would do many of these things, and I took him at his word, and I voted against him. However, many, many people in this country ignored all the red flags (countless numbers of them), and voted him into office. Did they not think he meant what he said? Or, maybe they became hypnotized under his spell of “Change.” Sometimes “Change” can mean a “Change for the Worse,” and a leader can completely defy the will of the people. We’ll see what he tries to do next. Pay attention!
Laura



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 28, 2009 at 5:17 pm


Please don’t try to whip people into a frenzy over a phrase on the White House website that is clearly intended to address the troubling development of media monopolies. The past decades have seen the ownership of media outlets of all kinds concentrated into fewer and fewer hands. That is troubling, because fewer outlets = less diversity in point of view. A select group of very powerful (and wealthy) people will have the ability to control what we read and what we see. And THAT is the ultimate censorship.



report abuse
 

RJohnson

posted January 28, 2009 at 7:24 pm


I agree with Jay on this one. The government has no right to dictate to broadcasters what they should be able to broadcast. This eats right into the foundation of the Bill of Rights, and should be totally discarded by Congress.
However, neither should these broadcasters be permitted to use the publicly-supported airwaves free of charge. Frequencies should be leased based on a percentage of the revenue generated by the use of them, or sold at auction. These leases should be time-fixed and renewable, say every 5 or 10 years.
Surely the champions of free-market capitalism can get behind this concept of allowing the market to determine the value of a radio frequency in a given geographic area, and allowing broadcasters to compete for said frequency.



report abuse
 

John Gallagher

posted January 28, 2009 at 8:15 pm


When private corporations monopolize a limited medium and use it for propaganda, freedom of speech demands equal time for opposing views. The right to turn the knob is meaningless when the only choice is off.
Clear-channel radio, with 1,400 stations, was created with the sole purpose of being a propaganda vehicle for right-wing ideology and to defend a right-wing government, right or wrong. If a talk-radio host must follow the party line in order to keep a job, the host is a paid propagandist.
The argument is always made that liberal talk radio does not succeed when tried. Yes, liberal talk shows without strong messages appealing to our greed, selfishness or fears, or preaching a strong anti-government message or hatred of taxes, gays, women and minorities have not succeeded



report abuse
 

Boris

posted January 28, 2009 at 8:50 pm


Liberal talk radio is never going to fly. We are all familiar with studies that have shown that generally the more intelligent people are the less time they spend watching television and listening to the AM radio. Intelligent informed and educated people are simply not going to be regular listeners of a daily three-hour talk show that isn’t ESPN. One doesn’t have to listen to Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage or the other conservative blowhards very long to see that if intelligent, informed and educated people are indeed listening to any of these idiots they certainly never call any of these shows. Liberals have better things to do than sit around and complain, whine and wish for “the good old days” that never really were anyway. These conservative talk shows are not about information but affirmation. So I don’t see how the free market is going to support liberal talk radio. I’m a liberal and I wouldn’t listen to it and I bet most of my fellow liberals wouldn’t either. We have better things to do.



report abuse
 

Harryoutdoors

posted January 28, 2009 at 10:49 pm


Today I woke up in a different country than I went to sleep in.
I once was a citizen of a nation where anyone could speak their minds on any given subject without fearing there would be a knock on the door late at night.
Once our elected officials were men and women of high moral fibre…or at least they supported high moral legislation. Now in this new dreamland the highest post of the land is engaged in petty name calling against a voice on the radio while our nation sinks into eternal bankruptcy.
Our babies cry out in their mother’s wombs…but the cries are muffled by the gears of money machines and high pitched suction of a world-wide madness calling for their blood.
I wish to go back to sleep and wake up to the warm feel of freedom…but, I fear it will be a long struggle back and no mere nap will reverse this present evil.
Only action….now and relentlessly..until we see our country arise out of the ashes once again.
The time of blending in has passed…we must take up the fight and support organizations such as aclj.org …I try and think of other causes to support right now and I see they will just disappear from the air without a CHAMPION who will fight for us and them.
Supporting the aclj.org IS supporting other ministries…who else will go into the belly of the beast and slay the dragon?



report abuse
 

dpkjj

posted January 28, 2009 at 11:02 pm


To the people who affirm that the government has no right to control the airwaves, let me remind you that the airwaves, by definition, belong to everyone. Broadcasters, TV or radio, are given licenses – repeat, licenses, not ownership – to use particular frequencies.
I am neither supporting nor defending the fairness doctrine nor any other regulations, simply the people’s right (as represented by our government) to take whatever action we deem right or necessary regarding the private use of public airwaves.



report abuse
 

dave 77

posted January 29, 2009 at 12:20 am


if the government is going to regulate this, then i say they should also do the same for television newscasters. would’nt that throw a wrench in the liberal agenda. i don’t think the government shoud be allowed to dictate what the media says. if a network or radio station gets MY tax dollars, I want truth, not partisanship. the government can stay out of my home too.



report abuse
 

methodistsearching

posted January 29, 2009 at 12:40 pm


IMO, the fact that this is even an issue is a problem. The Democrats need to be careful not to move into venegful warrior mode, because then they will be no different than the Republicans were.
And, for a president who is famously called “no drama Obama”, this whole line of conversation is beneath him.
The right wing shock jocks live for publicity, because it equals ratings. You support them they win. You get angry and speak out against them, they win.
Try ignoring them and then letting their favorite force…the “magic of the marketplace”…deetermine their fate.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 29, 2009 at 3:17 pm


I need to hear talk radio and t.v. programs which support life and don’t putt on nonsence which supports murderous campaigns of which our tax dollars are supporting. I need to hear from leadership which can protect children from being murdered and who don’t want to fund it through government tax dollars. Planned Parenthood does a whole lot more than contraceptive advice. Let’s face it, when leadership does not stop children from being murdered, what do we have? murder funded and supported by our president. I have one question to ask you President Obama. Why would you want to let this murderous campaign to continue? It is not choice, it is letting others murder others right before our very eyes with government tax dollars. Cara



report abuse
 

blathering michael

posted January 29, 2009 at 9:01 pm


Let not your heart be troubled.
Re-installing the Fairness Doctrine is not being discussed by the Obama administration, the new FCC chair, or media reformers. Obama has expressed his opposition for its consideration. It is an outdated reg meant to make sure there was balanced information available across the vast stretches of America with little or sparse radio coverage.
It outlived the spirit of its usefulness with the advent of cable TV, and now the Internet.It was never easy to enforce or administer.
It’s now useful as a straw dog for talk radio hosts, and conservative politicos to create scary talk show topics, or to fund-raise.
Radio has big problems at the moment, re-installment of the Fairness Doctrine is not one of them. BlatherWatch.blogs.com



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 29, 2009 at 9:38 pm


Unfortunately Obama didn’t have his own ditto heads. No one who couldtell him the ayer’s! of his ways or seemingly they couldn’t ayer! the rants of Jeremiah Wright either.
Even if I was not on his team, I would have opra-herded him about not associating with the hateful, and tell him why I left the congre-ants of Jim Joners.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 30, 2009 at 12:47 pm


wow this is amazing how quickly this so called leader of our free world is taking over….never expected such swift action..in such a disguised way….. but then again i did. i knew we were heading to this and couldnt believe how many folks sheep are being led to slaughter….. r we heading to a civel war first? or will christ return… sooner than we think? within weeks? or do we all have to suffer thru …. i pray we call keep our peace of heart as we must endure whats to come out of all the snakes in the apple trees ! fasten your seat belts and pass your faith along …….. leslie



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 30, 2009 at 2:00 pm


Check out article by Carol Marin, Chicago Sun-Times, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009. See for yourselves; read. Although Carol is writing there, she is a media person who also is a “press” person in addition to doing political interviews. She states that Pres. Obama only calls on those correspondents whose names appear on the list before him. That, to me, is manipulating our “free press,” if not controlling it. My fellow citizens, we must not forget the lessons of history: Repressive governments control their media/press. We are not talking about pornographic material. The liberal Left, however, will argue that any restriction on pornogrpahy is an infringement on free speech and that is O.K. to them. It was O.K. for the Left and Democrats to criticize Pres. Bush and call for his being tried for war crimes. But, it is not O.K. for Republicans to listen to Rush Limbaugh, according to Pres. Obama!!!! Christian and talk radio must remain free of any government interference or restriction, if we are to remain “the land of the free.”



report abuse
 

Michelle r. Taylor

posted January 30, 2009 at 10:05 pm


Hello Mr. Jay Sekulow,
I just want to mention a big thanks, thanks, thanks and more thanks for stepping up to the plate and posting your petition to continue the fairness doctrine as it is. WAY TO GO!!!! I gladly signed it and hope and pray that our senators and congressman in the the state of SC will make their voices and concerns know in the US congress to not put a stop to the fairness doctrine and continue our freedom of speech and allow christian broadcasters and conservative broadcasters make their voices and concerns known to our country. After all, they have a God given right to say what is on their hearts and minds, and they have concerns just as we americans do right now with the new administration put in place. So, I am hoping and pleading that those out there will go the ACLJ website and please sign the petition online if you agree to continue the fairness doctrine if you whole heartedly believe in freedom of speech.
God bless you Mr Sekulow for all you do in your work to allow law and justice to prevail and for standing up for what is right. We all need to stand up for our civil rights in this country,conservatives and republicans all, and not sit idly by and let the others run us down. We need to always remember that Stephen in the Bible stood up for Jesus, and we need to stand up for him and our great country.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 31, 2009 at 12:38 am


Yes, I absolutely agree with Jay! The Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech. We can say anything we would like to say regardless if we are Christians or not, whether we are Republicans or democrats, even if what we hear is offensive to us. This (for now)is a free nation. you can choose to listen or change the channel. The government has no business tampering with OUR freedom of speech. The more things like this the government gains control of, the less freedom we have. We need to stand up for the rights and freedoms for which the founders of this wonderful God blessed country fought so hard for.



report abuse
 

Cara Floyd

posted February 2, 2009 at 10:01 pm


Yes, I was bringing up subject matter. They must think I’m stupid? I wanted to do something to fix it. All this stuff hurts and to think that others are giving away American money to help people murder children. Ow my God, let’s make a choice to turn this nation around and help others preach the gospel around The United States of America and elsewhere. Fight for broadcast freedom and give your best. We need to turn this nation around and turn it around for Jesus Christ. Jesus I’m for you and let’s vote for life. Let’s not ignore it and let’s give our best with are voice, money, or whatever else we have to support life. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. You see he gave it, he didn’t take it away. He didn’t give money or a vote to take life away. He gave his best because he loves us. God loves us and tell us to stand up to those who are going the other way. Abortion will end in Jesus name. Amen



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 2, 2009 at 10:22 pm


Abortion is dreadfully wrong. In the Bible, a good majority of the cities and nations God destroyed had the major problem of child sacrifice. We are doing no better than those pegan nations that the Lord destroyed for rebelling against Him. We sacrifice our children to the lusts of the flesh and for convenience sake. I am sure God will not take it any easier on us than He was on them. The stark reality is that all of these idoletress people will pay for the sins they have made.



report abuse
 

Cara Floyd

posted February 2, 2009 at 10:50 pm


There is hope for broadcasters around the world to keep government out of our airways. We need to be the land of the free, the home of the brave. How about turning the chanel or radio broadcast if you don’t like what is said, that way the church can be the church and we don’t have to except the world as our media. Thanks, there is hope! Sign the Broadcasters Freedom Act petition today.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 3, 2009 at 9:26 am


Wars and murder are dreadfully wrong. The Bible God is the biggest war monger and murderer not to mention how many innocent babies the Bible says he murdered. Using this monster who the Bible says demanded abortions himself out of vengeance to defend an anti-choice stand is ludicrous.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 3, 2009 at 10:57 am


The Fairness Doctrine needs to be reinstated so that people with limited access to other media are not brainwashed by cult-like radio programs.



report abuse
 

"RoadRunner"

posted February 3, 2009 at 12:57 pm


It would appear that the Democrats want a “fair” point of view only when if fits their needs. Remember the media B.S. during the campaign? 75% of Obama coverage was positive while the same amount was negative towards McCain. That doesn’t sound fair to me at all. Secular media is always fair to the left and leaves the rest of the story out. If they don’t like what Jay, or Rush have to say…… CHANGE THE CHANNEL. Don’t tell me what I can or can’t listen to. The Government already tells us where to drive, how fast to drive, when & where we can smoke or drink. Tell us we have to pay taxes, unless of course your an Obama cabinet member then you only pay if you get caught and even then you don’t pay interest of penalties. The media is already unfair, bring the “fairness doctrine” to furwishen would only make the air waves more unfair. I guess then I won’t be able to listen to Christian radio programs either. Does anybody remember the movie “Demolition Man”? Anything unhealthy was made illegal, and the government regulated every thing, even SEX became a NO contact sport. looks like we’re one step closer. This almost makes me wish I was born 40 years earlier so I wouldn’t have to be subjected to this unconstitutional idiocy.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 4, 2009 at 8:16 pm


Yes, God has wiped out many nations. Why?, He has the authority to. He is God. He has never punished anyone with death that didn’t deserve it. You must not be talking about the same God I am. I mean the one and only true God of the Bible, the God who created all mankind, who delivered his people from the hands of other nations many times, the God that when the whole world of mankind rebelled against Him and chose to take part in such things as murder, stealing, adultery, idolatry, and killing babies He did something that was terrably unjust. Not unjust to us. Unjust to Himself. He sent His one and only son down to His rebellious earth to die so that us sinners who hated Him could kill Him. Why? Because He chose to love us and wanted to make a way that we could repent and escape the punishment of Hell. It took every drop of bl



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 4, 2009 at 9:12 pm


Your Name:
Your said: Yes, God has wiped out many nations. Why?, He has the authority to. He is God.
The statement above demonstrates the danger of religion and why it needs to disappear from the earth before there will ever be peace. God supposedly wipes out entire nations and believers like you don’t even question this. God has “authority.” I could not follow a God as immoral and unjust as the Bible God nor am I willing to grant an imaginary deity any authority.
If the God of the Bible really wiped out many nations can you tell me why after they were wiped out to the very last person, entire nations such as the Midianites and the Amorites reappear later in the Bible and so numerous that they were like locusts on the land? Or why their kings such as King Hazor can be killed and then come back to life later in the Bible also? Don’t avoid these questions. You might want to go back and read your Bible a little more carefully and critically and forget what other PEOPLE have convinced you about it. Fortunately the events such as the Passover and the Conquest are mythical events. Not only is there no evidence whatsoever for these events or any of the people supposedly involved, the Israelites were never even in Egypt. Events such as the Passover event could not and would not have gone completely unnoticed and unreported by the Egyptians in the mountain of historical records we have from these people. Plus such a catastrophe would have left unmistakable archaeological evidence and a ton of it. There is none.
What this all means is that if there really is a God then Christians are the ultimate blasphemers. To blame atrocities such as the ones described in the Bible on a Creator capable of making this universe and describe this being as a bloodthirsty monster that could be placated by the smell of burning goat flesh and the sight of blood is certainly blasphemy. You might want to think about just what it is you are trying to believe. I’m quite sure there is no such thing as an afterlife. But if there were a judgment at death I would NOT want to be YOU!



report abuse
 

Messenger

posted February 5, 2009 at 12:24 pm


Prepare for the Kingdom of God is at hand. Put on the full armor of God
Message: To show faith you follow the instructions which are ordinances
1. Offer the sacrifice of repented IHS which is repent= Name your sins to God Almighty privately in prayer in the Name of His Son, Jesus then IHS.
IHS= Immerse(baptism in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost)
Hallow(Holy)
Sanctification(free from sin)
2. While in prayer ask God for understanding so you can Sow seed which is:
Sow= to read
Seed= the Word of God Almighty
3. Keep the Commandments and Statues they are the way of living for the righteous. Remember that Ordinances of God Almighty come and they must be done in order to prove that you have true faith. Always know that God says nothing unrighteous. He never mislead His people. If instructions you receive are contrary to His way of living remember never to do them because they are not His.
A word of knowledge: The Name of God Almighty is Yahweh in Hebrew.
wisdom for you:
Sin brings death to your soul
repentance brings life from the dead
light means no sin(repented, IHS)
darkness means sin(unrepented, IHS)
worshipwiththetruth.blogspot.com



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 5, 2009 at 10:48 pm


Look, I believe we are both created unique and special. As you said, I will read my Bible more. Why don’t you do the same.
P.S. If I am wrong, there will be no god to punish me. What if you are wrong.



report abuse
 

flyboy

posted February 6, 2009 at 1:59 pm


Boris, Hazor was a city, located in Eastern upper Galilee on the ancient rout leading from the land of Israel to Babylon, via Syria. Joshua 11, Judges 4.
Concerning the Midianites
God allowed the Israelites to fall under the oppression of the Midianites because of their sinful state. God destroyed the Midianites when Israel repented. He used a man name Gidean and 300 soldiers who screamed while carrying clay jars, pots, and lamps. God caused the midianites to become confused and kill eachother.



report abuse
 

TC

posted February 6, 2009 at 3:47 pm


This is nothing more than an attempt to take away the voice of opposition. This is a prelude to communist rule which we all know and observed with other nations who took the same tactics with free speech as we are about to. The ultimate issue here is taking away God given rights according to our constitution. This is free radio for heavens sake…the liberals can say what they want on there programs we can voice conservative ideas on our…what is the big deal…unless the manner in which the info is given is more concise, truthful and logical than the other so to compensate you must quiet them. I wonder why is the President of the United States worrying about a Talk-Show host anyway!!! He holds no political position or appointment…oh I get it maybe Rush holds Obama’s conscience in his hands..lol



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:43 pm


Flyboy
You said: Boris, Hazor was a city, located in Eastern upper Galilee on the ancient rout leading from the land of Israel to Babylon, via Syria. Joshua 11, Judges 4.
Boris says: I meant Jabin the king OF Hazor who the Bible says was killed in Joshua 11:10 – and this is reiterated in 12:19. How does Yahweh then hand the Israelites over to King Jabin, a dead king in Judges 4:2?
You said: Concerning the Midianites
God allowed the Israelites to fall under the oppression of the Midianites because of their sinful state. God destroyed the Midianites when Israel repented. He used a man name Gidean and 300 soldiers who screamed while carrying clay jars, pots, and lamps. God caused the midianites to become confused and kill eachother.
Boris says: How is this possible when ALL the Midianites including women and children and all their kings were completely wiped out to the last person in Numbers 31? How could they be so numerous they were like locusts on the land a generation or so later like Judges claims? Get back to me after you’re read your Bible a little more carefully will you?



report abuse
 

Marcel

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:43 pm


What’s up with “Reverend” Barry Lynn?? What a joke! He just does not like religion-I guess he’s an agnostic or atheist. All of these people are here to “demoralize the Faithful” Hmmm, I wonder who could have inspired them to do this?? Could it be…(refer to Dana Carvey 1986)



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:50 pm


TC where exactly does the Constitution say our rights are “God given” may I ask? For that matter democracy is Greek word and the New Testament is written in Greek. Yet not only do we not find the word democracy in the Bible, nowhere in the Bible is there any example of a democratic society or anything that resembles our modern system of justice. The Bible even portrays the Romans, where we did get much of our ideas about democracy as executing an innocent man on the whims of a crowd and no evidence. The story of Pontius Pilate in the Bible is as untrue as any ever told on this earth. You can’t execute someone who never existed anyway.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:03 pm


Your Name:
You said: P.S. If I am wrong, there will be no god to punish me. What if you are wrong.
Suppose there is a God what proof do you have that there is an afterlife, a judgment at death or a God who created this universe that’s so petty he’s concerned with opinions people like us held or didn’t hold while we were alive? Do you wonder why atheists are not the least bit afraid of going to hell? Perhaps we know something you don’t.



report abuse
 

Jeremy

posted February 9, 2009 at 3:55 am


Boris,
Thanks for giving me something to think about and read. A few things I’d like to point out:
Careful reading of the book of Judges will show a time lapse of at least 146 years (likely a lot more) between the oppression Israel suffered under the Midianites and the King of Hazor and the battle you speak of in the book of Joshua. Judges 2:10 “After that whole generation (meaning Joshua’s generation) had been gathered to their fathers, another generation grew up, who knew neither the LORD nor what he had done for Israel.” Your presumption that these two kings from Judges and Joshua were the same man just because their name is the same is faulty. Joseph is the name of Mary’s husband and also the name of one of Jacob’s sons. Is one to presume these two are the same person? In reading the Bible, you will find names and permutations of names (Joshua, Jesus, Yeshua) recur from time to time.
Also, the account of the slaughter of the Midianites in the book of Joshua does not state that all of the people of Midian were killed. It states that the army was destroyed, then the King of Hazor and the people of the city of Hazor. (Joshua 11:7-15) Wiping out all of the people in a capital city and killing the King does not equate to genocide of an entire people. The remaining Midianite people in the land continued to breed and likely harbor resentment against Israel and when Israel sinned again by turning to the worship of idols, God delivered them into the hands of the Midianites. Joshua 11:10 also states that Joshua burned up the city of Hazor, so there’s no way we can just presume that the Israelites moved into the city and somehow got themselves a Midianite king. The seeds of rebellion were already there, and when the time was right they rose up to oppress and take revenge on Israel.
I hope this has helped to somewhat clarify the difficulty you seem to be having with these passages.
God Bless,
Jeremy



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 9, 2009 at 9:36 am


I’m not the one who has the difficulty with these passages, you are. Since when is one generation, the time between Moses and Joshua 146 years? And the Bible does say the Midianites were completely wiped out. I read Hebrew and that’s what it says. I don’t care what you doctored up KJV says. Also Jabin king of Hazor is the same king. Just saying it isn’t won’t make it so. I hope this has helped to somewhat clarify the difficulty you seem to be having with these passages.



report abuse
 

Jeremy

posted February 9, 2009 at 11:27 am


Boris,
Jesus says it best: Matthew 22:29 “Jesus replied, ‘You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.'” For reference, I am quoting the NIV translation of the bible, not a “doctored KJV”.
We’re not talking about the time between Moses (how did Moses wind up in this?) and Joshua, but the time between Joshua and the time of the Judges. Also, I didn’t say that a generation was 146 years. You’re failing to actually read the verses that I’ve posted and the scriptures before and after them. The books of Joshua and Judges are consecutive accounts of the conquest of Canaan by Israel. The quote from Judges that mentions “a generation” comes before the time the the first Judge rose up to deliver Israel. Each Judges’ time has a number of years mentioned in the verses that passed between Israel being delivered, falling into sin, and then being over-taken by one of the Canaanite groups again. “Careful reading of the book of Judges will show a time lapse of at least 146 years (likely a lot more) “. I’m failing to see where I mentioned that a generation lasted 146 years. I did mention that it could be more than 146 years because the account of Shamgar given in Chapter 3 doesn’t have an exact time attached to it, nor is there a specific number of years given between when the generation after Joshua rose up and when the first Judge came into the picture.
I applaud your scholarship in learning Hebrew. Show me one verse that says the Midianites (the entire race of them, not just a city or an army) were wiped out in the time of Joshua. Any time someone shows me an apparent “contradiction” in the Bible it invariably leads to something like this–the person(s) did not read and examine not just the text, but the context of what is being said.
In closing, I sincerely hope that you aren’t referring to me as rude and annoying. If my post sounded that way, I do apologize. I’ve always believed in speaking my opinions in a direct fashion, and sometimes that can be seen as rude.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 9, 2009 at 10:24 pm


Jeremy,
According to Numbers 31 Moses and the Israelites annihilated the Midianites. When Moses found out the Israelites had let the women and children live he commanded they be murdered too and only the young virgins were kept alive so they could be raped repeatedly (Num 31:17-18). Then in Judges 6 we read where the Midianites are giving the task of oppressing Israel for 7 years. While a people known as the Midianites did exist in Palestine, like the other actual peoples and places the Bible mentions, they are simply grist for the Bible’s story mill. Nebuchadnezzar had no Jews in his court, Herod never ordered any children slaughtered, Pontius Pilate never had anyone crucified, Cyrus never ordered a temple built – these are all fictional stories. Why are there no other accounts of these same people anywhere in which we supposedly have their words recorded in a conversation? Think about it. Stories set in a dramatic setting with dialog in them are NOT historical narratives nor can they be. The Bible contains none of the elements of history writing even for its day and ALL of the common elements of fiction writing. There are NO historical narratives written anything like the way the Bible is written.
There is no evidence from the past archaeological or otherwise that the Israelites conquered Canaan or that they were ever even in Egypt. The stories of the Exodus and the Conquest are as untrue as any that have ever been told on this planet, especially the absurd tale of the Passover event for which there would be a ton of evidence and there is none. It is simply impossible that such a catastrophic event could occur and go completely unnoticed and unreported by the Egyptians not to mention all the archaeological evidence such an event would have surely left behind. Again there is absolutely nothing.
The study of the history of Palestine has moved far away from its mythic past. The Midianites worshiped the god Yahweh as a volcano and warrior god and there are shared mountain sanctuaries in Palestine where both the Israelites and Midianites worshiped this deity together. The Israelites actually adopted Yahweh from the Midianites.
I’m not really very good with Hebrew so there is no scholarship there. But I am quite good with ancient Greek, which was my language for ANE Studies. I do know the Bible quite well so please don’t tell me what’s in there. I’m always looking for Christians on these blogs who are trying to learn Koine Greek might have the Greek fonts on their computer and would like to practice Emailing in Greek back and forth. You perhaps?



report abuse
 

Jeremy

posted February 10, 2009 at 2:35 pm


Boris,
My motto has always been to remain teachable. Learning Greek could definitely benefit my studies of the New Testament. How do I start?



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 10, 2009 at 8:44 pm


Jeremy,
The great thing about learning ancient Greek today, with the availability of the Internet is that you can pretty much do it for free. You don’t need to waste your parent’s money in an expensive school like yours truly. You can learn enough Greek for free off the Internet to be able to read the New Testament. You should start here:
The Little Greek Home Page
Maintained by Jonathan Robie: useful advice and helpful links for the “Little Greek”. A good starting point.
Also check out:
TextKit: Greek and Latin Learning Tools
You can contact me at FearlessLeader38@aol.com to discuss this further now, after you look the sites over or after you get started. I’ll give you some more good free resources. If you stick with it I’m sure you will find learning ancient Greek very rewarding because translations always break down early and often and lose the feel of the story.



report abuse
 

tracheostomy

posted February 10, 2009 at 9:44 pm


B:[According to Numbers 31 Moses and the Israelites annihilated the Midianites.]
That is, assuming Moses was following orders, right?
B: [When Moses found out the Israelites had let the women and children live he commanded they be murdered too and only the young virgins were kept alive so they could be raped repeatedly (Num 31:17-18).]
Oh, but did God actually instruct or permit the soldiers to rape the women, and did the soldiers actually rape them? Where is THAT written? You have a problem there.
– The law God had given to the Israelites condemned rape, in some cases punishing it with death (Dt 22:25-27).
– Also, immediately following the command to spare the virgin women, the soldiers were instructed to purify themselves and their captives (31:19), and rape (or even consensual intercourse) would have violated this command (Lev 15:16-18).
– In the rest of the chapter, the women are usually referred to as people (using the masculine adam), not women or virgins, underscoring the notion that they were seen as captives rather than sexual objects
B:[Then in Judges 6 we read where the Midianites are giving the task of oppressing Israel for 7 years. While a people known as the Midianites did exist in Palestine, like the other actual peoples and places the Bible mentions, they are simply grist for the Bible’s story mill. Nebuchadnezzar had no Jews in his court, Herod never ordered any children slaughtered, Pontius Pilate never had anyone crucified, Cyrus never ordered a temple built – these are all fictional stories.]
And this statement is no more than a “just so” that parses based on an agenda. This is nothing more than arbitrary red-lining Jewish history as well as the historical Jesus.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 11, 2009 at 3:23 am


tracheostomy
Name any historical narrative that has goofy stories about angels, demons, seraphs, giants or any dialog whatsoever of the kind we find in the Bible. When we hold the Bible up to literary criticism as we would any other ancient literature it is revealed as fiction. All fiction makes reference to historical places and people. Non-fictional historical narratives do too but the history writers NEVER pretend to put words on the lips of these people. Dialog is the hallmark of fiction as is the set up and pay off of prophecy. Christians must therefore use special pleading in order to try to get us to use a different method of interpreting the Bible. They tell us “God wrote the Bible” and he could use any style of writing he wanted. So in order to get us to believe something ridiculous that flies in the face of EVERYTHING we know about ancient literature we must first believe religious dogma that is even MORE ridiculous. Now this is exactly the kind of backward thinking and circular reasoning Christianity is based on. Any thinking person is going to reject you special pleading required to believe the Bible isn’t fiction.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 11, 2009 at 10:41 am


Boris,
The passage from Numbers that you are referencing reads much the same as the passages in Joshua and Judges:
1. Army of Midian destroyed
2. Cities destroyed, people of cities killed
3. Kings or leaders killed
It does not say anywhere in the passages of Numbers, Joshua, and Judges that you’ve cited so far that the entire people of Midian were killed. I’m sure you will again blame this upon me reading a “doctored KJV”.
I am slightly curious about who you think that the KJV was doctored for, considering that the vast majority of Christians in Europe and Asia didn’t even have access to a Bible the way Americans do today. Assuming you were King James, what would be the point of inserting political propaganda and your own version of the truth into a text to somehow control the masses with your own revisionists version of history, when 90 percent or more of the people you’re attempting to target will never read the words?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 14, 2009 at 4:07 pm


Boris, are you still there? We have some pretty valid questions and answers that you havn’t responed to yet.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 14, 2009 at 9:06 pm


Your Name,
You said: It does not say anywhere in the passages of Numbers, Joshua, and Judges that you’ve cited so far that the entire people of Midian were killed. I’m sure you will again blame this upon me reading a “doctored KJV”.
Here’s what it says: “They made war on Midian, as Yahweh has ordered Moses, and put EVERY male to death (Num 31:7) The Israelites took the Midianite women and their little ones captive and carried of ALL their cattle, ALL their flocks and ALL their goods as booty (Num 31:9). So kill ALL the male children and kill ALL the women who have ever slept with a man; but spare the lives of the young girls who have never slept with a man, and keep them for yourselves (Num 31:17-18).
The Bible makes it very clear this was genocidal, infanticidal ethnic cleansing.
Later: “for they came up as thick as locusts with their cattle and their tents; they and their camels were innumerable, they invaded the country to pillage it. Thus, Midian brought Israel to great distress, and the Israelites cried to Yahweh (Judges 6:5-6)
The question remains how were the Midianites and their animals so populous after had both been completely annihilated in such a short period of time when they shouldn’t exist at all. Your answer that the Bible does not say that ALL the Midianites fails because first the text certainly DOES indeed say that ALL the Midianites were destroyed and second no Midianites are mentioned throughout the rest of the Torah which implies there were none.
The Bible also say the Israelites evicted the Amorites and Moabites from their land. These stories are very common in the ancient Near East. The Mesha inscription tells how Omri, king of Israel was oppressing Moab because Chemosh was angry. When Mesha restored the temple to the proper worship of his ancestors Chemosh relented and Omri and Israel were TOTALLY destroyed and the temple of Yahweh was plundered and the plunder was brought before Chemosh. – The Moabite Stone, ANET 320-321. Sound familiar? These kinds of stories are as old as any told in the Ancient Near East.
Yahweh supposedly used Israel’s enemies to punish them. Why should we believe that Chemosh did not use Omri (an eponymous name) and Israel to punish Moab? How did the Israelites get completely destroyed by the Moabites and there is no account of this in the Bible? See what I mean? These stories are just that. Stories.
The KJV wasn’t the first English translation. There were disputes about the translation of the Bible and King James simply wanted an authorized version. The question isn’t who the KJV was doctored for so much as who doctored it and why. For example the notion of a blissful or torturous afterlife is not present in either the Old Testament (There is no afterlife in Judaism) or the Greek New Testament. Philologists tell us that the notion of an afterlife is not present in most non-English translations of the Bible and this belief seems mostly to be present in English translations. Now this is especially true in the KJV’s mistranslation of the word sheol to hell in the OT I think about 30 times. To it’s credit the NKJV has corrected this and many other major flaws.
Don’t you use the NIV anyway? What do you care about the KJV? No one speaks like that anymore. As I pointed out to someone else on here translations all break down and lose the feel of the story. The Gospel of Mark, for example, is written in the present tense and gives the reader the feeling he is watching the story. Jesus didn’t heal, he IS healing; he doesn’t speak, he IS speaking, not the one who came but the one coming who is here NOW. It’s the kind of story that should leave the reader breathless at the end and it’s not even that well written. The English simply does not compare.
That being said, as long as they ignore what other people say about it people can still get a pretty good understanding of the Bible reading it in English and being able to read Greek and/or Hebrew doesn’t mean you’ll be able to understand the Bible any better than a person who can’t.
Now all this is off topic on this thread so if you want to respond I posted my Email address above on February 10, 2009 8:44 PM. That way other people on this blog don’t have to wade through posts they aren’t interested in.



report abuse
 

Cara Floyd

posted April 3, 2009 at 12:04 pm


2Corinthians 6:14-18 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the the living God. As God has said:”I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” 17″Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. 18 ” I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord almighty.” 2 Corinthians 7 Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God. Holy Bible New International Version



report abuse
 

N. Lindzee Lindholm

posted November 1, 2009 at 3:07 pm


Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine would be violating the First Amendment right to free speech. What is the point of having talk radio at all if the station cannot air the beliefs and opinions it likes? This is just another scheme of the left to silence the religious right, an aim for government takeover of the air waves. We live in America, not Iran.



report abuse
 



Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting LynnvSekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow: Faith and Justice  Happy Reading!

posted 11:26:38am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Another blog to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Lynn V. Sekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow's Faith and Justice Happy Reading!!!

posted 10:36:04am Jul. 06, 2012 | read full post »

More to Come
Barry,   It's hard to believe that we've been debating these constitutional issues for more than two years now in this space.  I have tremendous respect for you and wish you all the best in your new endeavors.   My friend, I'm sure we will continue to square off in other forums - on n

posted 4:52:22pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Thanks for the Memories
Well Jay, the time has come for me to say goodbye. Note to people who are really happy about this: I'm not leaving the planet, just this blog.As I noted in a personal email, after much thought, I have decided to end my participation and contribution to Lynn v. Sekulow and will be doing some blogging

posted 12:24:43pm Nov. 21, 2010 | read full post »

President Obama: Does He Get It?
Barry,   I would not use that label to identify the President.  I will say, however, that President Obama continues to embrace and promote pro-abortion policies that many Americans strongly disagree with.   Take the outcome of the election - an unmistakable repudiation of the Preside

posted 11:46:49am Nov. 05, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.