Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Killing Jesus
Challies Dot Com ^ | September 25, 2013 | Tim Challies

Posted on 09/28/2013 7:58:06 AM PDT by Alex Murphy

This book is going to be big, a near-lock for the bestseller lists. First Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard teamed up to write a book about Killing Lincoln and it sold more than a million copies. They followed it up with Killing Kennedy and it sold briskly as well. And now they turn their attention to their greatest subject: Jesus of Nazareth. Killing Jesus: A History is a short biography of Jesus, focusing on the events leading to his death.

From the outset, the authors make it clear that though they are Roman Catholics, they are not writing a religious book. Rather, they are writing a historical account of a historical figure “and are interested primarily in telling the truth about important people, not converting anyone to a spiritual cause.” They necessarily rely on the four gospels for their source material and often tell their story by directly quoting the Bible.

They begin, though, by setting Jesus firmly in his historical context and skillfully telling about the rise and fall of Julius Caesar and the subsequent ascension of Caesar Augustus. They introduce a cast characters who each make an appearance in the pages of the Bible: King Herod who would hear of a potential challenger to his throne and order the slaughter of innocent children, Herod Antipas who would behead John the Baptist and later refuse to deal fairly with Jesus, and Pontius Pilate, who would cave to pressure and order the execution of an innocent man. Each of these men becomes a living and breathing character in the narrative.

As the authors begin to tell about the life of Jesus, they follow the biblical accounts quite closely. They tell his life skillfully and with all the narrative tension and interest they used to tell their compelling accounts of Lincoln and Kennedy. The reader is left with no doubt that Jesus’ whole life was leading to a cross and that Jesus knew he would end up there. The reader sees that the claims Jesus made about himself put him at odds with both the Jews and the Romans.

As they approach Jesus’ death, the authors slow the pace a little, showing the injustice of the trial, the torment of crucifixion, and the necessary conclusion that Jesus really and truly died.

They take some license along the way, of course. The gospel writers were selective when they wrote about the life of Jesus and any author must at times fill in or at least imagine certain details. But even then, O’Reilly and Dugard have done their homework and refrain from taking large or irrational leaps from their source material. And because they tell the account using the Bible as their source, they are able to tell the story as if it is true and as if they believe it. They do not say, “he supposedly did this” or is “reputed to have done this.” They simply tell it as the Bible tells it.

As a historical account of the life of Jesus, the story, though selective, is well told, well written, and very, very interesting. This is especially true when it comes to the historical and cultural contexts, details the biblical writers were able to assume and, therefore, not describe in great detail. I am no expert on this period of history, but spotted no major missteps and felt the authors were attempting to do justice to the historical facts the Bible presents. Their list of secondary sources is quite strong, leaning more toward conservative than liberal authors.

However, Jesus’ life is not mere history. Yes, he was a real man who lived a real life and died a real death, but that is not all he was and all he did. He also claimed to be God’s Son and his followers claimed that in his life and death he had done something unique and, literally, world-changing. The same Bible that describes Jesus’ life, also interprets and explains it. And this is the story the authors do not tell.

Any author who writes a narrative account of Jesus’ life will find it difficult to do justice to both his humanity and his divinity (and we saw, for example, in Anne Rice’s series on Jesus). These authors err far to the side of his humanity. It becomes quickly apparent they will not focus on Jesus’ miracles. While they mention a few of the wonders he performed, and especially the ones involving healings, they do not commit all the way and tend to present these as events Jesus’ followers believed had happened as much as events that had actually taken place.

The authors primarily portray Jesus as a rebel against Rome who threatened to destabilize the region and who, therefore, suffered the inevitable wrath of the empire. They show that through his life Jesus believed he was the Son of God and even suggest this must mean he was either a liar, a lunatic, or that he really was who he said he was. As the book comes to a close they state that Jesus’ followers soon claimed he had been raised from the dead and that his followers believed this to such an extent that they willingly gave up their own lives to his cause.

But O’Reilly and Dugard do not ever explain what happened there at the cross between Jesus and God the Father. Of all Jesus said on the cross, each word laden with meaning and significance, they mention only two. They do not explain the cross as substitution, where Jesus went to the cross in place of people he loved; they do not explain the cross as justice, where Jesus was punished as a law-breaker; they do not explain the cross as propitiation, where Jesus faced and emptied the Father’s wrath against sin; they do not explain the cross as redemption, where we now need only put our faith in Jesus in order to receive all the benefits of what he accomplished.

Killing Jesus is not a bad book as much as it is an incomplete book. As history it is compelling, but of all historical events, none has greater spiritual significance than the life and death of Jesus Christ. And this is the story they miss.

A brief aside before I wrap up: If you have read Killing Kennedy you may remember that the authors seem have a strange obsession with kinky sexuality. Both Kennedy and the Roman rulers give them a lot to work with in that regard, and in this account they are sure to point to the ugly sexual deviancies that marked the Roman rulers of that day. While they do not go into lurid detail and do not mean to excite lust, neither do they exercise a lot of discretion, making this a book you would probably not want to hand to a child.

As O’Reilly and Dugard begin this book they claim the story of Jesus’ life and death “has never fully been told. Until now.” That’s very dramatic but also ridiculous. This story has been told repeatedly over the past two millennia and it will be told again and again in the millennia to come. Killing Jesus is another account that will be here for a while and then disappear and be forgotten. In the meantime, it will take Jesus out of the realm of fantasy and place him squarely in history, but even as it does that, it will neglect to tell why his life, his crucifixion, his resurrection are of eternal significance, a matter of his life and death and our own.


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Mainline Protestant; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: biography; books; killingjesus; nonfiction; oreilly
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last
From the outset, the authors make it clear that though they are Roman Catholics, they are not writing a religious book. Rather, they are writing a historical account of a historical figure “and are interested primarily in telling the truth about important people, not converting anyone to a spiritual cause.” They necessarily rely on the four gospels for their source material and often tell their story by directly quoting the Bible....

....These authors err far to the side of his humanity. It becomes quickly apparent they will not focus on Jesus’ miracles. While they mention a few of the wonders he performed, and especially the ones involving healings, they do not commit all the way and tend to present these as events Jesus’ followers believed had happened as much as events that had actually taken place. The authors primarily portray Jesus as a rebel against Rome who threatened to destabilize the region and who, therefore, suffered the inevitable wrath of the empire. They show that through his life Jesus believed he was the Son of God and even suggest this must mean he was either a liar, a lunatic, or that he really was who he said he was. As the book comes to a close they state that Jesus’ followers soon claimed he had been raised from the dead and that his followers believed this to such an extent that they willingly gave up their own lives to his cause.

But O’Reilly and Dugard do not ever explain what happened there at the cross between Jesus and God the Father. Of all Jesus said on the cross, each word laden with meaning and significance, they mention only two. They do not explain the cross as substitution, where Jesus went to the cross in place of people he loved; they do not explain the cross as justice, where Jesus was punished as a law-breaker; they do not explain the cross as propitiation, where Jesus faced and emptied the Father’s wrath against sin; they do not explain the cross as redemption, where we now need only put our faith in Jesus in order to receive all the benefits of what he accomplished. Killing Jesus is not a bad book as much as it is an incomplete book. As history it is compelling, but of all historical events, none has greater spiritual significance than the life and death of Jesus Christ. And this is the story they miss.

1 posted on 09/28/2013 7:58:06 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; Gamecock; Kaslin; metmom; F15Eagle
Ping to Tim Challies' review of O'Reilly's book.

See the related thread Going to Hell (Without a Handbasket).

2 posted on 09/28/2013 8:02:13 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (Just a common, ordinary, simple savior of America's destiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

“In the meantime, it will take Jesus out of the realm of fantasy and place him squarely in history, ..... “


If it achieves that, that’s a step in the right direction. Hopefully more people will become interested to learn more about Jesus.


3 posted on 09/28/2013 8:12:55 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

That Bible series that was just done had a ton of errors in it. So we can expect the same from this effort.


4 posted on 09/28/2013 8:16:11 AM PDT by GailA (THOSE WHO DON'T KEEP PROMISES TO THE MILITARY, WON'T KEEP THEM TO U!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Could it be that BOR helped to plant seeds of “evangelization” simply by writing this book?


5 posted on 09/28/2013 8:16:51 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GailA

But maybe in turn,like the Bible miniseries, this book could help plant the seeds in an indirect way, get folks interested in the Bible.


6 posted on 09/28/2013 8:19:43 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

Could it be that BOR helped to plant seeds of “evangelization” simply by writing this book?


That’s my thoughts too.

As long as it doesn’t have inaccurate information, I have no problems with it.

If the book just offers an historical account, I have no problems with that either. There are other books that address spiritual issues.

Again, hopefully more people will become interested in learning about Jesus after reading this book. So many don’t know there is real historical evidence to support his life here on earth. This may be a stepping stone for them.


7 posted on 09/28/2013 8:25:45 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

“They do not explain the cross as substitution, where Jesus went to the cross in place of people he loved; they do not explain the cross as justice, where Jesus was punished as a law-breaker; they do not explain the cross as propitiation, where Jesus faced and emptied the Father’s wrath against sin; they do not explain the cross as redemption, where we now need only put our faith in Jesus in order to receive all the benefits of what he accomplished.”

In other words they missed the whole story, the part that’s valuable to hopeless sinners in desperate straits before a righteous and thrice holy God “who will by no means clear the guilty.”


8 posted on 09/28/2013 8:26:15 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt (A sinner can't pay for grace that's free, nor add to work that's complete.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
In other words they missed the whole story

Well, it is Bill O'Reilly. You were expecting something different ... ?

9 posted on 09/28/2013 8:34:48 AM PDT by Campion ("Social justice" begins in the womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
No interest in reading the book but there was an interesting fact about the crucifixion of Jesus that I learned in the past year which settles the argument whether Jesus was really dead on the cross.

John 19:33 But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.

I always presumed this was some sort of miraculous sign but I recently read that it is not.

A medical examiner stated that when the heart has ceased while maintaining an upright position, the blood and the plasma separate in the sac that surrounds the heart.

When the Roman soldier stabbed Jesus in the heart producing (what appeared to their eyes as) blood and water, this was actually the separated plasma and blood. It proved two things: first that Jesus' body was truly dead as this separation does not happen without the heart stopping and, secondly, that the soldier hit the intended mark.

All the soldier was trying to do was see if Jesus' reacted to the pain of a stab in the heart. Since he didn't, the people of his time could surmise Jesus was dead.

But for those who claim that Jesus didn't actually die but merely fainted and was revived in the cool air of the tomb, this test proved the theory was not possible. There are other tidbits about the way the first century Jews were prepared for burial that also eliminate the "fainting" theory yet it still persists among some deniers.

10 posted on 09/28/2013 8:49:17 AM PDT by OrangeHoof (Howdy to all you government agents spying on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Thanks for pinging me to this review. I’m not sure how you could not deal with some of the miracles, even if written as a third hand account. It was Christ’s miracles that caused Herod’s desire to see Jesus. When Jesus wouldn’t performed a miracle for Herod, he got angry and sent Him back to Pilate.


11 posted on 09/28/2013 8:55:17 AM PDT by HarleyD (...one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Campion
I haven't read O'Reilly's book. I wonder how it compares with Jim Bishop's The Day Christ Died (1957), which was a best-seller...it's not clear if this reviewer is even aware of Bishop's book.
12 posted on 09/28/2013 8:56:14 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

When I was flipping channels the other night, I came across O’Reilly talking about some interview he did in connection with this book. He showed a clip in which he said Jesus was just a regular guy who really didn’t want to get up on that cross.


13 posted on 09/28/2013 9:04:01 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

Thanks for pinging me to this review. I’m not sure how you could not deal with some of the miracles, even if written as a third hand account. It was Christ’s miracles that caused Herod’s desire to see Jesus. When Jesus wouldn’t performed a miracle for Herod, he got angry and sent Him back to Pilate.


Since none of us have actually read the book, we don’t know if there are accounts for miracles in the book.

The resurrection was certainly a miracle. Was there an account of the resurrection in the book? We don’t know yet. Therefore, I will hold off on my critique of the book.

There are lots of other books about the historical Jesus. Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel are excellent choices. Hopefully people will become more interested in this person Jesus and will want to read more books about the subject.

Also, there are a lot of “all-knowing” atheists that thinki they know everything. Some don’t even know of a historical Jesus. This may also help some like new Christians that aren’t so good at defending their faith better know there is a historical Jesus.


14 posted on 09/28/2013 9:05:52 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
...he said Jesus was just a regular guy who really didn’t want to get up on that cross.

I would disagree with the "regular guy" comment but Jesus did plead with the Father in the Garden of Gethsemane to "remove this cup" (i.e. betrayal and death) from him if there was any other alternative. He also relented by saying "not my way but Thy way be done", an example all of us should follow.

This example is also cited to portray Jesus' "humanness". He would have preferred not to have suffered on the Cross but chose to obey His Father.

15 posted on 09/28/2013 9:23:03 AM PDT by OrangeHoof (Howdy to all you government agents spying on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
My mother, a retired HS history teacher (and Christian) is currently reading BO'Re's book, Killing Jesus. She thinks it is a very good history book of those times.

Back in APR 2013, I think it was Sean Hannity on his FOX news show, interviewed author Stephen Mansfield about his upcoming book, also entitled Killing Jesus. It was published 5/07/2013. I read it and was absolutely transfixed by it. It really brought a deeper understanding of the events surrounding Jesus during that 1st Holy Week. I cannot recommend this book enough. Of the 2, my mother thought Mansfield's book was better.

Curiously, when I did the Amazon search, I found a 3rd book entitled Killing Jesus. It was written by Paul Marano and published in its paperback edtion on 2/23/2013.

16 posted on 09/28/2013 9:31:19 AM PDT by MacNaughton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Isn’t there already a book out about this.


17 posted on 09/28/2013 9:49:08 AM PDT by barmag25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

I pray that you are correct.


18 posted on 09/28/2013 9:53:10 AM PDT by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Thanks for posting this AM.....Any thing that gets people to think about the Lord is good but I'd like to point out that no one killed Jesus....He laid down his life, which is a crucial point ...
19 posted on 09/28/2013 9:58:08 AM PDT by virgil283 (When the sun spins, the cross appears, and the skies burn red)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl; Alex Murphy; HarleyD
Could it be that BOR helped to plant seeds of “evangelization” simply by writing this book?

Actually I think he pours reinforced concrete over those seeds.

Plenty of non-believers have no problem whatsoever with a "historical Jesus." It's the deity of Christ that is the problem for them. A book like this just confirms what they already think.

20 posted on 09/28/2013 9:59:17 AM PDT by Gamecock (Many Atheists take the stand: "There is no God AND I hate Him.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
In 1957, Jim Bishop published The Day Christ Died (New York: Harper), a popular account that sold well. He wrote similar books about the deaths of Lincoln, JFK and FDR. Perhaps BOR aspires to be the Jim Bishop of our day.
21 posted on 09/28/2013 10:03:27 AM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof
Jesus did plead with the Father in the Garden of Gethsemane to "remove this cup" (i.e. betrayal and death) from him ...
I've never understood that. If Jesus, the Son of God, knew he was going to be with God, why the fear of death?
22 posted on 09/28/2013 10:05:41 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

His knew God the Father was about to turn His (Father’s) back on Him. Jesus knew the wrath that was about to be poured out on Him. No person ever suffered so much. Being fully man He plead for another way. As God the Son he knew He had to fulfill this penalty, and did so.


23 posted on 09/28/2013 10:12:28 AM PDT by Gamecock (Many Atheists take the stand: "There is no God AND I hate Him.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven
If Jesus, the Son of God, knew he was going to be with God, why the fear of death?

He also knew that He would suffer for the sins of the world, He knew the penalty for those sins and He knew He would be forsaken by His Father as part of that price. Understand that He wasn't guilty of anything but would pay nonetheless. It should serve to remind us of the gravity of our own sin and the consequences due us were it not for Christ's sacrifice. The thief on the cross understood darkly that he and the other thief were getting what they deserved (death) for their crimes, yet saw Jesus as an innocent.

24 posted on 09/28/2013 10:23:11 AM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
He [Bill O'Reilly] showed a clip in which he said Jesus was just a regular guy who really didn’t want to get up on that cross.
This is Bill O'Reilly. [I usually can't watch him for more than 20 seconds.] As far as not wanting "to get up on that cross," it was Christ's desire to suffer for us that brings so many to the Cross, which allows us then to suffer for His peoples (with eventual joy and no grumbling).
25 posted on 09/28/2013 10:35:26 AM PDT by mlizzy (If people spent an hour a week in Eucharistic adoration, abortion would be ended. --Mother Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

Listening to audiobook version (and for some reason songs from Jesus Christ Superstar keep popping up in my mind; good Caiaphas, the council waits for you...)
In a new column BOR explains it’s a history book not spiritual (said same in introduction) and he got one email or letter from someone saying “Bill, what do you know about Jesus? You are Catholic and they don’t know anything about the Bible”

>>The book is pure history; there is no religion in it.

http://www.billoreilly.com/site/rd?satype=13&said=12&url=%2Fnewslettercolumn%3Fpid%3D41346

JCSuperstar doesn’t quite show a resurrection at the end.
An episode of All in the Family showed Archie in jail
(trying to find Mike, he wound up arrested) and sees some
hippies singing “Superstar” in the cell.
Hippie: They’re singing about Jesus...Don’t you dig Jesus?

Archie: Jesus Christ I dig...and I dug him a long time
before you weirdos turned him into a superstar!


26 posted on 09/28/2013 10:57:05 AM PDT by raccoonradio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof

In any other context, I would agree with you. But it’s O’Reilly, and I don’t trust that he understands any of that. He has said he likes going to church because it’s a place you can be quiet and peaceful; he’s spoken dismissively of “Bible thumpers” and stated that the Bible is just allegorical stories; and there was the recent thread detailing his claim that the book is an attempt to “correct” the Gospels.

I believe he should have stayed far away from the subject of Jesus, because he’s going to end up misleading people.


27 posted on 09/28/2013 10:59:27 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy
"This is Bill O'Reilly. [I usually can't watch him for more than 20 seconds."

Same here. I haven't watched him in years, but when I caught that statement, it floored me.

" As far as not wanting "to get up on that cross," it was Christ's desire to suffer for us that brings so many to the Cross, which allows us then to suffer for His peoples (with eventual joy and no grumbling)."

Exactly. While on earth, Jesus was fully God and fully man, and the human part of Him prayed for another outcome, if it was possible. But the divine part of Him always knew His destiny---He wasn't killed, He willingly died for us.

28 posted on 09/28/2013 11:02:58 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Often though, the seeds will not sprout until there are events in the lives of the folks in question, be it a good event or a series of events, or a bad event or a series of bad events when even the most harden non-believer to start to get the “hint”.


29 posted on 09/28/2013 11:17:26 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

He showed a clip in which he said Jesus was just a regular guy who really didn’t want to get up on that cross.


Sometimes those flippant remarks reveal a lot.

To me this is about $$$ , not respect and accuracy.


30 posted on 09/28/2013 11:21:41 AM PDT by patriotspride
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
He has said he likes going to church because it’s a place you can be quiet and peaceful
Maybe 50 years ago, but with the advent of folk masses, singing, handshaking, etc., it's more like a "happening."
Personally, I much prefer the old ways.
31 posted on 09/28/2013 11:22:03 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: patriotspride

That could very well be.


32 posted on 09/28/2013 11:29:31 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

Yes, and silly me, I always thought it was about worshiping God.


33 posted on 09/28/2013 11:30:08 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

In God’s Plan, He provided His Son to be judged and to provide the Perfect Sacrifice for the penalty of sin.

Jesus Christ was only the 2nd person in all human history who had remained sinless up until His death. All others are born dead spiritually to God the Father from the consequences of Original Sin in mankind from the Garden.

The penalty of sin was death, which is a state of existence involving separation. In this case, a separation from God the Father, was the most violent death imaginable.

This is manifest by our Lord on the Cross, when He exclaimed, (Matt 24:36)`ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?’ (prophecied in Psalms 22:1 ELI ELI LAMA AZABTANI)(My God, My God (God the Father singular male), why have You(God the Father male singular) forsaken Me ?(first masculine singular suffix refers to God the Son uniquely)

The opposite of love is not hate, rather it is fear. God the Son loved God the Father and feared the consequences of sin imputed to Him and being judged on the Cross.

Since God the Father is Perfectly Holy, comprised of Perfect Righteousness and Perfect Justice, anytime He is exposed to sin, His Perfect Righteousness demands He Judge the Sin in Perfect Justice.

In His humanity, the soul of our Lord Christ Jesus was Judged on the Cross for the imputed sins of all humanity.

2Co 5:21
(21) For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.


34 posted on 09/28/2013 11:32:11 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: raccoonradio
The book is pure history; there is no religion in it.

All of human history is His Story.

35 posted on 09/28/2013 11:35:02 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; alphadog; infool7; Heart-Rest; HoosierDammit; red irish; fastrock; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

36 posted on 09/28/2013 11:37:13 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
"Jesus was just a regular guy who really didn’t want to get up on that cross....BOR?

Anything we say about anything says something about everything in how we think.

Note the use of the past tense singular use of the action verbs. It assumes Jesus Christ isn't very alive today.

The more significant event was His Resurrection and now His Ascension and Session.

37 posted on 09/28/2013 11:40:31 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

Christians are hopefully not going to buy this book


38 posted on 09/28/2013 11:41:22 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

After Killing Jesus what is Left? I hope he can turn to other subjects like Killing Musolinni or Killing Stalin, or Killing Charles I. I fear his next book is Killing Allan Cooms.


39 posted on 09/28/2013 12:19:49 PM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
Jesus Christ was only the 2nd person in all human history

Who was the first?

40 posted on 09/28/2013 12:20:10 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

*The authors primarily portray Jesus as a rebel against Rome who threatened to destabilize the region and who, therefore, suffered the inevitable wrath of the empire.*

Must be some other Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth never threatened the rule of Rome. Pilate would have released him in a minute if he’d dared.


41 posted on 09/28/2013 12:25:26 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
Same here. I haven't watched him in years, but when I caught that statement, it floored me.
Amazing; I don't know what his appeal is. I can't figure it out.
42 posted on 09/28/2013 12:52:06 PM PDT by mlizzy (If people spent an hour a week in Eucharistic adoration, abortion would be ended. --Mother Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: xone
His Mother... ♥
43 posted on 09/28/2013 12:53:46 PM PDT by mlizzy (If people spent an hour a week in Eucharistic adoration, abortion would be ended. --Mother Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

~~~But O’Reilly and Dugard do not ever explain what happened there at the cross between Jesus and God the Father.~~~

Then that means they don’t understand nor comprehend it. It’s a mystery to those not born again. They always re-explain it in some other term or form. Or miss it altogether.


44 posted on 09/28/2013 12:53:58 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

I think you nailed it.


45 posted on 09/28/2013 12:54:27 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GailA

“errors”

Yep.


46 posted on 09/28/2013 12:55:01 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
"Note the use of the past tense singular use of the action verbs. It assumes Jesus Christ isn't very alive today."

That's true. For the same reason, the book's title bothers me.

"The more significant event was His Resurrection and now His Ascension and Session."

Amen to that. I wonder if O'Reilly writes about those.

47 posted on 09/28/2013 12:56:04 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: barmag25

~~~Isn’t there already a book out about this.~~~

Yep, I do believe you are correct. Been a best-seller for a long, long time, too.


48 posted on 09/28/2013 12:56:17 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy
"Amazing; I don't know what his appeal is. I can't figure it out."

This is what I don't get. Conservatives have been on to him for a long time, yet while the ratings of other primetime Fox shows wax and wane, O'Reilly's stay high. How??

49 posted on 09/28/2013 12:58:02 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Forward the Light Brigade

LOL


50 posted on 09/28/2013 12:58:34 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson