Bill O'Reilly's an idiot

Yes, as a conservative I just said FoxNews personality Bill O'Reilly is an idiot, but not for the reason you may think.

I know how many conservatives love him, including our very own seeker. I know all about the "cultural warrior" mantra. There are some things that I enjoy about O'Reilly and on which we agree, but if you listen to his radio program for long you will have to agree the man is an idiot.

He possesses a good deal of knowledge concerning political matters, but when he begins to discuss religion and religious terms - the man is a moron.

My first realization of this fact came in 2002, when I heard him discussing differences and similarities of Christianity and Islam. He was woefully ignorant of both, surprisingly so. If you are a national figure discussing controversial and timely topics, wouldn't you at least try to learn about the basic tenets of the faiths you are discussing?

Most recently I discovered his idiocy last night (my local talk station broadcasts his show at night). In analyzing the possibilities for Super Tuesday, he began to talk about born again Christians and evangelicals. He brought up surveys that seem to indicate a voting shift among those groups (more on that in a later post).

In trying to explain who "born again" Christians are, he made a rambling statement about them being born Christian, leaving the faith and then coming back to it, so they are "born again." Apparently, all those studies of the biblical ignorance of Americans are true when one of the most recognized conservative political analyst has no idea what "born again" means.

In my second month of blogging, I discussed the myth that the term "born again" is an evangelical created phrase, but I never knew that a nationally known Catholic conservative would have no grasp of the term to the point where he embarrassed himself.

I know that the idea that someone can be "born" a Christian is accepted in some Christian groups, so I can give you a pass on that one. However you can't explain away the other statement, that they left the faith and have returned to it. Some may have done that in a sense, but my five-year-old was recently "born againt" without ever leaving Christianity.

Here is why Christians use the phrase born again:

Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3)

I understand that not every Christian group believes the same as evangelicals do, but if you are trying to discuss a group of people you should know enough about what they believe to understand the major terms they use in describing themselves.

So my plea for O'Reilly - discuss politics. You're good at it. You get great ratings and you sound like you know what you are talking about. Stay away from religion! You sound like a moron, bluffing his way through.

Comments

[Louis]

I'm glad you've discovered the truth about him, Aaron. I would only add that I think he's also an arrogant bully, bigot, and demagogue.

[Benjamin9]

Here is why Christians use the phrase born again:

Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3) -------

what if a person had died before JC was born and never was able to know him? millions, if not more, fall into that category.

[seeker]

If he did make such a statement, then he surely is ignorant of what it means to be born again, or an evangelical.

But one of the reasons I *like* him is precisely because he is NOT evangelical - this allows him to take stands on issues that are currently unpopular with evangelicals, and he does NOT myopically focus on "evangelical" issues like abortion and gay marriage - he covers a broader range of subjects, and from a more intellectual than religious point of view.

And BTW, the scripture you mention above is not the only one referring to the Christian experience as one of new birth. There's also:

1 Peter 1:23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,

1 Peter 2:2
as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,

1 John 2:29
If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone who practices righteousness is born of Him.

1 John 3:9
Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

1 John 4:7
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God.

1 John 5:1
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.

1 John 5:4
For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world our faith.

1 John 5:18
We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him.

[Aaron]

Ben, you ask an age old (2,000 years) question. Jesus established a new covenant, which fulfilled the old one with the Jewish people. To the best of my knowledge, prior to Jesus to be accepted by God one had to believe in the Jewish Messiah to come and to attempt to follow the law set forth in the Torah.

The question is similar to the one asked today about those not born in "Christian" nations, my answer is that God, being sovereign, knows who will and who won't respond to His offer of salvation. He places people where they can best respond to Him and serve Him. The same was true prior to Christ.

If you accept the Christian notion that God is sovereignly in control of circumstances and exists outside of time, therefore "knowing the future," it is not difficult to accept that He places individuals in varying locations throughout the world according to how they will respond to Him.

[Benjamin9]

"If you accept the Christian notion that God is sovereignly in control of circumstances and exists outside of time, therefore "knowing the future," it is not difficult to accept that He places individuals in varying locations throughout the world according to how they will respond to Him." -------

But, what if during life, pre JC, you had no faith at all in any God. you were pre 1st century, not a Jew, and had no faith in their desert God. when are you offered this opportunity to accept his offer?

[Aaron]

I don't mind that he's not an evangelical at all - most leading political conservatives are not, especially pundits. I just want him (and others) to be educated about the issues of which they speak. He clearly has no idea what he is talking about when it concerns evangelical Christianity. That is understandably. He is a nominal Catholic from New York - not much exposure to evangelicals. But, he should not speak on things of which he is ignorant.

If he had simply continued offering political observations, he would have been fine. Controversial with many, but fine. He chose to step into areas where he has no knowledge and it showed.

[Aaron]

Ben, again, that is part of where God sovereignly places individuals. If God knows before I am born that I will reject Him no matter where I live, what does it matter if I grow up in the Bible Belt or in China. I will reject Him no matter what.

If you accept the Christian notion of God's omniscience and sovereignty, then it should not be difficult to assume that God places people in the right locations according to how they will (or will not) respond to Him and how best they can serve Him living our their purpose in life.

When dealing with a Christian notion of salvation, we must deal with all of Christian theology in context. The idea of someone needing Christ for salvation does not exist inside a vacuum apart from God's omniscience (knowing all things, including how we will respond to HIs offer of salvation) and His sovereignty (absolute control of the universe). He knows who will respond to His offer of salvation and He places them where they will respond to Him.

Other Christians, particularly other Christian traditions, will have a different answer for that question, but acceptance of God's character has always answered those type of questions for me.

[seeker]

Aaron,

In addition to the theology that states that the OLD TESTAMENT folks looked FORWARD in faith to the messiah, while we look BACK, it is conjectured that the following scripture refers to Jesus leading the OT faithful to freedom as part of his death and resurrection. It is a bit of a mystery about where these souls were kept until the coming of the Messiah, perhaps in some "holding area" referred to here (and in Philippians 2:10) as "the lower parts of the earth").

We must also note that both Elijah and Moses appeared on the mount of transfiguration w/ Jesus, so they had to exist somewhere in the period before his resurrection and ascension.

Ephesians 4:8-10
Therefore it says,

"WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH,
HE LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES,
AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO MEN."

Now this expression, "He ascended," what does it mean except that He also had descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, so that He might fill all things.

Or as Peter Smythe discusses:

The usual translation of the "captivity" phrase is found in the NASB:

He led captive a host of captives. (Ephesians 4:8, NASB)

The usual exegesis or sermon of this passage is something like this:

The captives were those Old Testament saints who were in Abraham’s bosom. They were captive there until the day of the resurrection. When Jesus rose out of the grave, he had with him all those Old Testament saints - he led captivity captive. When he presented his blood before the Father all the Old Testament saints were with him watching.