Interplanner
Well-known member
I'm writing this at 6am PST, and pragerradio.com/listen will repeat an hour or two in which (Rabbi) talk host Dennis Prager grappled with identity politics vs behavior. Shall we subscribe to people saying they have an 'orientation' or only deal with their actions when it affects us? One of his guests on this was a homosexual editor at Town Hall explaining, essentially, that 'it is harder to be a conservative in the Bay Area than to be a homosexual in Alabama.' Why is that? Because Marxists do indeed run all their programs on identity: race, gender, class, sexual orientation. A person who says they are a conservative homosexual will be persecuted by Marxists. Because they do not deal in actions, only in identity. They will praise you for declaring your orientation, but attack you for conservative actions. Apparently there is no such thing as a conservative orientation.
Where Prager gets into a corner is his exception for Jews, which will eventually bring us to the Dispensational position on the Jews. Prager seeks to deal with people on the basis of their actions, not their identity. For ex., when teaching on 'the poor' from Deuteronomy, he will remind us that there is not to be favoritism to the poor simply for their identity. Justice is not to be rendered one way because they are poor; it must be based on actions.
But he makes his exception for Jews and goes off into identity-ism. "Christians can't be atheist; but Jews are a race and so they might perhaps be. They may even be Marxist." This is totally confusing, says Dr. Bernard Pyron, because it is the product of transformational Marxism's assault on absolutes, on the unchanging, on the eternal. Marxism cannot afford to have people believing in unchanging absolutes.
D'ists of course go Prager's direction. We know this from the number of times the TBN network played "Exodus" for its Sunday night movie, in which secular terrorist Jews in the late '40s seize a ship and rescue Jews by taking them to 'Palestine.'
So D'ists must have two programs running in the Bible or their theology, in which they keep following Prager's exception, and they must ignore Paul in several places in the NT where there is a Jew or an Israel that is action-based. "A man is a Jew if he is one inwardly...by the Spirit...his praise is not from men..." Rom 2. Or 'Peace be on all who follow this rule (of faith), even on the Israel of God" Gal 6.
Where Prager gets into a corner is his exception for Jews, which will eventually bring us to the Dispensational position on the Jews. Prager seeks to deal with people on the basis of their actions, not their identity. For ex., when teaching on 'the poor' from Deuteronomy, he will remind us that there is not to be favoritism to the poor simply for their identity. Justice is not to be rendered one way because they are poor; it must be based on actions.
But he makes his exception for Jews and goes off into identity-ism. "Christians can't be atheist; but Jews are a race and so they might perhaps be. They may even be Marxist." This is totally confusing, says Dr. Bernard Pyron, because it is the product of transformational Marxism's assault on absolutes, on the unchanging, on the eternal. Marxism cannot afford to have people believing in unchanging absolutes.
D'ists of course go Prager's direction. We know this from the number of times the TBN network played "Exodus" for its Sunday night movie, in which secular terrorist Jews in the late '40s seize a ship and rescue Jews by taking them to 'Palestine.'
So D'ists must have two programs running in the Bible or their theology, in which they keep following Prager's exception, and they must ignore Paul in several places in the NT where there is a Jew or an Israel that is action-based. "A man is a Jew if he is one inwardly...by the Spirit...his praise is not from men..." Rom 2. Or 'Peace be on all who follow this rule (of faith), even on the Israel of God" Gal 6.
