Kyle Mantyla's blog

The other day I mentioned that I had begun working my way through "The One Year Chronological Bible" which I am reading in conjunction with The ESV Study Bible. Last night I made it to Exodus 18 and came across this passage:

But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain —and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens.

That passage seemed familiar, mainly because it is what David Barton cites when he claims that God created the concept of elections and that our Founding Fathers explicitly cited that passage as the basis for Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution:

Notice how Barton says "God says choose out from among you leaders of tens, fiftys, hundreds, and thousands"? What I realized last night is that in Exodus 18, it is not God speaking, but rather Moses' father-in-law Jethro. 

After having led the Israelites out of Egypt, "Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, together with Moses’ sons and wife, came to him in the wilderness, where he was camped near the mountain of God." While Jethro was visiting, Moses went out to serve as judge for the Israelites and settle their disputes, but there were so many that the task lasted all day.  Jethro, seeing that the workload was too great, suggested that Moses should "select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain —and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens." Then these judges would hear the simple cases while reserving for Moses the difficult ones and easing his burden. And that is exactly what Moses did:

13 The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening. 14 When his father-in-law saw all that Moses was doing for the people, he said, “What is this you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge, while all these people stand around you from morning till evening?”

15 Moses answered him, “Because the people come to me to seek God’s will. 16 Whenever they have a dispute, it is brought to me, and I decide between the parties and inform them of God’s decrees and instructions.”

17 Moses’ father-in-law replied, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone. 19 Listen now to me and I will give you some advice, and may God be with you. You must be the people’s representative before God and bring their disputes to him. 20 Teach them his decrees and instructions, and show them the way they are to live and how they are to behave. 21 But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain —and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 22 Have them serve as judges for the people at all times, but have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves. That will make your load lighter, because they will share it with you. 23 If you do this and God so commands, you will be able to stand the strain, and all these people will go home satisfied.”

24 Moses listened to his father-in-law and did everything he said. 25 He chose capable men from all Israel and made them leaders of the people, officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 26 They served as judges for the people at all times. The difficult cases they brought to Moses, but the simple ones they decided themselves.

It is flagrantly false for Barton to claim that it was God speaking in this passage and utterly misleading for him to claim that it has anything to do with establishing elections. In fact, it was Moses alone who picked which judges to place in charge, which is pretty much the exact opposite of an election.

As we have said before, it is getting to the point where we now have to check nearly every assertion that Barton makes because so many of them turn out to be fundamentally false.  And if Barton is willing to lie about what the Bible says, it raises the question of whether there anything that he won't he lie about? 

On his radio program yesterday, Steve Deace welcomed Bryan Fischer for a long discussion about Fischer's recent column arguing that "homosexuality is not a conservative value."

Facetiously declaring that "haters of a feather stick together," Deace brought Fischer to try and explain why the Republican Party seemed so intent on embracing the issue of homosexuality at the expense of the support of Christian conservatives.  Fischer warned that if the GOP continued along this path, it was going to spell the end of the Republican Party while Deace simply could not understand why Republicans would be "catering to the homosexual lobby, which is a major fundraising arm for Democrats across the country":

Deace: The GOP is going to have to make a decision here: are they going to stick with those traditions that past conservative stalwarts like Russell Kirk, those laws of natures and nature's God that you just heard Bryan reference, or are they going to embrace the new morality? And what happens Bryan if they make the wrong choice?

Fischer: Well, I think it will be the end of the Republican Party. You know, the evangelical community still provides the core of the Republican Party base, they're the ones who are most motivated to go to the polls and they'll just abandon the Republican Party ...

Deace: You can even simplify it on a more base level which is why would you want to aid and abet and fund the people who are funding the folks you are running against? Why would you want to do that? Why do we aid and abet and enable the homosexual movement? I mean, can you imagine if [Jeff] Sessions and [John] Cornyn said 'we're going to have a fundraiser with AFSCME about how we can raise money to help the Republican Party." There would be howls of protest, Bryan, across the fruited plain from every vestige of the right-of-center coalition in this country. Well, that's the exact same thing they're doing by catering to the homosexual lobby which is a major fundraising arm for Democrats across the country.

Deace and Fischer also claimed that GOP needs to take a stand against homosexuality in particular, because gay activists are systematically forcing society to accept their immoral behavior while refusing to even admit that it is a sin:

Fischer: You know, the reality is Steve, if homosexuals were willing to keep this in the privacy of their own bedrooms, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. They're the ones that are bringing it out of the bedroom, they're bringing it into our streets, they are demanding and insisting that we recognize this behavior, that we normalize it, that we endorse it, that we approve of it. So they're really the ones that are dragging it out of the bedroom and making it an issue in the public square and, you know, we have to respond to that.

Deace: I think what you just said is very important because I get asked this sometimes by Christians, hey I agree that this is a sin, but why is this different than other sins? Why do we make such a big deal out of this publicly? And the point that I make to them is, listen, they're isn't a group of fornicators out there saying we've got to change the laws of marriage, the accreditation laws for counselors, the way in the curriculum that your kids are taught in school in order to teach them, hey, that it's okay for me to be a serial fornicator or a serial adulterer and we're actually going to teach them how to do that better. I mean, we're looking here at an immoral behavior with its own political lobby and they're the ones that are driving this debate, we're simply reacting to it.

Fischer: Well, and you look at this issue of sin; people say 'well, homosexuality is a sin like every other sin' and there's a point to that. But the problem is people right now that are homosexual activists that are engaging in this kind of behavior, they're denying that it is a sin at all. You know, they;'re saying that it is perfectly normal, that it's healthy behavior; they reject the analysis that there is something morally deficient about that behavior whatsoever. You know, most adulterers say "yeah, that wasn't too cool what I did there," but homosexual activists say "no, what we're doing is just fine and not only just fine, we're going to insist that you approve of what we do."

A few weeks ago, Roger Schlafly mourned a Census Bureau report showing that non-white births have now exceeded white births in the U.S, declaring that this was "not a good thing" because "immigrants do not share American values," by which he meant "vote Republican."

Today, Rick Scarborough of Vision America sent out an email warning that "the non-Hispanic white share of the population will fall from 70% today to a bare majority by the year 2050" and suggesting that is a bad thing.  While insisting that "the racial mix of this nation shouldn’t matter," Scarborough lamented "the sad reality is [that] America is changing," suggesting that "more non-white families" means more single-parent households, which in turn means less Christians:

Now we are witnessing more babies being born out of wedlock than in wedlock, leading to escalating social problems. That brings us back to this latest revelation on the growing influence of minorities in America. The sad reality is that more non-white families will also mean an America with more fatherless families.

...

Children raised in a one-parent household are also less likely to attend church services as both children and as adults, According to various surveys, as adults, they are less likely to go to church, pray, read the Bible or listen to Christian radio. They are more likely to get their values from movies, popular music, video games and the dominant (non-Christian) culture.

The increasing polarization of the races is an additional cause for concern. Politicians and self-styled community leaders urge blacks and Hispanics to see themselves as members of a race first and foremost, and not as Americans or Christians.

...

[A]s Christians, we must reach out to minorities in families at risk, with the message of the Gospel – one of repentance, love, salvation and a helping hand. Many churches of every ethnicity are doing a heroic job here. But they need our help.

This is the best way to guarantee that America stays America – a nation animated by Christian values – regardless of the nation’s racial composition.

A few years ago, Scarborough was quoted as saying that "if this country becomes 30 per cent Hispanic we will no longer be America," but then insisted that he had said nothing of the sort, despite the fact that the statement was reported by two separate news sources.

• Justin Berrier @ County Fair: Fox & Friends Drops The Veil, Produces Four-Minute Anti-Obama Attack Ad.
• Alvin McEwen: Alveda King speaks about her accusation against Bayard Rustin . . . or does she?
• Good As You: FRC to Obama: 'We believe that 'the wages of sin is death.'
• Wayne Besen @ Truth Wins Out: TWO Exclusive Video: Interview with Dr. Robert Spitzer Who Discusses Retracting His Infamous ‘Ex-Gay’ Study.
• Rachel Tabachnick @ Talk To Action: Insider View of the Culture Wars Exposed in New Book by Former Christian Right Strategist.
• Towleroad: Indiana Church Gives Child Standing Ovation for Singing 'No Homos Gonna Make It to Heaven.'
• Warren Throckmorton: Exodus International speaks out against FRC’s award winner.
• John Fea: Some Thoughts on David Barton's "The Jefferson Lies"--Part Two.

• It looks like NOM's Brian Brown has accepted Dan Savage's dinner debate challenge.
• MassResistance's Brian Camenker says "Elizabeth Warren is basically a Communist -- she's a supporter of everything conservatives hate."
• Tim Graham of the Media Research Center claims that MSNBC is "not just anti-war; they're anti-military. In particular, they're anti-American military."
• I am sure that this David Brody post declaring that "the Tea Party is alive and kicking" has absolutely nothing to do with him attempting to make the Tea Party still seem relevant because he happens to be writing a book about the movement.
• Randall Terry has chosen a running mate.
• Finally, Gary Bauer blames Richard Land's woes on the Left: "Sensing an opportunity to take down one of the pro-family movement’s most influential leaders, the left pounced and accused Land of racism. In addition, charges of plagiarism were made against him. I’ve known Richard for years and have always respected him as a man of the utmost character and integrity. It is inconceivable that these charges are true. But they remind me of the attacks on Rush Limbaugh and other conservative leaders, including me. The left never misses an opportunity to try to silence conservative voices, and it goes for the jugular every time."

Back in 2010, John Hagee released a book entitled "Can America Survive?: 10 Prophetic Signs That We Are The Terminal Generation" which he then used as a basis for several sermons at his Cornerstone Church. 

In one, entitled "The Death of the Dollar," Hagee cited Deuteronomy 28, which lays out signs that a nation is being cursed by God, to declare that America was most certainly under the judgment of God, citing violence in our cities, our struggling economy, the emergence of new diseases, our military losses in the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and a high divorce rate:

;

Matt Borges was recently named as the new executive director of the Ohio Republican Party and this is not sitting well with Ohio-based Linda Harvey, primarily because Borges previously served as a lobbyist for the gay rights group Equality Ohio.

Borges reportedly lobbied on behalf of anti-discrimination legislation in Ohio, which Harvey attacked in her radio message today as nothing more than an effort to "give a stamp of approval to immoral and sinful behaviors and a tool for lawsuits to defend behavior people should not be doing in the first place."

As such, Harvey declared that it was "unacceptable" to allow Borges to run the Ohio GOP "unless he renounces his past support for the goals of homosexual activism" because it is "one of the major forces for youth corruption, religious discrimination, and moral disintegration in our country":

Matt Borges is unacceptable at the present time to lead this party unless he renounces his past support for the goals of homosexual activism. And let's be realistic, homosexual activism is now one of the major forces for youth corruption, religious discrimination, and moral disintegration in our country. We need to oppose it with every legal, spiritual, and civil means at our disposal and this is, in my opinion, the duty of every Christian in this country.

This is simply an in your face insult to Ohio Christian families and voters. It's also terribly foolish strategically when people with strong values should be united against the re-election of Barack Obama.

• Benjy Sarlin @ TPM: Donald Trump Lets Loose With Birther Rant After Romney Reaffirms Support.
• Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Another missed opportunity to lead.
• Simon Maloy @ County Fair: Trump's Birtherism Fueled By Breitbart Reporting.
• Noah Rothman @ Mediaite: MSNBC Anchor Blasts Conservative Guest Who Compares Trump To Joe Biden.
• Scott Keyes @ Think Progress: Dirty Tricks In Wisconsin: Secret Group Shuts Down Phones Of Scott Walker’s Democratic Challenger With Spam Texts.
• Andy Kopsa @ Religion Dispatches: A New Goal for Anti-Choice Activists: Targeting “Sex-Selective” Abortion.

• Tony Perkins has reportedly accepted an invitation from Jennifer Chrisler, executive director of a the Family Equality Council, to join her and her wife for dinner.
• Ralph Reed invites you to the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference.
• Beware of Gay Day!
• Pat Robertson and Lou Engle teamed up for The Call Virginia.
• David Barton raises money for congressional candidate Kevin Lundberg in someone's kitchen.
• Finally, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is warning congregants that "we may need to witness to the truth by resisting the law and incurring its penalties" by opposing the contraception mandate.

Last week, Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis spoke at the Family Research Council's "Watchmen on the Wall" conference where he warned that the failure to embrace a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is undermining "the doctrine of marriage" and leading to things like gay marriage.

As luck would have it, just last week I bought a copy of "The One Year Chronological Bible" and had begun reading through it in conjunction with my copy of The ESV Study Bible.  Ham's assertion that a literal interpretation was required in order to understand the true nature of biblical marriage was in the forefront of my mind as I began working my way through Genesis, especially once I realized how much polygamy and incest the book contained.

In fact, outside of Adam and Eve, and Noah and his wife, just about every major patriarch engaged in either polygamy or some form of incest, and often both.

According to Genesis 16, Abraham slept with and married his wife's Sarah's slave because Sarah was was unable to bear children. On top of that, according to Genesis 20, Sarah was also Abraham's half-sister and he later took at least one more wife.

Abraham's son Issac was married to Rebekah, who, according to Genesis 24, was the daughter of the son of Abraham’s brother, which would make Rebekah the daughter of Issac's cousin, or Issac's first cousin, once removed.

Rebekah then gave birth to Esau and Jacob.  According to Genesis 26, Esau married two Hittite women and then later took a third wife while Jacob married the daughters of his mother's brother, his first cousins, named Leah and Rachel.  Rachel was unable to bear children and so gave Jacob her servant to sleep with and take as a wife, to which Leah responded by likewise giving Jacob her servant for a wife.

In addition to these arrangements, Genesis 38 tells the story of Judah sleeping with and impregnating his daughter-in-law while Genesis 19 tells the story of God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah where only Lot and his two daughters were saved ... after which Lot's daughters got their father drunk and slept with him and became pregnant.

One of the arguments we hear most often from the Religious Right is that changing "the biblical definition of marriage" by allowing gay marriage will lead to things like polygamy and incest ... which is odd considering that, according to the Book of Genesis, polygamy and incest were predominant forms of marriage.