I have been struck with how often so-called Fundamentalist Christian Preachers quote from Books of the Old Testament and almost never from the mouth of Jesus.

But more of a worry for people who are looking for the teaching of Jesus is that in these versions of 'Christianity' there has been an ignoring of things that Jesus said in favour of things Old Testament texts advocate. For example, there are people who think they are followers of the teaching of Jesus justifying, ‘an eye for an eye’ because it is in the bible – this is just absurd. I didnt really want to get into 'contradictory bible quotes' territory but tell me if I need to give some quotes to put this in context.

Dare we say it without incuring the wrath of Zionists?
What gives these (or any other group) the right to butcher innocents, after experiencing the 'Holocaust'?

Why is it allowed to go unquestioned, with precious little or no debate.

For if you do so, the instant labelling of "Anti Semite" is hung firmly about your neck.

Hi Rob (and Albie)

to answer the question... 'no' but in some cases 'maybe'.

There is a group in the USA (where else) which is called "Christian Reconstructionist". They are in part linked to a strongly Calvanistic and reformed theology, and they DO wish to re-implement the Mosaic law including stoning of adulterers etc.

Fortunately, they are not very influential now from what I observe.

I actually don't see the Old Testament used as you suggest among 'fundamentalist' churches. The O.T. is very useful and provides a backdrop to the coming of Christ. The most central theological point in the the Old Testament is actually found in Isaiah 53 "He was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities" referring to the Mesaiah, our Lord Jesus and his substitutionary sacrifice for our sin.

I think fundamenalist churches, where this just means they accept the Scriptures as divinely inspired, do indeed focus on the teaching of Jesus, and the Apostles. Our church certainly does. We seldom have a sermon based on the Old Testament alone.

Perhaps if you could give some specific examples it may make it easier to engage about the issue, and even provide some background for the particular group you refer to.

Just as examples. There are the Pastor Fred Phelps types. (Turrrrrrn or Burrrrrn) who want to stone homosexuals.
There are independant Baptists and Pentecostalists. Most of the Televangeslists tend to be Pente's. Chuck Swindoll is an excellent teacher, and is not in either of the above traditions.
James Dobson is quite good in my view also. (Focus on the Family)

I have no time for the 'showmen' like Bennie Hinz and company.

The topic/question is a worthwhile one indeed...glad u raised it.

Rob since u raised the topic, which preachers in particular r u talking about or is this just a generalisation? Funny that Jesus quoted from the old testament a number of times. All a matter of interpreting correctly as far as I can see. 99 per cent of Christians I know from a broad range of churches all have the simple understanding that the church is under a different covenant to that of the old testament. If that was not the case we would stone people for breaking the Sabbaoth. Seems to me the Islam and athiest based countries have always been a lot harsher on people than even Judaism.

Absolutely correct observation Rob - you may even have noticed (without really realising) many are also now making reference to "judeo-christianity" as if they are one and the same thing. Unfortunately it isn't even a hybrid - but as you say, Christianity being rebranded as Judaism, period.

This is a typical 'linking' technique in any rebranding exercise - to get people to move from one opinion to another. Say it often enough and eventually the new phrase will become accepted (commonly held) terminology - superseding in many peoples minds what was previously understood. For example we now have "peacekeepers" rather than soldiers (check out NLP - often used in business).

It is also, I'm sorry to say, about some Christians and Jews showing common cause against Muslims/homosexuals etc... and has very little to do with real spirituality.

We sort of discussed something similar a couple of months ago regarding the use of judgemental language by the pope with regards to homosexuals (why is it that whenever this man opens his mouth, violence ensues?) If you have time for a good read - (the article, by an American priest, really is excellent) - the number of postings will reveal that this was quite a hotly debated topic...

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4664#48427

My only experience is the TV Evangelists - but this includes Hillsong which obviously has considerable political clout in this country. The other American brands must also be popular to have the funds they obviously have.

One issue in which I have noticed a large discrepancy is, surprisingly enough, money. In the old testament it is often said that god rewards people for belief in him by bestowing riches upon them. This seems to justify, surprisingly enough, the rich hanging on to their wealth because god has given it to them, whereas:

Jesus said stuff like, [Mark 10:25] 'it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven' and [Matt:5:45] 'does not the father send his rain to fall on the just as well as the unjust and his sun to shine on the unjust as well as on the just.'

And of course the Apostles and Jesus himself were poor so the idea that God pours wealth on his believers in proportion to their faith is a non-sense in 'christianity' that is actually based on the life of jesus.

Another issue of considerable import is that of violence and punishment. In particular I raise the 'eye for an eye' issue because Jesus apparently took the time to specifically reject that directive [Matt:5:38] and seguay directly into the famous, 'turn the other cheek' injunction and a description of a methodology which I dont see ANY of our so-called 'christian' leaders adopting.

Hence the question: is this modern christianity (such as Bush, Howard, Costello, Abbott etc practice and preach) really in keeping with the teaching of Jesus, or is it actually something quite different which has co-opted the brand loyalty and the 'warm and fuzzy' image of christianity and bent those things to their own purposes? Remember, 'Many will come in my name who are not of me.'