Response to Arthur Levine
Shabbat Shalom Arthur,
After reading your article Whose land is it anyway? A response to
Pat Robertson at UPI Religion & Spirituality Forum, I see
that what you find hard to believe is THE BIBLE.
Apparently you've rejected it for your faulty human reasonings,
which is idolatry.
May God grant you repentance (Isa. 55:7-9) that you may come to
see what others who submit to the Word and Will of God already
do: it's the Promised Land of ISRAEL - by divine decree.
Sincerely,
David Ben-Ariel
************************
Mr. Levine responds:
From: Arthur Levine
To: davidbenariel
Date: 1/21/06 3:19:26 PM
Subject: Re: Pat Robertson
Dear David,
I make it a practice rarely to respond to zealots, but after
looking at your blogg, I have concluded that you will probably
take this as a compliment.
My personal feeling about the Bible and its literal translation
- New or Old Testament - and whether I believe in it is not
central to my belief in God, which I do, and to my belief that
people have the right to choose their own path to God.
I would hope that in the future you can find it in your heart
to understand that other people may have different versions of
personal faith and belief systems that differ from yours, which
are valid for them, even if they do not adhere to your
interpretation of the Bible. Regards,
Arthur Levine
arthur@faith-patch.com
******************************
My reply:
To: Arthur Levine Date: 1/21/06 4:31:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pat Robertson
I make it a practice rarely to respond to zealots,
And what are you but a zealot for humanism? Here a zealot,
there a zealot. Such prejudicial language coming from an
estranged Levite, if not a cohen. Regardless, I appreciate your
response, Arthur.
My personal feeling about the Bible and its literal
translation - New or Old Testament - and whether I believe in it
is not central to my belief in God, which I do, and to my belief
that people have the right to choose their own path to God.
Just like Adam and Eve rejected revelation, stole the divine
prerogative to determine for themselves, as wannabe gods, what
is right and what is wrong? That amounts to SPIRITUAL
ANARCHY.
I would hope that in the future you can find it in your
heart to understand that other people may have different
versions of personal faith and belief systems that differ from
yours, which are valid for them, even if they do not adhere to
your interpretation of the Bible.
I already understand this but consider it dishonest once errors
are clearly pointed out by the Light of the Word, and if someone
rejects that light to lean to their own human understanding they
have no legitimate basis for their beliefs, and everyone's
beliefs are equally valid (which logic demands simply is
impossible) and everybody remains lost in the spiritual
wilderness, groping about, yet ironically feeling smug and
self-righteous about how their religion, created in their own
image, is so tolerant and understanding. Yet your article is not
tolerant of those who accept that there are absolutes in life,
that there is a definite right and wrong and that the Bible sets
the standard for all men and nations to follow, so help us God.
Shavua tov Arthur,
David Ben-Ariel