Boy Sent Home From Public School For Dressing As Jesus Christ For Halloween
Posted by Job on November 2, 2008
Before you get all angry at this kid for attacking your religious cultural traditional American values, please note that the Roman Catholic Church all but co – opted Halloween with “All Saints Day.”
PARAMUS, N.J. (CBS) ― A Paramus middle school student was sent home Friday after he came to school dressed up as Jesus for Halloween. For a few hours, Alex Woinski was the messiah of West Brook Middle School, but like the real Jesus, Woinski was condemned, so to speak.
“Sort of like a new remake of what supposedly happened,” Woinski told CBS 2. Decked out in sandals, a robe, fake beard and thorns, the 13-year-old joined 500 other students at his school’s Halloween celebration, and on this day, he was the chosen one – to go home.
“It was offensive to some students,” Woinski said, when asked what school officials told him the reason for being sent home was. Woinski says he wore the costume because friends say his long hair makes him a Jesus lookalike, and were not offended by his costume.
The school says thes costume was a disruption and denies its religious nature had anything to do with it. “I don’t think I overreacted,” Principal Joan Broe told CBS 2.
Broe said too many students were drawn to the costume, and that was reason enough. “Children were [asking], where is the boy who is Jesus Christ?” she said. “It was disrupting the education process.”
Woinski’s parents agree it was political correctness gone amok. “I think the whole freedom of speech and expression has definitely had a damper put on it, and this is proof of that,” says Kim Woinski, Alex’s mother. (Please note: I wish people would quit invoking “freedom of speech” out of context. The Supreme Court has said time and time again that “freedom of speech” does not give you protection to say anything you want anytime you want without adverse consequences from anyone. It only means that the government cannot fine or imprison you because of your religious or political speech. Look, if some melee had broken out, the storyline would have immediately been “anti – Semitic white Christian teenagers whose parents will vote for John McCain commit hate crime against Jewish child AND THE PRINCIPAL FAILS TO PROTECT HIM BY FAILING TO HAVE DAILY TOLERANCE DIVERSITY AND MULTICULTURALISM CLASSES!)
But it won’t put a damper on Woinski’s trick or treating. This Jesus has been resurrected for Friday night.
Woinski has developed an interest in religion. His mother is Catholic and his father is Jewish. He recently celebrated his Bar Mitzvah and his also studying Bible scripture. (Typical media whitewashing this kid’s behavior. Please recall his stating “Sort of like a new remake of what supposedly happened.” Let me say that coming up with ways to mock Jesus Christ and undermine Christianity has long been a Jewish pastime, and their purpose for studying the Bible is part of an attempt to be able to do it better. Jews who make a living of mocking Jesus Christ and claiming that there are so many inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the New Testament often know the Bible better than most evangelical Christians. And as for this child’s Roman Catholic father, he certainly does seem to be the liberal sort who thinks that people trashing his religion is a good thing. Now keep in mind: where people putting on suits to mock Jesus Christ is not that big a deal to Protestants, to Catholics, for whom a huge portion of their religion is worshiping images and representations of Jesus Christ, it is a huge deal, and the fact that this fellow not only married a non – Catholic but allowed his son to receive a Bar Mitzvah AND go around mocking the same imagery that his own religion worships shows precisely what sort of “Catholic” that he is. Again, the media knows this, and is clearly siding with the attempt of this child to mock Jesus Christ, and are doing all that they can to withhold that angle from the story. An evangelical Christian girl who went to Halloween dressed as Anne Frank or any other Holocaust victim, now that the media would have been all over. In this case, the media is giving full play to this teacher’s refusing to allow this kid to go around all day with people following him and makin fun of Jesus Christ, which of course was the intent of this child and his mother.)
His school says this was the first time anyone had ever dressed up like Jesus. They say other students were ordered to alter their costumes because they were deemed inappropriate. (A closing crack in the article making it seem as if this fellow was disproportionately punished for mocking Jesus Christ.)
Look, despite the lies of religious right people as well as John Hagee dual covenant theology dispensationalists, Jews have no regard for Christianity. Quite the contrary, Jews despise Christianity and Jesus Christ, and actually have more regard for Islam. Check out their Talmud. Ray Comfort reports that he once pretended to be a Jew with the last name Cohen (which identifies a Jew from a priestly line, Christians know this, and is why a TBN movie starring Stephen Baldwin on the great tribulation depicted a fellow named “Elijah Cohen” as a powerful prophet that was leading the left – behind church), went inside a synagogue, and heard the Jews there brag about having killed Jesus Christ. “He was a false Messiah so we strung Him up.” As Comfort freely admits entering the synagogue under false pretenses and disrespecting the place by giving a child there a gospel tract and getting himself kicked out (both of which were wrong, Comfort!) there is no reason to doubt his story. So if Comfort got inside a random Jewish synagogue during a random meeting and heard them bragging about killing Jesus Christ then we can assume that this is rather common discourse of theirs. (Please keep in mind that Comfort’s story is corroborated by not a few Jewish converts from Christianity, many of whom have found themselves disowned by family and friends shortly afterwards.)
Of course, the mainstream media will not report the virulent antipathy that Judaism teaches towards Christianity. Quite the contrary, they call Christians who do so anti – Semitic, and they also call Christians that refuse to participate in interfaith gatherings with Jewish leaders which ultimately wind up being pressure chambers where Jews and liberal Christians demand that the evangelical invitees slowly abandon their religion point by point (tactic A. is to point out which beliefs are anti – Semitic, tactic B. is to point out that these beliefs are based on New Testament scriptures and doctrines that have been challenged by historical, literary, textual, etc. criticism, so C. holding onto an anti – Semitic belief that is based on Bible passages that have been “proven” to be questionable can only be the very same anti – Semitism that has spilled the blood of countless Jews at the hands of Christians over the centuries and oh yes D. bar Christians with a strong background in theology and apologetics and willingness to defend the accuracy of scripture and have been unwilling to cast aside virtually every passage in the Bible that some text critic somewhere has chosen to dispute) anti – Semitic as well.
Let me be clear: I have no problem with a 13 year old kid who decides to dress up as Jesus Christ for Halloween. One of the biggest errors of modern Christianity, and it comes directly from Constantinism, that horrible ascriptural tradition of Roman Catholicism and state church Protestantism where everyone is compelled to claim to honor Jesus Christ or face imprisonment, fines, torture, ostracism, marginalization, unemployment etc. (i.e. the tradition that did very much terribly persecute not only Jews but also Christians who refused to baptize their infants and insisted on a confessional church comprised only of believers!) is that people who do not believe in Jesus Christ have some obligation to respect Him and those who follow Him. Even if these people reject Jesus Christ, evangelical Christianity insist on this madness that the unregenerate accept the historical and ethical truth of the Bible and the positive impact that religion has on the culture. It is utter foolishness because A) in a free society people can believe what they want and if they choose to believe that “Heidi” or “My Friend Flicka” is more historically truthful and ethical than the Bible then it is their business and B) even if they did “greatly respect Christianity and its contributions” (as not a few non – Christians including many Jews sincerely do) then big deal, what good is it going to do for them when they stand before Jesus Christ in judgment? The lake of fire is not going to be any cooler for people who respect Jesus Christ while not believing in or obeying Him. Yet, so much of evangelical Christianity, especially its political, legal, media, merchandising, etc. arm is geared towards getting people to like and respect Christians rather than to reject the sinful world and believe in and obey Jesus Christ.
Incidentally, it is not merely true that people like John Hagee, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, and the rest of the religious right will never reveal the true level of antipathy that Judaism has for Jesus Christ because doing so would be quite inconvenient to their ability to get millions of supporters to raise billions of dollars and trudge to the polls every 2 and 4 years “to stand with and support Israel our Jewish friends who share our culture and Judeo – Christian values.” It is also true that these types will not tell you that the real reason why Christianity has persecuted Judaism was because of the desire of Christians to mix their faith with the world, starting with a desire to mix Christianity with culture and traditions and culminating with a desire to mix Christianity with the state. THAT is when the anti – Semitism started.
Now during the time of the early church, in the apostolic era and shortly thereafter, when Christians took the doctrine of separation from the world seriously, there was no anti – Semitism in Christianity. It was only when Gentile Christians began to feel that it was appropriate to seek a level of acceptance and approval in mainstream Roman society that the church adopted anti – Semitism. The first move was to call the Jewish Christians heretics and Judaizers (for their opposition to pagan ideas and practices that the Gentile Christians either wanted to adopt or to claim that Christian ideas were similar to in order to gain the respect of cultured pagans … even as late as the Reformation you had John Calvin claiming that Greek pagan philosopher Seneca was an excellent exponent of a Christian worldview!) and drive them from the mainstream church. The next move was to adopt an allegorical interpretation of scripture. Now please realize that allegorical interpretation was a religious tactic adopted by pagan theologians to deal with the extremely immoral behavior of Greek gods! So, these people took the same methods that were used to claim that Greek “gods” (actually DEMONS) who committed incest, rape, murder, etc. WEREN’T QUITE SO BAD and applied it to the Bible. One of their primary tactics was to take everything that the Bible was using to describe the worldly systems (cultures, religions, nations, desires, etc.) as evil and claim that it actually meant the Jews! Because these people lusted after the world and wanted to be part of it and accepted by it, they used allegorization to reject the doctrine that the world was evil in favor of claiming that the Jews were evil. So Cain, Sodom and Gomorrah, Babel, and everything else that the Bible uses to teach us about this wicked world the allegorists claimed actually referred to the Jews. Why? So that the church could be Cain, Sodom and Gomorrah, Babel, etc. and in those things while continuing to call itself holy.
And yes, allegorization was done to expand the Christian realm, the kingdom of heaven, from being merely the hearts of baptized confessing living believers in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to include cultures, values, etc. A common thing was to explain Christianity in terms of the Greek pagan philosopher concept of “virtues.” (For the record, we should point out that the Jewish philosopher Philo did the same long before the “Christian” Gentile philosophers basically produced a poor imitation of the brilliant but regrettably utterly paganized Philo’s worldview.) By the way, this was not nearly only limited to those who followed after the western church and the Alexandria school. The eastern church came up with basically the same doctrines using different methods. This proves that if you want to reject what the Bible says about how Christians must reject the world, then you will find a way to come up with doctrines to justify it.
So, that explains why when Constantine took over Christianity and melded it with the state, there was already 200 years of Christian doctrines around that laid the groundwork for why people should accept it as a good thing. Christians had already by this time been trying to gain acceptance for their religion in the culture by making their religion more like the culture, more acceptable to the culture, and more importantly defining religious doctrines in terms of the culture. So transferring that to the state to support Constantinism was only a small matter, as back then there was no such thing as separation between church and state. So Jews were railed against by Christian Rome for the same reason why they were hated by the pagan Rome prior: because they would not conform to Roman culture. And keep in mind: during the Protestant Reformation, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and the rest all basically made little Romes by creating state churches. That was why they continued to teach “covenantal infant baptism.” It was for the purposes of initiating people into the Reformed or Lutheran church – state, so doctrinal/theological/spiritual significance had to be contrived for it that was truthfully little different from the Roman Catholic justification for it. As a result, all people who refused to conform to church – state – culture were persecuted, and these includes not only Jews, but also Christians with nonconformist beliefs.
Now these church – state Protestants did not go as far as the Roman Catholics, who claimed that everyone that was baptized into and received last rites from the church state was automatically saved (though they might have to endure purgation and require prayers and indulgences). They fully acknowledged that many, indeed most members of the Reformed and Lutheran state churches were unsaved. So, Calvin and others came up with a doctrine of an ekklesiola (the actual body of regenerated) within the ekklesia (the church – state – culture) complex. One had to actually believe to be in the ekklesiola only. But to be in the ekklesia, one only had to be born and baptized as an infant in a particular region. Membership in the ekklesia was mandatory under the pain of fines, imprisonment, marginalization and death and had to be maintained by external conformity to religious values that quite honestly in many cases were merely cultural norms that became a method of social control just as it had been for Roman Catholics. (Again, Jews refused to join the ekklesia and were persecuted and marginalized as a result.) But membership in the ekklesiola was God’s business. Some theologians went as far as to claim that only God could tell the difference between the ekklesiola and the ekklesia, and that people should not even try.
Why? Because insistence on determining actual Christian faith based on external evidence would have destroyed the church – state – culture. It would have created a division from which this complex could never recover. So, the church – state – culture had to create a way for the unsaved within it could be accommodated on the basis of their infant baptism, public adherence to a confession, and external obedience to church teachings and cultural morality. The first notable effort to manage a church – state – culture population consisting of a large majority of people that were not born again were attempts to enforce strict legalism using both the state and church such as in John Calvin’s Geneva. Soon, however, the way to accommodate the unsaved within “Christendom”, whose actual definition is church – state – culture bodies where initiation is by infant baptism was doctrinal liberalism. Rather than using state enforced legalism to force unbelievers to stay in, use liberalism based on rationalism and natural theology to give unbelievers no reason to, especially if the penalty for doing so was economic, political, social, and perhaps even legal marginalization and persecution. (Incidentally, the atheist Enlightenment was every bit as a reaction against the state – church – culture ekklesia as were the pietist and free church movements. Where the latter did not want to attend churches whose doctrines and practices knowingly accommodated unbelievers, the latter were unbelievers who did not want to be bothered with being forced to go to church at all.) And yes, this state – church – culture ekklesia was the true thing that hindered Protestants (except for some pietist groups that had been kicked out of the ekklesia!) from missionary activities. If your state, culture, religion and economy are based on a body of people baptized into it as infants, the last thing that you want to do is go make disciples of people that were never baptized as infants into the ekklesia, because doing so would undermine the entire religious, political, and economic argument, especially when you consider that the overwhelming number of people in the newly evangelized area would remain non – Christian. So, the only real way to accommodate this was with conquest, colonialism. Go take over a heathen country, make it part of your state, and THEN infants (plus any adult converts) baptized into the church – state – culture complex would be part of the ekklesia. People merely seeking to become Christians without being part of the church – state – culture were not sought after or even desired. That is why even the doctrines of William Carey, who operated after several hundred years of the free church tradition (and these free churches were themselves often persecuted and marginalized by the Anglican, Lutheran and Reformed state churches), were so controversial because this thinking had been so embedded into Protestant thought.
Another factor: amillennialism. If you hold to the doctrine that Revelation and the other eschatological passages are not literal but refer to Jesus Christ ruling the earth through the church, the only way to accomplish this is with a church – state – culture setup. Most people will not truly accept the gospel and be born again. We know this from the parable of the sower. According to that parable, even 2/3 of the people that INITIALLY accept the gospel will ultimately reject it (the seeds sown in rocky soil and among thorns). So for the pagan pleaser Origen’s amillennial doctrine to be workable, the goal has to be to set up a state – church – culture institution to try to reform and redeem the world rather than true church that is separate from the world to save souls. And of those baptized into the state – church – culture ekklesiola, God saves whom He will to form the ekklesia. Those outside the ekklesiola, God is largely unconcerned with. (Free church Arminians claim that predestination was developed to support the state church and point to the state convened Synod of Dordt where the Roman Catholic doctrines of Coornhert that Jacobus Arminius had attached himself to were rejected, but the truth is that the already Biblical doctrines of election and predestination that had actually long existed in Judaism before the Jewish early church adopted it was merely prostituted to support Origen state church amillennialism, and furthermore we should recall that the biggest and oldest church – state – culture body is comprised of the very free will Roman Catholics whose doctrines influenced Arminius through Coornhert and became Arminiamism in the first place.)
And what is the primary justification among both Catholic and Protestant state – church – culture advocates? That we should maintain and support the ekklesia for the benefit of the ekklesiola. In other words, maintaining a Christian state and culture where few people truly believe Christianity but everyone is forced to respect Christianity either by statute or by media – education propaganda conditioning A) gets more people saved by exposing them to more churches and the gospel preached therein and B) prevents Christians from being persecuted for the gospel’s sake. Of course, this is a complete rejection of the experience of the early church, which spread like wildfire in the face of persecution. It was in no small part because being separated from the world gave them no delusions of living in a Christian culture. Being forced to acknowledge that most of the people in a culture were receiving no benefit from the gospel of Jesus Christ whatsoever gave them an incentive to do real evangelism. However, if one buys into this church – state – culture concept where everyone is basically good and decent and piety is based on a willingness to pretend so, why preach the gospel? The preoccupation is not with preaching the gospel, but rather with persecuting nonconformers, be they witches, atheists, communists, Catholics, blacks, homosexuals, or JEWS. THAT is what the Salem witch trials were all about. (That was what Sarah Palin’s visiting pastor Thomas Muthee’s allegedly running a witch out of town using a thinly veiled death threat was about.) Yes, I said the Salem witch trials. The idea that Christians came to America seeking religious freedom is a lie. The truth is that of the 13 original colonies, only 2, Georgia and Rhode Island, did not set up a state church and did not use it to try to impose cultural conformity. As a matter of fact, many of the religious people who came to America did so for the purposes of starting “New Jerusalem.” They did believe that their native church – state – cultures that persecuted them were heretical and apostate but they came to America not to reject that model but to try to do it better. Again, if you truly believe in amillennialism, you are obligated to at least try.
So why doesn’t the religious right tell you this story? Simple: because they honestly believe in “America as ekklesia” nonsense, or they are trying to promote it for their own purposes. “America was founded as a Christian nation” say some, others are a bit more publicly acceptable by stating “America was founded on Christian principles.” The only way to do such a thing would have been to found America on the 619 of the Torah whose death Jesus Christ did not come to subject the world under its curse, but rather to fulfill so that the church would be freed from with life. As it was, America at no point has ever even codified the Ten Commandments, let alone the rest of the Torah. And not even codifying the Ten Commandments would save a single person, because no person could keep it even if they wanted to. The only thing that codifying the Ten Commandments would do is to cause unsaved people to bring ever more condemnation upon themselves by trying to keep it and failing to as part of some attempt to keep the civil statutes. The elect, informed and empowered by the Holy Spirit, would not bother with this foolishness because they know that they would not need to be. American civil law and culture has never reflected the 619, never fully reflected the Ten Commandments, and certainly has never reflected the sermon on the mount or the other teachings of Jesus Christ.
Claiming otherwise is a lie, and it is in pursuit of this lie that so many Jews have been persecuted. And of course, it is a result of this persecution that we have so many Jews that regard Christianity as evil and see ridding the world of it as the best way to ensure their own survival. Quite frankly, I don’t blame them one bit. And it is not the least bit ironic that people, the dispensationalists and dual covenant theologists, who hide the true teachings of Judaism toward Christianity and the reasons for the ill treatment of Jews by Christians because of attempts to codify conforming the church to the state and culture and forcing people to respect and worship it. No, it is not the least bit ironic that the people who do this while claiming to be the friends and advocates of Jews are actually working to recreate the system that has worked to persecute and murder so many Jews rather than work to convert them.
A big thing in Europe back in the day if you were a Christian female evangelist to Jews? Seek work as a nanny to Jewish families, and then temporarily steal their babies for the purpose of a “covenantal baptism” to mitigate the effects of original sin and initiate them into the church – state – culture complex without their parents’ consent or knowledge. It allegedly was supposed to open doors to the child’s later being converted. So rather than expressing outrage over the tactics of the erstwhile Alex Woinskis (or for that matter Dan Browns, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harrises) we need to be preach against the John Hagees, Pat Robertsons, James Dobsons, Thomas Muthees, and other religious right leaders that want to take us back to a time when culture, traditions, affiliations, etc. stand in the place of the gospel in the hearts of the people in the church.