A Shameful Misrepresentation of God's Word

The author blatantly attacks the Christians who belive that "If God says it, that settles it." What he doesn't seem to realize is that the Word of God does not need the "wisdom" of any man injected into it. If God says it, that DOES settle it. How can any man possibly have the nerve to say that if God, the supreme ruler of all things, gives a command, that a man can disrespect it and do as he pleases?

"...neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate HOMOSEXUALS, nor sodomites... will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6: 9-10, NKJV).

I'm sorry Mr. Spong, but God has spoken. And he certainly doesn't need your supposedly professional opinion on the matter. I hope nobody was deceived by this book. To those that were, I ask you: Whom do you serve? God or men?

Hate This!

I hate this book! It makes the Christians ridiculous! It is terrible! I hate it so much! Ho? You hate it too??? Well, that's great...let's hate it together! Maybe we could base a hate club against this book! This book is terrible!

important book

If one is familiar with Spong, then one knows where to go for alternatives to conservative Christianity. His work is important because it really highlights the two choices one faces in religion. Either one can interpret the Bible in a plain, common sense manner the way one interprets other nonfiction literature or one can become liberated and create one's own religion based upon one's own personal preferences. Spong's approach liberates oneself from all boundaries. As a result, anything goes. One finds no logical reason to ban sex with animals or children since the Bible is no longer authoritative since it is in Spong's view riddled with errors. Therefore, one has no basis for saying that rape is wrong. Majority opinion is often wrong (sun revolving around the earth). Hence, those who adopt Spong's view logically ought to be "beyond good and evil" and stop using words such as right and wrong. Instead, one can replace those words with convenient and inconvenient. The refusal to do this by proponents of this belief system by adherents of Spong's views demonstrates a fundamental inconsistency in their world view.
By the way , Exodus 20 is speaking of the government; in the Sermon on the Mount, Christ is talking about not seeking personal retribution (ie. they are different contexts). Hence, if one actually reads the Bible in context, one does adopt Republican views (for the benefit of some of more ignorant reviewers).