Rescuing Jesus
Welcome to the Rescuing Jesus podcast page!
Here you will find brief descriptions and links to my two podcast series: "Atheists for Jesus: Rescuing Jesus from the Bible" and "Rescuing Jesus (and America) from the Religious Right." As the names imply, the first series will deal primarily with Biblical subjects (and will be identified with episode numbers) and the latter with religion as it interacts with political issues (and the 2010 episodes will be identified by "RJ 2.0" followed by a brief description of the topic). Both of these podcast series can also be found on iTunes by searching the Store for: "Schei". Older episodes of "Rescuing Jesus (and America) from the Religious Right" that were done in 2006 can be accessed by clicking HERE and also on iTunes. These podcast were done during the George W. Bush administration and while some of the information is, therefore, somewhat dated, I do believe that they contain useful information that is still valid today. (I plan on producing updated versions of these podcasts in the near future.) I hope that you will find the information in these podcasts to be of interest and of value to you. Please feel free to contact me with your feedback.
Ken Schei

[Religion] / 06/14 11:37

An examination of the Virgin Birth story.

[Religion] / 04/30 14:33

In this episode, we'll take a look at the differing beliefs of today's liberal and conservative Christians. I'll introduce the history and beliefs of an early group of Jewish followers of Jesus and his original apostles known as the Ebionites. We'll hear what some famous people had to say about the self-proclaimed apostle, Paul. We'll take a brief look at recent scholarship pertaining to the so-called "Q Document." And, we'll examine the origins, the teachings, and the impact of two gospels that pre-date the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

[Religion] / 03/20 22:36

This episode contains an introduction to Atheists for Jesus, a brief outline of the main topic for this series (Rescuing Jesus from the Bible), a congratulatory message to the US Airways crew, and a thought about our current economic problems.

[Politics] / 03/14 12:11

"This final episode introduces my new podcast, "Atheists for Jesus: Rescuing Jesus from the Bible."

According to the Pauline version of Christianity (as interpreted by many in the "Religious Right" today), faith in Jesus is all that is needed. While according to Jesus and the Ebionites (the Original Apostles and their followers), living a good life (works) is the key.

From Paul we hear:
Rom 10:13
13 ...Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

But Jesus states:
Matt 7:21
21 Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Or as James (the brother of Jesus and the leader of the Ebionites) put it:
James 2:26
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Now, the "Religious Right" will counter with quotes from Paul's letters or--most famously--John 3:16, which they claim as proof that the way to get to Heaven is through faith in Jesus rather than works:

John 3:16
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

I could point out that Paul never met the historical Jesus and that the Gospel of John was written decades after the death of Jesus and was, therefore, the one that was most influenced by the teachings of Paul. However, I don't need to do that because Jesus--in very straightforward language--settles the argument for me.

Jesus' emphasis on works as the route to heaven (rather than faith in Jesus) is found in one of the most well known but probably least understood portions of the New Testament. That is the story of the "Good Samaritan." Over the years, the term "Good Samaritan" has become so watered down that the original moral message of the story has been lost to many people. "Good Samaritan" has come to be applied to anyone who does a good deed. There are even "Good Sam" clubs that are organized to help fellow travelers. What has been forgotten by most people over the years is the fact that the Jews (and the lawyer that Jesus was talking to was a Jew) hated the Samaritans! It was not merely a stranger that helped the injured man after pious members of the lawyers own religion ignored him (a priest and a Levite). It was a SAMARITAN!! A follower of a false religion; a person that most Jews would have nothing to do with; a SAMARITAN!!

In Jesus' time, this must have been a real shocker! The impact would have been similar to Jesus today telling a Fundamentalist Christian the story of the "Good Muslim" or the "Good Mormon" or even (gasp!), "The Good Atheist." With this in mind, let's look at the story of "The Good Samaritan":
Luke 10:25-37
25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.
29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?

37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. (KJV)

"Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" What a find! A clear cut question that received a clear cut answer. No mysteries, no need to search for hidden meaning (even though some religious leaders today, who must know better, seem unwilling to point this out), just a straightforward answer to the age old question of works vs. faith!
"Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"

There are many answers that Jesus could have given to this question.

He could have said:
"You shall accept me as your personal Lord and Savior!"

But he didn't say that.

He could have said:
"Believe in me, for I will be a sacrifice that will take away all of your sins!"

But he didn't say that.

He could have said:
"Have faith in me, for my death will allow all those who believe in me to enter into eternal life!"

But he didn't say that.

What he did say was that you should love God and love your neighbor!

The lawyer then asks a question that leads to a definitive answer to the question of "Works vs. Faith."

The lawyer asks:
"And who is my neighbour?"

"And who is my neighbor?" I may never tell another lawyer joke! This simple question leads us to the most definitive answer possible, and it comes directly from Jesus.

Now, Jesus could have said:
"Your neighbor is he who shares your faith in me!"

But he didn't say that.

He could have said:
"Your neighbor is he who shares your religious views!"

But he didn't say that.

He could have said:
"Your neighbor is anyone you like and respect!"

But he didn't say that.

What he did say, was that the lawyer answered correctly when he said that the neighbor was:
"He that shewed mercy on him."

Not the people of FAITH (the priest and the Levite), but the person of WORKS (who showed love and kindness to his fellow human being). And this person was not even a person who did his Works because of his Faith, he was, rather, a non-believer; a Samaritan!

Jesus then gives a very straightforward instruction to the lawyer who has asked how to get to Heaven:
"Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. "

"GO, AND DO THOU LIKEWISE."!! What a wondrous instruction! Even an old "heathen" like myself can add a hearty, AMEN!

[Politics] / 10/08 6:59

Hi All,

Frank Schaeffer is the son of the late Francis Schaeffer ("Francis Schaeffer, who helped politicize the Evangelicals into the Religious Right through his incendiary books such as A Christian Manifesto (1980) wherein he called for the takeover of America in the name of Christ if, need be, by force if all else failed"). Frank helped his father to organize Evangelicals into what is known as the Religious Right.

Frank's recent article about Palin should be a must read:


[Election 2008] / 09/10 10:50

The first thing that I would like to take a look at is the idea that Senator McCain should be elected based on the fact that he was a war hero and a POW. While I certainly honor the service of all of our military men and women, I question the sincerity of the Republican Party's "newly found" deference to Senator McCain on this subject.

I would like to have a Republican explain to me why this should be so important to voters in 2008, when it was so unimportant to the Republicans in 2000. In 2000 the Republicans passed over John McCain and chose George W. Bush (who was--to state it as kindly as I can--NOT a war hero). In fact, we saw the first example of what came to be called "Swiftboating", being used against McCain, with innuendos about possible brainwashing and references to the "Manchurian Candidate" effectively turning his war record and POW status against him (much as was done later by Bush supporters attacking the war record of John Kerry). Yet today we are constantly encouraged by these same Republicans to vote for McCain based on the very same war record and POW status that they rejected (and in some quarters reviled) in 2000. McCain's war record did not improve in the interval between these two elections. So, there must be another factor involved.

One thing that did change between these two elections is McCain's stated feelings about the Religious Right. In 2000, he stated:

"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right."

There is, indeed, a great chasm between the John McCain who called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, "Agents of intolerance," and the John McCain of today who can be found courting the most radical members of the Religious Right. As was stated in the New York Times:

"To make up for a history of conflict with the Christian conservative wing of his party, Mr. McCain has in some ways gone further than Mr. Bush to reassure the right of his intentions, even at the risk of spooking more moderate voters."

Perhaps it is Senator McCain's recent pandering to the Religious Right that has been the true cause of the Republican's newly found reverence for his war record and POW status. However, since the Republicans certainly did not consider it to be a litmus test for qualifying for the Presidency in 2000, I find it to be more than just a little disingenuous for them to try to sell this idea in 2008.

To paraphrase an old line: It's the issues, stupid!

[Election 2008] / 09/10 10:40

Well, let's see what silly distraction we can come up with today so that we can avoid talking about the important issues in this campaign.

Flip to any news channel today (9/10/2008) and it is likely that before you hear the words "Iraq", "economy", "health-care", "poverty", "social-security", or "education", you will hear the word "lipstick". Have we gone insane?????

I'm 65 years old. For as long as I can remember, I've heard the "lipstick on a pig" metaphor used over and over again to describe a bad idea that someone was trying to dress up as a good idea. It was used by John McCain at one time to deride Hillary Clinton's health care policy.

Now, however, when Barack Obama uses it to describe McCain's rather lame attempt to call himself an agent of change, the McCain camp screams (and MSM listens) that Obama was calling Sarah Palin a pig. (I would invite the reader to view the actual comment. I believe that it is quite evident that Obama was referring to McCain's policies.) (link)

This type of distraction may be necessary for a campaign that is bereft of good policy points, but it speaks volumes about their disrespect for the American public. We need (and deserve) to hear about where both sides stand on the important issues of the day, rather than to be bombarded with childish stunts like this one.

I used to have a fairly good opinion of John McCain. I'm saddened that I feel the need to say that in the past tense.

[Politics] / 07/04 1:10

Episode 2 Contents:

Gay marriage

The Ebionites (cont.)

The number '666'

The Religious Right's views on homosexuality

Bush's tax cut proposals

Ann Coulter

Al Gore's new movie "An Inconvenient Truth"

[Religion] / 06/03 13:00

The most important discussion should not be the marital status of Jesus, but rather the question of whether Jesus' original followers (those who actually knew him) believed Jesus to be a god or a human being.

Kindle Version!
Kindle Version
About Podcasting
Podcasts are like small, independent radio programs. You may listen to these programs on your personal computer or download them to any portable mp3 player. If you subscribe to this podcast, you will automatically receive new episodes as they are released.

Subscribe to Atheists for Jesus: Rescuing Jesus from the Bible via iTunes


<< >>
Special thanks to Mr. George Hrab for the use of his music. Hear the full songs and learn more about this talented artist on his site at Geologic Records.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 2.5 License.