JB: Four Robbers vs One Cop, Robber Shot


What to say but SERVE HIM RIGHT?

From The Star 12 May 2010:

Robber shot in botched heist
By AUSTIN CAMOENS

JOHOR BARU: An illegal immigrant was shot in the leg when he tried to rob a 68-year-old man who withdrew some money earlier from a bank, in Taman Pelangi here.

The drama began when the victim was waylaid by four men on two motorcycles as he was entering his vehicle parked outside the bank.

A policeman patrolling the area noticed the scuffle and went to the man’s aid but was in turn attacked by the suspects. The policemen opened fire twice as he was out-numbered.
‘Shot in action’: The injured robber apprehended by police after his accomplices fled empty-handed in a robbery attempt near Taman Pelangi Tuesday.

Johor police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Mohd Mokhtar Mohd Shariff said the other three robbers fled empty handed on seeing one of them shot.

“The gang is believed to be involved in various wayside robberies in the area, most recent being last week when they robbed a man of RM57,000 after he withdrew money from another bank in the area,” he said.

DCP Mohd Mokhtar urged anyone with information on the case to contact the police hotline at 07-2212 999.

Good on ya, JB cop!

UPDATE: From The Star 14 May 2010:

Busted – gang that preys on bank customers
By NELSON BENJAMIN and MOHD FARHAAN SHAH

JOHOR BARU: Police have busted an Indo­nesian gang which targeted people withdrawing large amounts of money from banks, with the arrest of two Indonesians.

The first suspect was nabbed after he was shot in the leg during a robbery outside a bank on Tuesday. His accomplice was nabbed within minutes near Holiday Plaza.

Sources said the suspects would usually split up with one gang member hanging around banks or teller machines trying to spot people making large withdrawals.

It is learnt that once a victim had been identified, the gang member waiting outside the bank would trail the victim and “strike” at traffic light junctions or lonely stretches.

Most of their victims were woman who placed their handbags on the car seat.

It was reported that an illegal immigrant was shot in the leg when he tried to rob an elderly man who withdrew some money earlier from a bank in Taman Pelangi.

Johor police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Mohd Mokhtar Mohd Shariff said police were confident of arresting the remaining gang members who were believed to be responsible for at least 10 cases in the state.

It is learnt that police have launched a manhunt for at least two other gang members still at large.

Investigations showed that this gang has been known to travel to Indonesia frequently after committing robberies around the country.

Police are still trying to ascertain whether the same group was involved in the case of a Singaporean woman who was robbed of more than S$50,000 (RM115,000) .

Meanwhile in an unrelated case, police arrested two suspects, including an illegal immigrant, involved in three robberies and break-ins.

DCP Mohd Mokhtar said they had entered a marketing office through the roof and stolen a laptop and RM10,000 at about 9am on May 8.

Police later raided a house in Kg Semangat in Kempas and arrested two people.

They seized three mobile phones, three parang, two laptops, one set of keys, three watches, four iron cutters, three video players, and two crowbars.


35 Responses to “JB: Four Robbers vs One Cop, Robber Shot”

  1. Simon Thong Says:

    As I withdrew money from an atm at about 6.30pm, I noticed a guy outside watching me through the glass. A young woman with a child had also noticed him. “He’s watching us,” she said, adding that she was afraid to go out. I asked her to go out with me, and as we emerged on the sidewalk, he approached, right arm outstretched, hand holding something, as if to show it to me. I waved the woman away and she hurried to her car nearby.

    “Uncle,” he began, and I yelled at my loudest, “STOP! DON’T COME NEARER!! He stopped momentarily but moved nearer. Pointing at his face, my arm completely stretched out, I yelled again, “DON’T!!!” and got ready to slam a fish into his face. By then, several people were watching us, and he backed away. I moved off to my car as he moved quiickly away. I drove off. What did he want? Would you let him get near enough to threaten you with a small but sharp weapon?

  2. Simon Thong Says:

    Correction: and got ready to slam a FIST into his face.

  3. Ron Says:

    That’s odd. I thought a man of faith would entrust himself to God’s protection and follow Jesus advice in Luke 6:

    If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.

  4. Simon Thong Says:

    Ron, we have been through this before, and this verse was explained to you. Read that explanation again for your enlightenment.

  5. Ron Says:

    I’ll take that as a reluctant admission to your weakness of faith in the almighty’s protection capabilities — the same lack of faith exhibited by congregations which install high-tech security systems and hire armed guards to monitor the church parking lot during Sunday services.🙂

  6. Simon Thong Says:

    there is none so blind as he who will not see; you give a bad name to agnostics and atheists.

  7. tarpaulin Says:

    “If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. ”

    Ok man! After that what you do when you run out of your 2 cheeks.

  8. Simon Thong Says:

    The teaching does not apply to self-defence, protection of family and others against robbers, rapists, murderers and such. Thus, no problem with running out of cheeks.

  9. Scott Thong Says:

    I’ll take that as a reluctant admission to your weakness of faith in the almighty’s protection capabilities — the same lack of faith exhibited by congregations which install high-tech security systems and hire armed guards to monitor the church parking lot during Sunday services.🙂 – Ron

    I was just thinking about this sort of thing…

    Like, if God is in control of everything, what’s the point of locking your front door or looking both ways before you cross the street? If it’s God’s will, you’ll be robbed or hit by a speeding car regardless, right?

    Ah, but who knows God’s specific will at every single moment? What if it’s all cause-and-effect, for example, if you leave your front door wide open every night for a week, God’s will resulting from that action is to allow you to be robbed?

  10. Scott Thong Says:

    “If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. ”

    Ok man! After that what you do when you run out of your 2 cheeks. – tarpaulin

    Do what Chuck Norris does.

    “Chuck Norris turns the other cheek… To give you a spinning roundhouse kick.”

  11. Scott Thong Says:

    That’s odd. I thought a man of faith would entrust himself to God’s protection and follow Jesus advice in Luke 6: – Ron

    A perfect Christian would work for God voluntarily with no pay, after selling all his possessions and donating every penny to charity. He would never argue or get angry (except at injustice), would not offer resistance to an evil man, would not hesitate to inform people of their sin and of God’s offer of forgiveness and salvation even if it means lawsuits or beheading…

    Christians are not perfect. Nobody is. Q: Where do sinners go? A: To church.

    But at least we try, like the difference between the dying duck and the dead duck as in the tale I related earlier.

  12. Simon Thong Says:

    But would Ron even consider what you said, Scott? He would turn to his list of “Attacks against Christianity” and mouth the next one in it. He demands perfection from christians when he himself is not perfect. He demands a perfect theory of God when his own theory is full of holes. In fact, his theory is simply a collection of Anti this and Anti that, rather than a coherent system. He lives as an imperfect person with imperfect relationships in an imperfect world but he demand perfection from others. A hypocrite he is, or in the words of an older translation, a whitened sepulchre.

  13. Ron Says:

    “I was just thinking about this sort of thing…”

    Have you considered the instructions given in Mathew 6 –

    “24No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

    25″Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? 26Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?

    28″And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”

    …and and Luke 12:

    4″I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. 7Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.”

    … and Psalm 23:4

    “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me.”

    So the way I see it, Chrisitians who take precautionary measures are second-guessing God, i.e., displaying their lack of total faith in his assurances.

    “Christians are not perfect. Nobody is. Q: Where do sinners go? A: To church. But at least we try…”

    “Do, or do not. There is no try.” –Yoda

  14. Ron Says:

    “Ok man! After that what you do when you run out of your 2 cheeks. – tarpaulin”

    Bend over… you got two more.

  15. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    The above “Biblical study” by Ron..

    Scott ought to respond (as usual).

  16. Ron Says:

    Imagine that! An atheist… studying the Bible… on the Sabbath (in North America). Weird, huh?

  17. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    I used to live almost 2 yrs in Mt. Pleasant MI USA in 1994-95. Where do you live Ron and Robert?

    I met many American. Many of them didn’t practice Christianity or they were just “Christian” by name and they ignore it. Some of them are atheists might be. (Did Jesus say my religion is called “Christian” anyway?).

    Maybe in the USA nowardays there are not many people praticing. Of coure there are, but the majority are not really committed to their religion of Christianity I think. However atheists are clearly a minority. I wonder if Ron and Robert thought people who believe in religion were all stupid (somehow)..and thus atheists are smart.

    Hundreds of the world leaders are “stupid” (for believing in religion)?. Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggard, Dr. William Campbell, John Gilchrist, Josh Mc Dowell and his fellows/ followers are all misleading ? Ron and Robert should teach them maybe! And teach us also (Muslims).

    I’m sure however, thousand of scientists are also practicing or believing in religion. Ron and Robert cannot deny this very fact ! What’s wrong with these people?

    Therefore..if they are NOT misleading, it might be atheists who are the ones who misleaded instead ? It cannot be both are right in this constrasting or oppossing side of position or believe.

  18. Simon Thong Says:

    Nope, Ron an atheist is not studying the Bible. Merely looking for verses to use as ammunition in his anti-Christian crusade.

  19. Ron Says:

    Some Chrisitians may make up excuses, but In Mathew 6:19-21 Jesus says:

    “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

    And in Mathew 19:21 he further admonishes:

    “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    So the directive to Christ’s followers is quite clear. Give up your material possesions, and devote your life in servitude to God.

    The consequences of failing to do so are detailed in Acts 5:1-10. To whit:

    Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet. Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.” When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. Then the young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

    About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

    “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

    Peter said to her, “How could you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

    At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband.

  20. Scott Thong Says:

    There is a difference between ‘serving’ and ‘practical usage of’ money, just as there is a difference between ‘worrying’ and ‘sloth’. So I work hard using my God-given abilities in order to pay the bills and tithe at least 10% to support the church, and make sure I have my life insurance policy on track – does this mean I don’t trust God to provide for me and my family?

    Isn’t the very fact that I have steady income, and the chance to purchase the insurance policy of my choice across state lines from a competitive market (which you backward Americans don’t have, *snark*), a form of God’s provision? Sure, there are the temporary panic attacks when some misfortune strikes – but I always have that Marx’s Magical Opiate to ground me. (What’s your own mental/emotional safety net, btw?)

    It is truly a very Liberal worldview where ‘provision’ only means ‘100% on the dole’. *snark*

    I agree that Christians should be focusing on the hereafter, however Jesus also tells us to use our earthly resources wisely in order to win them over and bring them to Him. So as I said before, Christians are by no means perfect – but at least we’re still trying. Maybe that’s why those fundie-nut Conservatives outgive Liberals in charity? (Charity using their own money, I mean, not charity using other people’s tax money, of which Liberals are champions of. *snark*)

    Regarding Ananias and Sapphira, as the second-last paragraph of your comment makes clear, their sin was to try and cheat God (while making themselves look good to the congregation). Note that elsewhere, Paul complains that here he was working for God but the congregations expected him to simultaneously work for his own living – yet they didn’t drop dead.

    The sharing of possession was done willingly – thus the early Christians were voluntary Communists. Unlike, say, the atheist Communists. *snark*

    There, four snarks slotted into my reply. Satisfactory?

  21. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    Robert and Ron..,

    Darwin’s Evolution “great idea” made some people confused. I hope you both do not. The fact is that many scientists do not believe in it either. Those scientists are either Christians or of any faith as well.

    I must thank you for your relentless explanations so far. Though “Evolution” is believed by some, millions of peoples out there are also sceptic with the ‘frivolous’ idea, neither do they fully understood it. So do I And you too maybe, Robert?

    Many basic questions bogged my mind. Below are among the issues:

    1) Does Evolution evolved things or, made them anyway? Is there in any science books stated that Evolution created creatures?

    2) If Evolution did not make them, who made them? They (creatures, living or non-living) made themselves to exist?

    3) If Evolution made things out into existence, in order to make it happened, it needs matters (atom, energy etc) to “create” any single thing. Can Evolution create things without element of matters? Evolution created something without needing a single matter?

    4) Evolution made matters ? Or.. matters exist by the Evolution process ?

    5) Evolution only took place AFTER the existence of the first ever thing/ creature and Evolution never “existed” or irrelevant when it was before time and space existed.

    6) In order for “Evolution” to evolve something, Evolution must first present in the first place. Evolution must be present BEFORE the presence of the time and space.

    Please check my statements below..and advise me if it true or false:

    TRUE or FALSE ?

    The Possible Conclusion:

    1. “Evolution” is the word (terminology) we use to mean or to demonstrate the developments (process) of the Universe from its very beginning, and all its contents (creatures): but Evolution did NOT, does not make them. Please tell me if this (my statement) is wrong or right.

    2. Evolution CANNOT make anything because “Evolution” is NOT a force or power but a process – developments processes or stages of the creatures evolved from it very beginning till the modern times. For example the process of making a pancake 1) must have the flour, 2) mix it with water 3) bake it in a pan. So the “process” never at any time made it, but a cook or chef that made it.

    3. Things evolved upon times, stage after stages that is the way God made things out. You called it “Evolution”. We can call it “developments of creatures’ stages or whatever. It is a matter of choosing of word to describe something. Those words do not have power to do anything, but God is (that made the evolve (and you called it “e.v.o.l.u.t.i.o.n”

    It is clearly misleading and FALSE believe to say “Evolution made them” ! A confused WRONG idea ! TQ

  22. Ron Says:

    Nasaei, Robert and I have already addressed these questions on a number of posts and even provided you with links to investigate them further. If you wish to ignore those answers, that’s entirely your choice, but by the same token, I feel no compulsion to keep repeating them over and over again either.

    And as far as your last four questions are concerned, even IF the theory of evolution were proven wrong at some later point, that would not automatically prove the “God did it theory” correct by default.

  23. Ron Says:

    “I work hard using my God-given abilities in order to pay the bills and tithe at least 10% to support the church, and make sure I have my life insurance policy on track – does this mean I don’t trust God to provide for me and my family?”

    Scott, while your financial prudence is highly commendable from a fiscally conservative standpoint, it nonetheless runs counter to the priciples outlined by your lord and saviour.

    “Isn’t the very fact that I have steady income, and the chance to purchase the insurance policy of my choice across state lines from a competitive market (which you backward Americans don’t have, *snark*), a form of God’s provision?”

    I didn’t realize God was in the life insurance business. Doesn’t he have enough on his plate already sustaining the universe, keeping tabs on his creation, plodding through billions of prayer requests, and creating all those trillions of unique snowflakes at his snowflake factory?

    “What’s your own mental/emotional safety net, btw?”

    Well, without going into minute detail, I’ve taken broad measures to become as financially independent as possible. Suffice it to say that I don’t just rely on a hope and a prayer to provide for all my needs.

    “It is truly a very Liberal worldview where ‘provision’ only means ’100% on the dole’.”

    Is it? I’m fiscally conservative and socially liberal. So tell me Scott, where does that place me on your political scale?

    “Maybe that’s why those fundie-nut Conservatives outgive Liberals in charity?”

    Yes, that’s the political spin the blog site you linked takes away from Mr. Brooks’ book, but the author explicity dismisses that corelation as immaterial, both in his book and in this lecture:

    http://tinyurl.com/3xdbfm8

    “Regarding Ananias and Sapphira, as the second-last paragraph of your comment makes clear, their sin was to try and cheat God (while making themselves look good to the congregation).”

    According to the text, God struck them dead because they sold some land and held back a part for themselves. Was there an obligation to donate the entire amount? Even so, that seems a rather harsh penalty, especially for the wife, considering that social customs of the time offered her no legal recourse to countervail her husband’s wishes.

  24. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    Ron, I don’t really need a two pages explanation, but a concise or short confirmation only. For example you can answer to my question no 1 above, by just say: (for example) “Yes, Evolution DID NOT create things”… or: “NO, Evolution made them”, so that I can know what is your understanding with regard to “evolution”. No point giving me websites links since I can find plenty of them on the internet. By short, I just like to know it from your personal standpoint, others’ viewpoints.

  25. Simon Thong Says:

    Imagine, Ron instructing Scott on what the Bible teaches! LOL.

    Ron, don’t keep on making a joke out of yourself.

  26. Simon Thong Says:

    Nasaei, you’re not going to get anything out of him except attacks.

  27. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    I think so Simon. I asked their PERSONAL opinion on it, they give me websites instead. I talked to them, they asked me to talk and communicates with others (websites).

    Very obvious to me..as I expected..Robert and Ron already made up their mind and believe in something even though they are very not sure of. Otherwise why can’t they cannot explain it to us ? Otherwise Ron wouldn’t have said: –

    “even IF the theory of evolution were proven wrong at some later point, that would not automatically prove the “God did it theory” correct by default…” or such unconfirmed thing ! (yet they ALREADY believe !)

  28. Ron Says:

    The main difference, Nasaei, is that my ‘belief’ is based on an overwhelming body of evidence, whereas yours is based on what… the delusional and incoherent scribblings of some ancient goat herders?

    And my point was that rejecting one theory doesn’t mean another wins by default. If scientists discovered the lunar surface wasn’t composed of volcanic rock that wouldn’t automatically validate the theory that it’s made of green cheese.

  29. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    Did “evolution” make things..? That was among the question I asked. Simple.

    …or “evolution” was a terminology we use to describe developments stages
    of things..?

    I may have other simple questions for further discussion.

  30. Scott Thong Says:

    Scott, while your financial prudence is highly commendable from a fiscally conservative standpoint, it nonetheless runs counter to the priciples outlined by your lord and saviour. – Ron

    There is another angle I forgot to explore, that of being good stewards of the resources and responsibilities entrusted to us. It’s not for no reason Jesus kept talking about money and wealth, more than about heaven and hell.

    Jesus’ request to sell everything and donate the proceeds were actually specifically for that particular rich young man… You don’t see Him chiding various other followers to do so, including the Lazarus family whose house He visited, the woman who poured 300 denarii worth of perfume on Him (which He instead chided Judas for snarking it could have been sold to donate to the poor), Zacchaeus who only gave half of his possessions to the poor, and well-off Joseph of Arimathea whose tomb He ‘borrowed’. Neither did Paul or the others lambast the various supporters whom are recorded as still having jobs and houses. In the rich man’s case, it was to challenge his specific weakness of loving luxury and security in wealth.

    I didn’t realize God was in the life insurance business. Doesn’t he have enough on his plate already sustaining the universe, keeping tabs on his creation, plodding through billions of prayer requests, and creating all those trillions of unique snowflakes at his snowflake factory?

    I believe omnipotence covers that, however the idea that God created a universe that can run without Him constantly pressing buttons (not to say that He cannot press universal control buttons at all) was one of the catalysts for religiously motivated scientific research.

    Is it? I’m fiscally conservative and socially liberal. So tell me Scott, where does that place me on your political scale?

    Fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    Let me make a guess, I bet you and a lot of Americans probably want to see a 2012 candidate who clearly outlines his agenda, including promising to focus only on economic and foreign policy matters to fix the mess they’re in now, and not touching social issues (leave that to individual states which have diverse demographics anyway). Am I close?

    According to the text, God struck them dead because they sold some land and held back a part for themselves. Was there an obligation to donate the entire amount? Even so, that seems a rather harsh penalty, especially for the wife, considering that social customs of the time offered her no legal recourse to countervail her husband’s wishes.

    Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.”

    Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

    “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

    Peter said to her, “How could you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord?

  31. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    All scientists in the world believe in evolution theory – True of False ?

    That was another ‘question’ that I’ve asked.

  32. hutchrun Says:

    And to think Four Robbers vs One Cop is bad?
    Here`s 2billion gone “poof”
    http://jelas.info/2010/05/26/chua-rm-2b-of-mca-assets-to-be-managed-by-my-son/

  33. Nasaei Ahmad Says:

    Last week Tun Mahathir said 2 major oil fields worth $320 billions that Malaysia used to control it but now no longer our’s. It is belongs to Brunei.

    Hidup UMNO, Malaysian are shocked! I trust MCA more than am-NOAPKO.

  34. Ron Says:

    “There is another angle I forgot to explore, that of being good stewards of the resources and responsibilities entrusted to us.”

    Yes, and they were often presented as parables describing a servant’s (slave’s) responsibilities to his master.

    “It’s not for no reason Jesus kept talking about money and wealth, more than about heaven and hell.”

    His discussions on earthly wealth were mostly negative because he considered it a stumbling block to attaining spiritual salvation. Jesus might have been called many things, but “Leading Judean Neocon” wasn’t one of them. If anyhing, he was a “spread the wealth around” and “pay your taxes” kind of guy, yet these are the very same qualities you openly despise in Obama.

    “Jesus’ request to sell everything and donate the proceeds were actually specifically for that particular rich young man.”

    Sure, in that particular instance. But look in Luke 12:33 where he tells his disciples “Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.” And in Luke 14:33 where he’s even more explicit when he states “any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.”

    “You don’t see Him chiding various other followers to do so, including the Lazarus family whose house He visited, the woman who poured 300 denarii worth of perfume on Him (which He instead chided Judas for snarking it could have been sold to donate to the poor)”

    This is one of those stories where the four gospels disagree. Matthew and Mark say it was at Simon the Leper’s house and an unamed woman annoited his head. Matthew claims the disciples complained. Mark says some of those present. Jesus then says to chillax because the poor will always be with us, but he won’t — which is an odd thing to say, because Christians insist he was resurrected and now lives eternally in the hearts of all believers. And as an added touch of irony he goes on to say “I tell you the truth, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.” Too bad neither author could see fit to remember her actual name.

    Now Luke, on the other hand, claims a woman of the city, who was a sinner (which suggests not everyone in the city was a sinner) came while Jesus was dining at a Pharisee’s house and washed his feet with her tears, dryed them with her hair, kissed them, and then annoited them with oil. The Pharissee (named Simon) complained about this not because of the waste, but for the simple fact she was a sinner.

    In John the setting is at Lazarus house, the woman is Mary, she pours the perfume on his feet and wipes them with her hair, and Judas is the one complaining about the wasted opportunity to help the poor. The author clues us in that “He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.”

    “Neither did Paul or the others lambast the various supporters whom are recorded as still having jobs and houses.”

    Perhaps, but he also said “if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”

    “Let me make a guess, I bet you and a lot of Americans probably want to see a 2012 candidate who clearly outlines his agenda, including promising to focus only on economic and foreign policy matters to fix the mess they’re in now, and not touching social issues (leave that to individual states which have diverse demographics anyway). Am I close?”

    My support goes to candidates who promise to uphold the Constitution. Unfortunately, Ron Paul has stated he will not run in 2012 and an Obama/Palin choice is no choice at all.

    Re: Ananias and Sapphira

    Reposting the text doesn’t alter the situation. Peter’s allegation that they lied is not supported by the opening narative.

    “Peter said to her, “How could you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord?”

    1 Peter 3:1

    “Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives.”
    s, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,

  35. Scott Thong Says:

    Hey Ron and Robert, look, your buddy on all things anti-religion and anti-conservatism (and anti-capitalism).

    http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: