Norway Oslo Shooter, Anders Behring Breivik – A Non-Practicing Christian


The Norway/Oslo shooter, Anders Behring Breivik is apparently a Christian, according to certain parties.

A non-practicing Christian who murders people in direct opposition to You shall not murder (Exodus 20:12) and Love your enemy (Matthew 5:24).

And who believes that being a Christian does not necessarily constitute that you are required to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus; Christian fundamentalist theocracy… everything we DO NOT want… secular European society…what we DO want; It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian-atheist; and it is essential that science take an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings.

Similarly, I am a non-practicing vegetarian who eats pork chops and bacon.

Also, I am a non-practicing Muslim who has never once carried out, or even thought about carrying out, any of the Five Pillars of Islam. And eats pork chops and bacon.

Did I mention I am also a non-practicing atheist who overtly believes in God and the supernatural? Please inform the media when I finally snap and go on a shooting spree that I have always firmly avowed myself as an rational-minded atheist. “IN THE NAME OF NO GOD!!!! dakka dakka dakka dakka

But enough about myself! Al Gore is a non-practicing Global Warmist who emits magnitudes more CO2 than me, consumes far more energy and resources than me, and recently bought a mansion by the seaside which he fully expects to be swallowed up by the fifteen-foot sea level rise in another few years.

So have I made my point through sarcasm yet?

Without sarcasm: Anders Behring Breivik is about as actually a Christian as Richard Dawkins. Just because I call myself something, doesn’t mean I really am that.

KAH KAH KAH KAH! See first comment below for a WIN addition!

Tags: , , , ,

55 Responses to “Norway Oslo Shooter, Anders Behring Breivik – A Non-Practicing Christian”

  1. newbie Says:

    and i’m a non practising virgin!

  2. Scott Thong Says:

    Killer one, dude!

  3. Low Says:

    fighting for peace is like f*cking for virginity…

  4. Ron Says:

    A non-practicing Christian who murders people in direct opposition to You shall not murder (Exodus 20:12) and Love your enemy (Matthew 5:24).

    God said:

    “Annihilate, dash to pieces, demolish, destroy, exterminate, kill, leave none alive, pillage, plunder, put to death, rape, slay, smite, stone, wipe out, show them no mercy or pity or remorse” (The entire Old Testament)

    Jesus said:

    “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Mathew 10:34)

    “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!” (Luke 12:49)

    “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.” (Luke 19,27)

    “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)

    “Neca ecos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet.” (Kill them all, God will recognize His own.) ~Arnaud-Amaury, Papal Legate to the Crusaders and the Bishop of Citeaux (Just prior to the extermination of every inhabitant in Béziers, the first city to be sacked, on July 22 1209)

    “We are at fault for not slaying them.”~Martin Luther, On the Jews and Their Lies

    “God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.” ~George W. Bush

    “Actually, I put things into proper perspective. Belief in Christianity is not the belief in the Christian moral teachings or ethical things… it is the belief in Christ, hence ‘Christ-ians’, followers of Christ.”~Zack T (Christian Apologist on this blog)

    Seems to me that Breivik is quite vigorously engaged in the practice of his Christian faith.

    The remainder of your post can best be summed up as partisan polemics, but if Coulter’s (quote-mined) claims are to be taken at face value, then she’s not a real Christian either, because she falls squarely into the “just a cultural Christian” camp she so readily denounces. To whit:

    “Let’s say I go out every night, I meet a guy and have sex with him. Good for me. I’m not married.”—Rivera Live 6/7/00

    “Throughout this book, I often refer to Christians and Christianity because I am a Christian and I have a fairly good idea of what they believe, but the term is intended to include anyone who subscribes to the Bible of the God of Abraham, including Jews and others.” ~Ann Coulter, Godless

  5. NORWAY MASSACRE: KILLER NOT A CHRISTIAN | simonthongwh Says:

    […] https://scottthong.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/norway-oslo-shooter-anders-behring-breivik-a-non-practici… […]

  6. hutchrun Says:

    The Professor and the Madman

    While the establishment media look to fundamentalist Christianity and various right-wing sources to explain the ideology of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik, they have completely ignored his virulent scientific fundamentalism and Social Darwinism, including a far-ranging proposal for a revival of eugenics inspired by Princeton University evolutionary biologist Lee Silver.

    In his 1518-page “European Declaration of Independence,” Breivik reveals himself as an unapologetic champion of modern biology and the scientific worldview.

    Science also trumps religion according to Breivik: “As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings.”

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/07/the_professor_and_the_madman048831.html

  7. hutchrun Says:

    From the self-interview section of Breivik’s manifesto:

    “Q: What should be our civilizational objectives, how do you envision a perfect Europe?

    “A: ‘Logic’ and rationalist thought (a certain degree of national Darwinism) should be the fundament of our societies.”

    This dark vision is not his invention. It’s a spin-off of what he aptly calls “National Darwinism,” which got its start in the writing of Charles Darwin. While a gentle soul in person and wishing no harm to anyone, Darwin envisioned a picture of the world that equates “extermination” (a favorite word of Darwin’s) with biological advancement.

    No one sane would blame Lee Silver or Charles Darwin for Breivik’s rampage, but it’s a historical reality that views like theirs, in the hands of madmen and not-so-madmen, have inspired some very evil deeds. This fact, because it suits no liberal or progressive narrative, unlike the irrelevant citation of Robert Spencer, is not something you will ever hear as the subject of an aggressive, obnoxious interview on the BBC.

  8. hutchrun Says:

    I tried to tell you: “Thousands demonstrate for an Islamic state in Egypt,” by Ben Hubbard for The Associated Press, July 29:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/cairo-protesters-call-for-an-islamic-state-in-egypt/article2113896/?from=sec431
    South of the capital, gunmen fired on a car carrying Christians, killing two.

    Norwegian Ambassador to Israel….
    Killing Norwegians – Not Okay
    Killing Jews – Okay

    Svein Sevje said in an Israeli newspaper interview Tuesday that while the Norwergian bomb and gun rampages that killed 76 people and Palestinian attacks should both be considered morally unacceptable, he wanted to “outline the similarity and the difference in the two cases.”

    Palestinians, the ambassador told Maariv, “are doing this because of a defined goal that is related to the Israeli occupation. There are elements of revenge against Israel and hatred of Israel. To this you can add the religious element to their actions.”

    “In the case of the terror attack in Norway, the murderer had an ideology that says that Norway, particularly the Labor Party, is forgoing Norwegian culture,” Sevje said, referring to suspect Anders Breivik, a Christian nativist who is opently anti-Islam and anti-immigration.

    Norway’s ambassador to Israel justifies ‘Palestinian’ terrorism and we’re supposed to cry for the Norwegian Laborites? If the opposition Progress party ever manages to depose the scummy Norwegian Labor party, I will – bli neder (without taking a vow) – stand in the streets to hand out sweets to everyone.

  9. Scott Thong Says:

    fighting for peace is like f*cking for virginity… – Low

    Yes, but the end result of total war still can be peace… So says King Steve:

    8-Bit Theater: King Steve on International Relations

  10. Scott Thong Says:

    God said:

    “Annihilate, dash to pieces, demolish, destroy, exterminate, kill, leave none alive, pillage, plunder, put to death, rape, slay, smite, stone, wipe out, show them no mercy or pity or remorse” (The entire Old Testament) – Ron

    Addendum…

    God said of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, and what-have-you-ites.

    As none of these peoples exist today, nor are we invading Israelites, I categorize my failure to emulate Stalin’s approach to the Ukraine as a minor sin annulable with a Hail Mary or two. /sarc

    “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Mathew 10:34)

    Yes, as Christian martyrs over the centuries have learnt first hand.

    Oh look, more martyrs over there in the pages of Barnabas Aid.

    It’s like Christians are non-violent or something and therefore tend not to strap bombs to themselves and blow up their oppressors.

    Utterly crazy hypothesis, better call Arkham to lock me up. /sarc

    “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!” (Luke 12:49)

    “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.” (Luke 19,27)

    “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)

    I’m assuming you’re just snarking here, so no comment.

    But if I’m mistaken, please inform me and I will dutifully present my exegesis.

    “God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.” ~George W. Bush

    Net result: Probably a million fewer deaths by today

    Sooooo… How many innocent lives has Obama saved in Libya? Lessing out the beheaded loyalists, anyone else killed by the rebels’ property-torchers and child soldiers, and those who will eventually die from the rebel-run government’s Al Qaeda buddies. /snark

    Hey, maybe those arsonists are obeying Luke 12:49 or something, huh? /sarc

    “Let’s say I go out every night, I meet a guy and have sex with him. Good for me. I’m not married.”—Rivera Live 6/7/00

    Sounds like a hypothetical to me, and furthermore one where she’s putting herself in the shoes of one of her usual targets. Anyone have the full segment?

    but the term is intended to include anyone who subscribes to the Bible of the God of Abraham, including Jews and others.” ~Ann Coulter, Godless

    To emulate her style, “The God of Abraham is fully within His divine rights to cancel the subscription of anyone who doesn’t abide by the terms and conditions listed in the End User’s Agreement.”

  11. Ron Says:

    God said of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, and what-have-you-ites.

    I’m not sure how specifically identifying the cultural inhabitants of Canaan slaughtered in Yahweh’s name ameliorates your position, because the problem still remains: constructing a logically coherent explanation to reconcile the contradictory directives emanating forth from the same entity. Good luck, and Godspeed!

    As none of these peoples exist today

    The empires might no longer exist, but certain population fragments still do. The Amorites (Aramaeans), for example, maintained a distinct cultural identity well into the seventh century CE before finally being swallowed up in the Arab-Islamic juggernaut. Even so, there are still pockets of Christian believers living in modern Syria who proclaim themselves to be of Aramaean descent.

    nor are we invading Israelites, I categorize my failure to emulate Stalin’s approach to the Ukraine as a minor sin annulable with a Hail Mary or two. /sarc

    Whether or not you’re an invading Israelite is not the issue at hand. The challenge, as I’ve explained above, is charting a course through the minefield of contradictory instructions attributed to the God of the Old Testament.

    Yes, as Christian martyrs over the centuries have learnt first hand.

    Yes, and many times throughout history those Christians martyrs died at the hands of fellow Christians.

    Oh look, more martyrs over there in the pages of Barnabas Aid.

    Well, bully for them!😉

    It’s like Christians are non-violent or something and therefore tend not to strap bombs to themselves and blow up their oppressors.

    Christian Terrorism

    Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

  12. Ron Says:

    I’m assuming you’re just snarking here, so no comment.

    But if I’m mistaken, please inform me and I will dutifully present my exegesis.

    By all means, please do, so long as you incorporate a solid rebuttal to the seven pages of scripture Breivak’s Manifesto cited in defense of his actions.

    2083 – A European Declaration of Independence – pdf (His exegesis begins briefly on page 1324 and continues from pp.1327-1334.)

    Net result: Probably a million fewer deaths by today

    I’m sure the families of fallen soldiers and Iraqi citizens will be extremely relieved to hear that, especially in light of the fact that bringing democracy to Iraq only became a fall-back explanation once the original excuse — Saddam has WMDs — became unfeasible to maintain.

    And though I’m fairly certain I’ve already addressed this issue elsewhere on your blog, it nonetheless bears repeating that Saddam’s rise to power was aided and abetted by the US. So as long as were dealing with hypothetical situations, it’s entirely possible that even more lives could have been saved if US interests had stayed out of foreign affairs in Iraq to begin with.

    “Honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” ~President Thomas Jefferson (Inaugural Address, 1801)

    Sooooo… How many innocent lives has Obama saved in Libya?

    I’m no more in favor of the current administration’s foreign entanglements than I was with those of the previous ones.

    However, I’m very keen to discover your (non-partisan) justifications for supporting the imposition of democracy in Iraq while taking a hands-off approach to Libya.

    Sounds like a hypothetical to me, and furthermore one where she’s putting herself in the shoes of one of her usual targets. Anyone have the full segment?

    If you really believe that a woman who dated Spin founder Bob Guccione Jr. (a self-confessed ‘ladies man’ and eldest son of Penthouse publisher Bob Guccione) and NYC Council president Andrew Stein (twice divorced) is still a 50-year-old virgin, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing.

  13. Scott Thong Says:

    And though I’m fairly certain I’ve already addressed this issue elsewhere on your blog, it nonetheless bears repeating that Saddam’s rise to power was aided and abetted by the US. So as long as were dealing with hypothetical situations, it’s entirely possible that even more lives could have been saved if US interests had stayed out of foreign affairs in Iraq to begin with.

    Command & Conquer Red Alert 8 & 1/2: Lion of Babylon

    In this latest instalment of the acclaimed RTS series, with the absence of a Cold War in light of the ongoing hot wars, the USA never meddled in the affairs of other nations. A young lieutenant siezes power over the entire Occident and styles himself Nebuchadnezzar the Second. It is up to the non-united, but numerous Jews of the world who never underwent the Holocaust to undermine his efforts to build a giant combat robot of himself on the site of the former Temple.

    However, I’m very keen to discover your (non-partisan) justifications for supporting the imposition of democracy in Iraq while taking a hands-off approach to Libya.

    On this I am on the extreme, extreme fringe of the right.

    List of places that really ought to be invaded by the UN for flagrant abuse of their own and neighboring populaces (except that the UN is a giant bureaucratic bunch of liberal pansywaists and their peacekeepers would probably rape the populace anyway like they always do): Libya, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, Myanmar, Sudan, North Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Gaza.

    Just off the top of my head.

  14. Scott Thong Says:

    The challenge, as I’ve explained above, is charting a course through the minefield of contradictory instructions attributed to the God of the Old Testament.

    I must have missed that nuance in your earlier comments.

    Yes, and many times throughout history those Christians martyrs died at the hands of fellow Christians.

    Don’t say that we aren’t for equal opportunity! /sarc

  15. Scott Thong Says:

    “Honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” ~President Thomas Jefferson (Inaugural Address, 1801)

    I tend to agree, and especially like his attitude towards the Barbary pirates: To heck with protection money, invade their home bases and kick their teeth in!

  16. Ron Says:

    List of places that really ought to be invaded by the UN for flagrant abuse…

    That’s nice, but I asked for your non-partisan justifications why Iraq invasion (under Bush) was okay while Libya (under Obama) was not.

  17. Scott Thong Says:

    That’s nice, but I asked for your non-partisan justifications why Iraq invasion (under Bush) was okay while Libya (under Obama) was not.

    And I mean to say that, snark and zing opportunities aside, I have no argument against Obama’s attempt to oust Gadaffi (except that it is half-hearted, cynical after the way libs railroaded Iraq, and will probably usher into power guys just as bad).

    Various other wingnuts share similar views – they don’t say that swatting at the Gadfly is wrong, instead they point out that the justifications for war in Libya apply just as much or more to places such as Assad’s Syria and Saddam’s Iraq.

  18. Scott Thong Says:

    Hey you know something? Anders Breivik strikes me as your kinda guy, Ron.

    I mean, he wants to defend the ‘secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage’ (which is what the modern West is, secular society descended from formerly Christian culture) from being replaced with with that has EVEN LESS place for democracy/secularism/atheism/homosexuality/women’s rights than those Bible thumping fundie nuts.

    PLUS, he thinks logic and science should be the foremost guide… Especially in place of biblical teachings which would create a ‘Christian fundamentalist theocracy’ which is everything he doesn’t want. Sound familiar?

    AND speaking of which, he cites Bible verses out of context and without regard to other passages to suit his agenda… Just like you!

    How uncannily coincidental is that?

  19. Ron Says:

    When can I expect that exegesis that you promised me, Scott?

  20. Ron Says:

    I have no argument against Obama’s attempt to oust Gadaffi (except that it is half-hearted, cynical after the way libs railroaded Iraq, and will probably usher into power guys just as bad).

    So basically what your saying is that you have a hate-on for Obama and all things non-conservative. How does that gell with the self-professed “objectivity and neutrality when it comes to debates” you wrote about Standards of Proof post?

  21. Scott Thong Says:

    So basically what your saying is that you have a hate-on for Obama and all things non-conservative.

    While I have it in for Obama and libs, it’s more because of

    1) Their utter ineptitude
    2) Their astounding arrogance
    3) Their shocking double standards and dishonesty that lets them act as if they’re not doing anything wrong

    The third one is what especially gets me.

    Example: Now that Rick Perry’s policies are a proven success in Texas and he’s announced his bid for the Presidency, suddenly his college transcripts have been leaked and are being nicely mocked/savaged.

    Soooo, three years down the road, where are Obama’s allegedly stellar college writings? Why are they (like his birth cert before them) sealed? Do we need Donald Trump to start challenging Obama’s manliness to get them out or what?

    And you have Hillary and various Dems calling critics of Obama’s adventure in Libya unpatriotic. Yes, the same bunch who did a U-turn and buried their urging Bush to whack Saddam in order to score political points badmouthing US involvement.

    Or libs calling for CIVILITY in the same breath as accusing Tea Partiers of being idiot terrorist suicide bombers. Which is kinda confusing as to whether that’s an insult or a compliment, seeing as how libs luuuuuurve those Palestinian self-splodeyers and think Southern Baptists are a greater existential threat than Al Qaede operatives sneaking across the southern border /snark

    Or the various sex and/or corruption scandals involving either members of a name of party conveniently unmentioned in the media or REPUBLICANS (R)!!!!!. But remember, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LIBERAL BIAS IN THE MEDIA, AND OH FOX NEWS IS SKEWED.

    I could go on and on.

    Anyway, if you take a look back, you should find that my only mention of Libya in the main posts has been to call out Obama and Dems for their flip-flopping.

  22. Scott Thong Says:

    When can I expect that exegesis that you promised me, Scott?

    Hey, how much am I getting paid for this? Can I charge per word pay rate? Rush projects cost extra you know.

    Dutiful exegesis, cliff notes version:

    1) Jesus said otherwise.

  23. Ron Says:

    1) Their utter ineptitude

    It’s hard to soar with the eagles when your working with GOP turkeys.

    2) Their astounding arrogance

    Remind me again: Which party granted concessions on spending cuts? Which party’s negotiator stromed out of the talks? Which party’s teabag militants refused to budge even an inch on modest tax increases and was so adamant about that point they were even willing to default on America’s debt?

    3) Their shocking double standards and dishonesty that lets them act as if they’re not doing anything wrong

    The third one is what especially gets me.

    Example: Now that Rick Perry’s policies are a proven success in Texas

    Sure, a success if your definition of success is balancing the state budget deficit with $6 billion in federal stimulus funds and ruthlessly slashing $31 billion from health, public education, and social services over the next several years because the stimulus funds have dried up, while simultaneously screaming that you will secede from the union if the federal government doesn’t cut wasteful spending (like the stimulus handouts you’re pocketing).

    But then again, Perry did get a D in Principles of Economics, so what more can one expect?

    and he’s announced his bid for the Presidency,

    Yes, and this despite the fact that two weeks earlier he’d stated that God had urged him not to run for President.😉

    suddenly his college transcripts have been leaked and are being nicely mocked/savaged.

    Politics is a bloodsport.

    Soooo, three years down the road, where are Obama’s allegedly stellar college writings? Why are they (like his birth cert before them) sealed? Do we need Donald Trump to start challenging Obama’s manliness to get them out or what?

    Do you have evidence that Obama was directly involved with the posting of Perry’s transcripts. If not then how do you know it wasn’t just a disgruntled Texas constituent, or a rival Republican opponent, or even a teabagger with a raging hard-on for Palin (or Michelle “Crazy Eyes” Bachmann) who wants to keep him out of the race?

    And you have Hillary and various Dems calling critics of Obama’s adventure in Libya unpatriotic. Yes, the same bunch who did a U-turn and buried their urging Bush to whack Saddam in order to score political points badmouthing US involvement.

    Hillary supported the war from day 1 and to my knowledge has never once reversed her decision despite criticism from within her own party.

    Or libs calling for CIVILITY in the same breath as accusing Tea Partiers of being idiot terrorist suicide bombers.

    Wasn’t it Palin who placed posters with targets and names on her website urging readers to “take a stand” and then quickly took it down after Democratic Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords was shot?

    Hey, how much am I getting paid for this? Can I charge per word pay rate? Rush projects cost extra you know.

    What? I thought only Scientology(tm) charged for religious enlightenment? Besides, I already did your research by providing a link and page numbers. But hey, if the task is to onerous, don’t bother, because in the end it won’t change the fact that you’ve already lost the main point about him not being a practicing Christian, even if his interpretation of the scriptures is incongruent with your own.

    Dutiful exegesis, cliff notes version:

    1) Jesus said otherwise.

    Like I wrote earlier, the Bible is a minefield of contradictions.

  24. Scott Thong Says:

    It’s hard to soar with the eagles when your working with GOP turkeys.

    Funny, not much soaring seemed to have been done when libs had double majorities before the 2010 revolution.

    But lemme get this straight… You’re saying that if MORE Stimulus and MORE Obamacare and MORE Cash For Clunkers and MORE ending tax cuts had been enacted, the country wouldn’t be in recession and a massive debt hole now?

    Which party’s teabag militants refused to budge even an inch on modest tax increases and was so adamant about that point they were even willing to default on America’s debt?

    As AoSHQ says, what about the Dems who were similarly willing to default if they didn’t get their way?

    Politics is a bloodsport.

    So how come we don’t see prime time rape jokes about Obama’s daughters?

    Do you have evidence that Obama was directly involved with the posting of Perry’s transcripts. If not then how do you know it wasn’t just a disgruntled Texas constituent, or a rival Republican opponent, or even a teabagger with a raging hard-on for Palin (or Michelle “Crazy Eyes” Bachmann) who wants to keep him out of the race?

    Never insinuated it.

    So re-asking: Why did the media jump to vet Joe the Plumber, a private citizen, while giving a Presidential candidate a free pass?

    Wasn’t it Palin who placed posters with targets and names on her website urging readers to “take a stand” and then quickly took it down after Democratic Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords was shot?

    Yes, it was. And here’s a few hundred examples of libs doing much worse – for example fantasizing about killing people, putting archery targets on a map, puttign a bullseye on a politician, actual physical violence, and actually killing people.

    Now re-asking: Recently Gabrielle Giffords returned to cast her vote. And libs are all over the place calling Tea Partiers terrorists, suicide bombers, idiots etc. How does this gel with the supposed focus on ‘civility’?

    And linking back to the debt ceiling vote: So it’s always only Conservatives who have to be moderate and reasonable and willing to negotiate and polite? Never libs who have the same standards applied to them?

    But hey, if the task is to onerous, don’t bother, because in the end it won’t change the fact that you’ve already lost the main point about him not being a practicing Christian, even if his interpretation of the scriptures is incongruent with your own.

    You know that point I was trying to make, about just because I say I’m an atheist vegetarian virgin, doesn’t make it really so?

    Well I’m using that point as applied to your claiming to have won the argument already.

  25. Scott Thong Says:

    Sure, a success if your definition of success is balancing the state budget deficit with $6 billion in federal stimulus funds and ruthlessly slashing $31 billion from health, public education, and social services over the next several years because the stimulus funds have dried up, while simultaneously screaming that you will secede from the union if the federal government doesn’t cut wasteful spending (like the stimulus handouts you’re pocketing).

    Funny thing that slashing budgets like a neocon despot, it actually works:

    But in Wisconsin, here is the net effect of the budget repair bill:

    1. No teachers are being laid off.

    2. Teachers are teaching (in many districts) an additional period per day. They’re doing their jobs — for the children — an additional period per day, rather than overseeing a study hall while they read Steven King books.

    3. Putting 1 and 2 together, class sizes are being reduced in districts, since there are more teachers, teaching more classes, thus realizing what the unions always claim is their Holy Grail — fewer kids per class, and thus more personalized instruction.

    4. Budgets are balanced and teachers’ salaries won’t be coming out of the children’s college funds. Um, isn’t that a good thing too? Isn’t it nice to leave parents some money to save for their kids’ futures?

    But then again, Perry did get a D in Principles of Economics, so what more can one expect?

    And Al Gore got a D grade in Natural Sciences at Harvard.

    Explains why he guzzles energy, flies global on a CO2-spewing private jet, then buys a seaside mansion that will be swallowed by the surely-rising sea levels due to globul warmings (that, or because the Earth’s interior temperature is several million degrees).

  26. Scott Thong Says:

    It’s hard to soar with the eagles when your working with GOP turkeys. – Ron

    Apparently then, fat juicy turkeys are good for the economy:

    More at https://scottthong.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/republican-led-economy-vs-democrat-led-economy/

  27. Scott Thong Says:

    Remind me again: Which party granted concessions on spending cuts? Which party’s negotiator stromed out of the talks? – Ron

    Remind me again: What actual plan did Obama offer?

    Perry’s transcripts

    Quote: As an instructor in the law, not only did he produce no significant scholarship, there is no evidence that he made any impact on his students. Consider that point for a moment. Isn’t it extraordinary, given the press adulation in which Obama has basked for the last four years, that reporters have been unable to come up with a single student who says he was inspired, or even impressed, by Obama’s teaching?

  28. Scott Thong Says:

    Perry isn’t the only one… Kasich in Ohio upgraded too. Meanwhile, Wisconsin gained as many jobs as the rest of the nation combined!

  29. Scott Thong Says:

    By all means, please do, so long as you incorporate a solid rebuttal to the seven pages of scripture Breivak’s Manifesto cited in defense of his actions. – Ron

    Done.

  30. Ron Says:

    Funny, not much soaring seemed to have been done when libs had double majorities before the 2010 revolution.

    But lemme get this straight… You’re saying that if MORE Stimulus and MORE Obamacare and MORE Cash For Clunkers and MORE ending tax cuts had been enacted, the country wouldn’t be in recession and a massive debt hole now?

    Obama extended tax cuts and introduced new ones. And slow economic recovery notwithstanding, the recession ended in Q3 2009.

    As AoSHQ says, what about the Dems who were similarly willing to default if they didn’t get their way?

    It was a cheap political ploy by the Republicans.

    Bush raised the debt ceiling seven times in eight years: once each year in ’02, ’03, ’04, ’06, ’07 and twice in 2008.

    Clinton raised it four times in eight years: twice in ’93 and once in ’96 and ’97.

    Bush Sr. raised it four times in four years: twice in ’89 and twice in ’90.

    Reagan raised it 17 times in eight years: three times in ’81 (two of which were within the same month), twice in ’82, twice in ’83, twice in ’84, three times in ’85, twice in ’86, and three times in three consecutive months during 1987.

    Yet now all of a sudden the GOP made it a major issue.

    So how come we don’t see prime time rape jokes about Obama’s daughters?

    That’s because a pill popping junkie like Rush can’t attract sponsors for a TV show. So he broadcasts his jokes about wanting to see “Obama’s daughters getting groped” on national radio.

    So re-asking: Why did the media jump to vet Joe the Plumber, a private citizen, while giving a Presidential candidate a free pass?

    Re-asking? You asked about Perry’s transcripts and I answered.

    Yes, it was. And here’s a few hundred examples of libs doing much worse – for example fantasizing about killing people, putting archery targets on a map, puttign a bullseye on a politician, actual physical violence, and actually killing people.

    I’m not going to debunk each and every one of your links, but as I’ve already explained on another thread, Coulter’s visit to Canada has nothing to do with the US. The man who lost his finger started the physical altercation, and Amy Bishop had a history of violence decades before she ever met Obama.

    But since were finally back on the topic of serial killers, here are some of their more common characteristics:

    “Nearly all serial killers are very devout men who were raised by members of Pentecostal sects, fundamentalist Catholics or were ‘hard-shell’ Baptists and Methodists.”

    Now re-asking: Recently Gabrielle Giffords returned to cast her vote. And libs are all over the place calling Tea Partiers terrorists, suicide bombers, idiots etc. How does this gel with the supposed focus on ‘civility’?

    “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”~ Ann Coulter

    “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building”~Ann Coulter

    “I don’t really like to think of it as a murder. It was terminating Tiller in the 203rd trimester. … I am personally opposed to shooting abortionists, but I don’t want to impose my moral values on others.”~Ann Coutler, on the murder of Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller, FOX News interview, June 22, 2009

    “God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.”~Ann Coulter

    “If I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”~Ann Coulter

    “I was going to have a few comments about John Edwards but you have to go into rehab if you use the word faggot.” ~Ann Coulter, at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference”

    “I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo.”~Ann Coulter

    “Don’t retreat. Reload.”~Sarah Palin

    This is pretty much how people in America who profess strong Christian beliefs talk every day, which further strengthens the point that Breivik was every bit the Christian he claims himself to be.

    And linking back to the debt ceiling vote: So it’s always only Conservatives who have to be moderate and reasonable and willing to negotiate and polite? Never libs who have the same standards applied to them?

    Which Bizarro world are you living in? The GOP has shown itself unwilling to make compromises at every juncture. In April they threatened to shut down government until they got a budget with just spending cuts and no tax increases. Now when there’s a budget shortfall, they play political football over an artificial debt ceiling that’s been raised dozens of times before by threatening to default on the debt obligations — which they themselves approved just three months earlier — unless the Democrats concede to even further spending cuts without tax increases. Once again they got everything they wanted and gave up nothing in return.

    “What’s wrong with being the party of ‘No’ or the the party of ‘Hell No’?”~Sarah Palin

    Sounds more like the spoiled child who’s never learned to share than a mature adult who’s mastered the art of diplomacy and negotiation.

    Funny thing that slashing budgets like a neocon despot…

    Funny how all those Republican states that balanced their budgets did so using Stimulus Funds. Kind of like the 30-year-old kid who claims he’s a financially independent adult even though his parents send him a cheque to cover living expenses every month.

    And Al Gore got a D grade in Natural Sciences at Harvard.

    Explains why he guzzles energy, flies global on a CO2-spewing private jet, then buys a seaside mansion that will be swallowed by the surely-rising sea levels due to globul warmings (that, or because the Earth’s interior temperature is several million degrees).

    My position on the climate change is undecided, but nonetheless your oft-repeated mantra that Al Gore’s hypocrisy proves the science invalid is as much a logical fallacy as trying to claim that physicians who chain-smoke negate the medical claims linking lung cancer and heart disease to tobacco use.

    Remind me again: What actual plan did Obama offer?

    Why don’t you look it up? It’s located on this this hidden whitehouse-dot-gov website under an obscure heading called “Office of Management and Budget” and a totally bizarre title “The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2012” — I mean, Christ Almighty, how did Obama ever expect anyone to find that sucker there?

  31. Ron Says:

    Done.

    Just wanted to see if you’d actually follow through on your boast. But it don’t change a thing, because millions of Christians claim their particular interpretation of scripture is the correct one. They can’t all be right, so what makes you think your answer is any more authoritative than theirs?

  32. SCOTT THONG: Debunking Norway Shooter Anders Breivik’s Usage of Bible Verses in His Manifesto | simonthongwh Says:

    […] here, I now attempt to debunk Anders Breivik’s citing of Scripture. Thanks go to commentor Ron for spurring this post. Browsing around I didn’t find any examination of Breivik’s citing […]

  33. Scott Thong Says:

    It was a cheap political ploy by the Republicans.

    Reagan raised it 17 times in eight years: three times in ’81 (two of which were within the same month), twice in ’82, twice in ’83, twice in ’84, three times in ’85, twice in ’86, and three times in three consecutive months during 1987.

    Yet now all of a sudden the GOP made it a major issue.

    Just following Obama and the Dem’s playbook:

    “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills,” Obama said.Obama and all Dems voted against debt ceiling increase in 2006

    LEADERSHIP

    FAILURE

    !!!!

    and Amy Bishop had a history of violence decades before she ever met Obama.

    How purely coincidental then that she and the guys and gals in these mug shots were drawn to Obama.

    Using liberal logic vis-a-vis Jared Loughner, the hate filled rhetoric spewing from Obama’s lips must have pushed them over the edge into lawlessness!

    “Don’t retreat. Reload.”~Sarah Palin

    This is pretty much how people in America who profess strong Christian beliefs talk every day, which further strengthens the point that Breivik was every bit the Christian he claims himself to be.

    I want you to argue with them and get in their face.
    If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.
    So I know whose a$$ to kick.
    – Barack Obama, more here.

    This is pretty much how people in America who profess strong liberal beliefs talk every day, only the liberal-infested media excuses their talk as ‘metaphorical’ versus Conservative talk as ‘inciting to violence’.

    I’m not going to debunk each and every one of your links,

    Ah, so now you know something of what it’s like when a polemicist info-dumps attacks on the Bible and expects a response to every point made. The amount of work that goes into such a ‘debate’ is lopsided. Hence, I decided I might as well make my response on Breivik’s manifesto a full post.

    It’s like if every other post I just went “Obama/Liberals/Atheists are (insert slanderous accusation here), prove otherwise!”

    Which Bizarro world are you living in? The GOP has shown itself unwilling to make compromises at every juncture. In April they threatened to shut down government until they got a budget with just spending cuts and no tax increases.

    Wait, I thought you wanted them to listen to Obama more?

    “What’s wrong with being the party of ‘No’ or the the party of ‘Hell No’?”~Sarah Palin

    Sounds more like the spoiled child who’s never learned to share than a mature adult who’s mastered the art of diplomacy and negotiation.

    I won. – Obama to the GOP

    My position on the climate change is undecided, but nonetheless your oft-repeated mantra that Al Gore’s hypocrisy proves the science invalid is as much a logical fallacy as trying to claim that physicians who chain-smoke negate the medical claims linking lung cancer and heart disease to tobacco use.

    Actually I just do that for fun.

    But good luck to you when your energy prices skyrocket thanks to Cap and Trade or whatever else they pass thanks to Al Gore’s brilliant salesmanship.

    Oh wait… Did I say skyrocket?

    Why don’t you look it up? It’s located on this this hidden whitehouse-dot-gov website under an obscure heading called “Office of Management and Budget” and a totally bizarre title “The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2012″

    You know who reads the official Obama White House website?

    Not the Obama White House.

    White House: Where’s the GOP health care plan? Where’s the GOP healthcare plan?
    GOP: Um, it’s linked right on your White House website.
    White House: D’oh.

    White House press office FAIL of the day

    You know who knew Obama had a plan?

    Not his own Press Secretary.

    Meanwhile, regarding terroristically taking the nation hostage with strapped explosives due to refusal to compromise:

    I watch right now as, yet again, he blames the bad economy, and now specifically the S&P downgrade, on “brinksmanship” in Washington and “an unwillingness to compromise” — as if he has absolutely nothing to do with either brinksmanship or unwillingness to compromise. Who was it who, just at the verge of a deal, suddenly insisted on an extra $400 billion in taxes, thus killing the “compromise”? Obama. Who was it who vowed to veto a debt-ceiling deal even if it made it through both branches of Congress, including a Democratic Senate, if it would require another debt-ceiling increase vote again before the next election? Obama. For that matter, Obama just said that the problem is people worrying too much about winning the next election rather than getting policy right. What a joke. Again, he is the guy who, on the debt ceiling (as just described) and on several other items has insisted that the next move must, absolutely must, not occur until after the next election. He’s the guy governing based on the next election. The American Spectator

    What do you call a Democrat who clings to his beliefs, despite the hard evidence of real-world tests undermining those beliefs? A visionary; a genius; a man of highest intellect. What do you call What do you call a Republican who clings to his beliefs, encouraged by hard evidence confirming those beliefs? A terrorist.Ace

  34. Scott Thong Says:

    Just wanted to see if you’d actually follow through on your boast. But it don’t change a thing, because millions of Christians claim their particular interpretation of scripture is the correct one. They can’t all be right, so what makes you think your answer is any more authoritative than theirs?

    In answer to that, I can’t authoritatively say that I am right and anyone else is wrong. What I do is what I usually do whenever an issue is not firmly settled – I use my brain.

    Therefore the closest I can come to being ‘authoritatively right’ is my conviction that I have correctly weighed all the facts and arguments. Go back to Personal Standards of Proof for that.

    Sooooo… What makes you so sure your polemical interpretations are right?

    But hey, let me ask a rhetorical question here:

    If Breivik’s interpretation is the one accepted by the majority of professing Christians, would you and most other liberals, agnostics and atheists still be alive to bash their beliefs?

    For all the jawboning about how crazy, bloodthirsty and murderous the billions of followers of the Bible are, there are surprisingly (surprisingly!!!1one!) few Christians who actually carry out the indiscriminate slaughter that they allegedly subscribe to with all their heart, mind and soul.

    It’s like a vast majority of Christians don’t actually think the Bible encourages violence.

    (What a far out idea that! Crazy! Ridiculous!)

    But that would be highly improbable if the Bible were really full of encouragements to shed blood and whatnot.

    It’s like the Bible doesn’t actually sanction deplorable violence or something.

    (What a far out idea that! Crazy! Ridiculous!)

  35. Ron Says:

    Just following Obama and the Dem’s playbook:

    Raising the debt limit is about politics, not economics

    When Republicans held both the Senate and the White House (2003, 2004, 2006), they provided virtually all the yea votes, while almost all Democrats voted no. When the Democrats were in power (2009, 2010), the roles reversed: the Democrats provided all but one of the yea votes, while Republicans voted no. Only when government was divided – with a Democratic Senate and a Republican president (2002, 2007) – has the vote to lift the debt limit been bipartisan.

    How purely coincidental then that she and the guys and gals in these mug shots were drawn to Obama.

    No more coincidental than the GOP’s predilection of attracting pedobears into its ranks. Without names or sources it’s impossible to determine whether or not the mugshots in your links are authentic or photoshopped. However, such ambiguities don’t exist in these photos. It appears that conservatives prefer to attend their bookings in formal attire.

    Using liberal logic vis-a-vis Jared Loughner, the hate filled rhetoric spewing from Obama’s lips must have pushed them over the edge into lawlessness

    Again, your argument fails for the following reasons:

    – neither Amy Bishop’s or George Sodini’s crimes were politically motivated.

    – Phil Spector’s crime, which occurred in 2003, wasn’t either.

    – the anthrax attacks took place during the Bush administration, and were directed at democratic senators and MSM outlets. Furthermore, there was no direct evidence linking Bruce Ivins to those attacks.

    – Colleen LaRose was motivated primarily by religious ideology and sheer boredom (unemployed, no friends and domiciled with a workaholic Texas boyfriend)

    I want you to argue with them and get in their face.

    … from a speech given at a political rally encouraging supporters to gain more independent voter support.

    If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.

    … a satirical reference from the movie The Untouchables: i.e. be prepared to finish what you started. Besides, I thought conservatives were big on guns?

    So I know whose a$$ to kick.

    … said in reference to who was to be held accountable for the BP oil spill.

    Doesn’t look like any of those quotes are targeting violence against Republican representatives.

    Ah, so now you know something of what it’s like when a polemicist info-dumps attacks on the Bible and expects a response to every point made.

    Info dumping? You’ll have to blame Mr. Breivik for that. Besides, had you simply addressed the verses I initially quoted the workload would have been significantly lighter.

    The amount of work that goes into such a ‘debate’ is lopsided. Hence, I decided I might as well make my response on Breivik’s manifesto a full post.

    Hey, you called this dance, so don’t complain if the music is too fast for you. Besides hard work comes with the territory for those who genuinely seek after the truth.

    It’s like if every other post I just went “Obama/Liberals/Atheists are (insert slanderous accusation here), prove otherwise!”

    What do you mean it’s like if? It is. The post you referenced was basically a ticker tape parade of copy-paste links to other right-wing blogs and your previous posts pinned together with unbridled snark-asm — “Haha, debunk all these SUCKAH!!” — and filed under “left wing violence” just for good measure.

    Wait, I thought you wanted them to listen to Obama more?

    True. what’s your point?

    But good luck to you when your energy prices skyrocket thanks to Cap and Trade or whatever else they pass thanks to Al Gore’s brilliant salesmanship.

    There’s no question that renewable energy currently costs more than what we pay for fossil fuels. However, that price gap will quickly narrow and disappear once the world’s remaining oil reserves begin to dwindle, so it’s only prudent to make that switch before the energy crunch hits.

    ou know who reads the official Obama White House website?

    The article you linked to was written 23 February 2010. How does it relate to the recent budget talks?

    Meanwhile, regarding terroristically taking the nation hostage with strapped explosives due to refusal to compromise

    I’ve already gone over this and provided links to refute the claims made the right-wing bloggers you cited.

    And quite honestly, I don’t know how any of this relates to thread topic.

    In answer to that, I can’t authoritatively say that I am right and anyone else is wrong. What I do is what I usually do whenever an issue is not firmly settled – I use my brain.

    Are you insinuating that the other apologists are not using their brains when it comes to interpreting scripture? In fact, why is reason even required given Paul’s explicit exhortation that Christians speak of things not with words taught us by human wisdom but with words taught us by the Spirit (1 Corinthians:2:12-13)?

    Therefore the closest I can come to being ‘authoritatively right’ is my conviction that I have correctly weighed all the facts and arguments. Go back to Personal Standards of Proof for that.

    But strongly held convictions aren’t facts — they’re merely opinions, which leads us right back to square one.

    Sooooo… What makes you so sure your polemical interpretations are right?

    I didn’t offer any interpretations. I merely pointed out that the Oslo shooter quoted scripture to support his actions.

    It’s like a vast majority of Christians don’t actually think the Bible encourages violence.

    Then you must be living in a country that censors world news.

  36. Scott Thong Says:

    I want you to argue with them and get in their face.

    … from a speech given at a political rally encouraging supporters to gain more independent voter support.

    If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.

    … a satirical reference from the movie The Untouchables: i.e. be prepared to finish what you started. Besides, I thought conservatives were big on guns?

    So I know whose a$$ to kick.

    … said in reference to who was to be held accountable for the BP oil spill.

    Doesn’t look like any of those quotes are targeting violence against Republican representatives.

    Ah, so you do know how to take things in context, when it suits your agenda.

    The post you referenced was basically a ticker tape parade of copy-paste links to other right-wing blogs and your previous posts pinned together with unbridled snark-asm

    And who has been constantly, vigilantly checking a ticker tape parade of blogs to collect the links? The post didn’t arrange itself, ya know.

    There’s no question that renewable energy currently costs more than what we pay for fossil fuels. However, that price gap will quickly narrow and disappear once the world’s remaining oil reserves begin to dwindle, so it’s only prudent to make that switch before the energy crunch hits.

    Four totally contextless responses:

    1) Not yet peak oil
    2) Abiogenic petroleum origin
    3) Bussard/Polywell fusion reactor
    4) Market forces, not forced by govt

    Are you insinuating that the other apologists are not using their brains when it comes to interpreting scripture? In fact, why is reason even required given Paul’s explicit exhortation that Christians speak of things not with words taught us by human wisdom but with words taught us by the Spirit (1 Corinthians:2:12-13)?

    See my post on personal standards of proof again. Is your brain identical to mine in every synapse and cell? If not, there is a chance your interpretation of the same data set will differ from mine.

    I didn’t offer any interpretations. I merely pointed out that the Oslo shooter quoted scripture to support his actions.

    I meant your polemics in general. You know, like the ones where you totally cannot/refuse to comprehend that people other than violent talkin’ Obama use metaphor in their speech, and go about ranting about literal stars literally hitting the literal Earth.

    Then you must be living in a country that censors world news.

    Funny thing, world news… I turned it on the other day and saw Jolo, Pattani, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mumbai, Chechnya, Gaza, underwear bombers, Fort Hood shooters, Fort Hood attempted bombers, DC snipers, Times Square attempted bombers, train bombers… I wondered to myself, what could all these incidents possibly have in common?

    Thank goodness the liberal media, the TSA and Janet Napolitano are so busily protecting us from ex-combat veterans, Caucasian toddlers and those infamously violent Presbyterians!

  37. Ron Says:

    Ah, so you do know how to take things in context, when it suits your agenda.

    Which agenda would that be? Correcting factual errors?

    And who has been constantly, vigilantly checking a ticker tape parade of blogs to collect the links? The post didn’t arrange itself, ya know.

    Well, I appreciate your honest in admitting the post was constructed with malice aforethought. Such candor is rare these days.

    Four totally contextless responses:

    1) Not yet peak oil
    2) Abiogenic petroleum origin
    3) Bussard/Polywell fusion reactor
    4) Market forces, not forced by govt

    Re:

    Point 1 – It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. consumption is increasing and fields in production are at peak capacity. Untapped reserves are remote and expensive to put into production. Then there are the environmental costs.

    Point 2 – An abandoned hypothesis.

    Point 3 – Not ready for prime time.

    Re point 4: Market forces don’t properly encapsulate the non-financial costs involved in doing business. See Tragedy of the Commons for more info.

    See my post on personal standards of proof again. Is your brain identical to mine in every synapse and cell? If not, there is a chance your interpretation of the same data set will differ from mine.

    I’ve read it but gained no new insights from the information presented. If anything, it further reinforces my point that no two people come away with exactly the same interpretation of the same scripture passages. Plus you failed to address my second question: Why should reason even factor into making such interpretations when the Holy Spirit is purportedly guiding those reading the scriptures? Furthermore, wouldn’t you expect such guidance to bring about a congruence of beliefs? Instead we see dissension.

    I meant your polemics in general. You know, like the ones where you totally cannot/refuse to comprehend that people other than violent talkin’ Obama use metaphor in their speech, and go about ranting about literal stars literally hitting the literal Earth.

    There’s a fine line between humorous metaphor and blatant demagoguery, and Tea Party rallies frequently seem to cross over that line. As for stars literally falling to earth, that’s not polemics — those are Jesus exact words.

    Funny thing, world news…

    Unfortunately, violence in the name of Christianity is not only not unheard of, but a sad fact of life.

  38. Scott Thong Says:

    Which agenda would that be? Correcting factual errors?

    Your agenda of correcting factual error when it suits your agenda of bashing your target.

    To wit: Obama made those remarks in a non-threatening, non-violent context because his words are metaphorical…

    But at the same time, Palin’s remarks about ‘reloading’ Congressional action to oppose Obamacare or the debt ceiling are not similarly metaphorical?

    Placing surveyor marks on states marking which ones to try and win (which you were careful not to call crosshairs or gunsights, showing that you do know this) equals incitement to murder?

    The Bible speaking apocalyptically about falling stars must and only can equate literally to giant spheres of superheated plasma travelling thousands of light-years to impact Earth?

    Well, I appreciate your honest in admitting the post was constructed with malice aforethought. Such candor is rare these days.

    Indeed, read the top of my post and you should realize that we just give as good as we get from libs.

    Point 1 – It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.

    Exactly! When is the key to whether we should be wasting billions and killing thousands of jobs – in a major global recession no less – to artifically rush to market technology that cannot possibly cope with the requirements.

    Especially when the USA itself is sitting on massive deposits of oil, shale and coal – oil that Dems don’t let you drill for, but are A-Okay with letting China deplete it via Cuba, or sponsoring Brazil to drill for theirs.

    Wind power? Britain shows that they have to run gas turbines on idle (the most inefficient mode) continuously to account for any sudden loss in energy output – such as happens all the time with unpredictable wind. Double the cost for no energy savings, or even net energy losses.

    Solar power? I’m all for it, in fact someone calculated that if you covered the entire Death Valley in panels, it could power the entire USA. Too bad the animal huggers won’t even let you panel a small section of any desert because semi-rare snakes and lizards live there.

    Hybrids? With the energy it takes to build one (same goes for windmills and solar panels) and the hellish waste the mining for its rare earth metals produces, in practise your driving emissions reductions never even write off the CO2 released in production. Bonus points when you have to replace the worn down battery! And hey, wanna talk about those RECORD BREAKING GM Volt sales? The ones that are supposed to save the company and eat up the upped production numbers?

    Obama’s vaunted green jobs? Years and millions of dollars after Van Jones left his czarship unceremoniously, name one green job created (better yet: name one that isn’t just part of government bureaucracy). Look at Spain, where for every green job, two other jobs hemorrhage.

    I’ve said it often before, I’m actually all for so-called ‘green’ power – just not for the same reasons as environmentalists and especially global warmists, and not rushed to market under legislative coercion. (Starve the Middle East of despot-sustaining, terror-sponsoring money? Why not!)

    Point 2 – An abandoned hypothesis.

    IMHO, the mind boggles at the sheer mass of organic life that needs to have been pressure cooked to produce that much petroleum.

    Point 3 – Not ready for prime time.

    And wind power is?

    A mere $100 million has been allocated for US Navy research into Polywells – a fraction of a fraction of what Kyoto Protocol costs even one adhering nation.

    Throw money at the project already!

    Re point 4: Market forces don’t properly encapsulate the non-financial costs involved in doing business. See Tragedy of the Commons for more info.

    Top-down, statist diktats don’t either. See Shortage Economy for more info.

    Overall, I think we both favor alternatives to fossil fuels, just that we differ on the timeline and method of implementation.

    I’ve read it but gained no new insights from the information presented. If anything, it further reinforces my point that no two people come away with exactly the same interpretation of the same scripture passages. Plus you failed to address my second question: Why should reason even factor into making such interpretations when the Holy Spirit is purportedly guiding those reading the scriptures? Furthermore, wouldn’t you expect such guidance to bring about a congruence of beliefs? Instead we see dissension.

    There are those who claim to be led by the Spirit, and perhaps in all honesty sincerely believe they are. But does this mean that they really are being led by the Spirit to interpret doctrine correctly? Even in the Biblical account itself there are those who deceive (others and/or themselves) with regards to Scripture.

    We are given brains for a purpose. For an out-there example, but an example nonetheless, take the passage “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6).

    Now maybe we can argue about what ‘way’, ‘truth’, ‘life’, or even ‘comes to the Father’ mean. We could even get all Bill Clinton and wonder what the meaning of ‘am’ is.

    But it would stretch the boundaries of logic to conclude that what Jesus is really saying is that ‘There are many ways to the Father, including but not limited to Jesus.’ – that is, the exact opposite conclusion. This becomes even more true when we browse the rest of the Bible and find multiple passages reaffirming this point.

    Hence I would have to conclude that when Oprah opines that Jesus is but one of many ways to God, I would have to disagree. In fact, IMHO she has to be wilfully ignorant to come to that conclusion if she relies solely on the Bible as her basis.

    But me being a mere human – a layman not trained in koine Greek no less – who am I to say that my opinion that Oprah is wrong on this point is anything more than a mere opinion? I can provide evidence and arguments to bolster my case, but unlike criminal or legislative courts, there will not be any binding resolution from my efforts.

    In short, what I’m trying to say is test them all (1st Thessalonians 5:21). This includes alleged Holy Spirit guidance (1st John 4:1).

    And thus it applies to your polemics as well: What basis do you have to say your opinion is anything more than an opinion?

    There’s a fine line between humorous metaphor and blatant demagoguery, and Tea Party rallies frequently seem to cross over that line.

    When you say Tea Party rallies, do you mean snippets the media reports (out of context, like that black man with an automatic rifle being proof that racist Tea Partiers want to shoot black President Obama… And surprise, it wasn’t FOX being un-factual-ish!)?

    Hey, the next Tea Party rally is likely just a stone’s throw away (for some libs, that’s literally a stone thrown). Why don’t you put on a HOPE Obama shirt only with a noose around his neck, bring a “We want to beat liberal brain [sic] out!” placard, and do some undercover original reporting on how violently intolerant Tea Partiers are when they unceremoniously kick you out? I’m sure MSNBC will pay tops for such devastatingly incriminating evidence. Or maybe Al Gore’s channel. At the very least Breitbart might make good on his reward for proof of racist Tea-tinged spittle.

    As far as I know, Tea Parties are for the most part much more civil and even more racially diverse than a similar event on the Left – say, Netroots Nation (I’ve linked to this snark comparison before.) Any racism (e.g. calling black Tea Partiers ‘sell out negroes‘ and ‘monkeys in the window‘), confrontation or violence comes from liberal counter-protestors and infiltrators (e.g. these FAIL crashers).

    As for stars literally falling to earth, that’s not polemics — those are Jesus exact words.

    And Barack Obama wants us to shoot Republicans in the face and a$$!!! That’s not polemics, that’s the Commander in Chief’s exact words!!!

    Unfortunately, violence in the name of Christianity is not only not unheard of, but a sad fact of life.

    I have to agree with you there. Violence purportedly in the name of Christianity exists and sadly so, more grieving because it is in exact opposition to what Jesus taught by word and example.

    But the difference in liberal reaction to Christian vs Muslim perpetrated violence is flabbergasting.

    Pro-lifers have really killed more people than 9/11 did? Really?

    Middle aged veterans are the prime source of domestic terrorists, not young newly-immigrated males? Really?

    Geriatric nuns with urine-collecting bags and toddlers with diapers are just as likely to blow up planes as one-way ticket, young males with little or no luggage? Really?

    Christians are more likely to decapitate or stone sexually loose women or homosexuals as members of certain other religions? Christians are in practise the most chauvanistic, homophobic, intolerant group in the world so we have to focus all our anti-bullying, anti-discrimination, anti-sexism efforts on them first and foremost and almost exclusively? Really?

    I commend the fact that you recognize global terrorism in the name of any religion (not just Christianity) to be abhorrent, and accept that you troll me on Christianity and conservatism because I’m a Christian conservative.

    But seriously, your fellow libs are ridiculously politically correct/multicultural/self-deceiving to the point of impending assisted suicide. Or maybe they’re just being realistic and practical, because few are the times Christians actually riot, burn, kill, behead and bomb because someone drew a picture of Jesus or held a Bible funny. (Reality: Government sponsored ‘art’ goes much, much further than merely neutrally depicting Jesus or Mary or mishandling a Bible.)

    Good luck to you when Dems get back majorities in both houses, the Supreme Court and win the Presidency. Your utopia of tolerant, progressive secular humanism will be quite the model nation before it takes a few dozen bombings and turns into the IR like in Prayers for the Assassin.

  39. Scott Thong Says:

    Further to my point about a shift away from fossil fuels starving out Mid East problem causers… The same thing would happen in the near future if the US would drill its own oil, coastal and deep water and ANWR and all.

    Looks like Israel is beating you to it.

  40. Ron Says:

    Placing surveyor marks on states marking which ones to try and win (which you were careful not to call crosshairs or gunsights, showing that you do know this) equals incitement to murder?

    Ah, so Sarah was telling surveyors to ‘reload’ their transits, theodolites, and levels. Then why did she tweet “bullseye” icon on her Twitter account? Thank Zeus for the Internet where memories can last a lifetime.

    The Bible speaking apocalyptically about falling stars must and only can equate literally to giant spheres of superheated plasma travelling thousands of light-years to impact Earth?

    Yeah, it sounds crazy now but Hellenistic Palestine wasn’t privy to that knowledge. To someone living in an era when people believed that the stars were tiny lights fixed in the heavens a literal interpretation would have made complete sense. It’s only the 21st century apologist who must resort to claiming the passage is metaphor because a literal reading would nullify his beliefs in biblical inerrancy when it comes to cosmological reality.

    Re: US Energy Policy

    I’d be happy to debate this issue on a separate thread.

    There are those who claim to be led by the Spirit, and perhaps in all honesty sincerely believe they are. But does this mean that they really are being led by the Spirit to interpret doctrine correctly? Even in the Biblical account itself there are those who deceive (others and/or themselves) with regards to Scripture.

    Do you believe you are being led by the Holy Spirit, Scott?

    Re: John 14:6

    Alright, since you interpret this passage as a literal and divine proclamation let me ask you this: What do you believe happens to everyone who lived prior to Jesus birth? Are they going to roast in Hell? What about those who’ve never heard of Jesus or the gospel? Or those who have but nonetheless sincerely believe their religious text is the correct path to heaven? Or those who simply find the Bible to incredulous to believe but still lead otherwise honest, peaceful and productive lives? In your opinion, are all those people doomed to eternal damnation as well? And assuming that the Christian version of Heaven and Hell actually exist, who would you rather spend the rest of eternity with:

    a) bitter misanthropes like Luther, Calvin, Dobson, Falwell, Robertson and the Phelps clan; or

    b) fun-loving, outgoing liberals?

    Hence I would have to conclude that when Oprah opines that Jesus is but one of many ways to God, I would have to disagree. In fact, IMHO she has to be wilfully ignorant to come to that conclusion if she relies solely on the Bible as her basis.

    I’ve never watched Oprah so I don’t know what she believes or why, but based on what you wrote my hunch is that her view of Jesus is similar to that of the Muslims, i.e. a great spiritual teacher, but not a divine being.

    In short, what I’m trying to say is test them all (1st Thessalonians 5:21). This includes alleged Holy Spirit guidance (1st John 4:1).

    **AHEM** These verses refer specifically to prophecies and false prophets, not scriptural interpretation.

    <blockquoteAnd thus it applies to your polemics as well: What basis do you have to say your opinion is anything more than an opinion?

    My opinions are informed by logic and reason, not faith and conviction or personal feelings.

    And Barack Obama wants us to shoot Republicans in the face and a$$!!! That’s not polemics, that’s the Commander in Chief’s exact words!!!

    When did Obama say he wants us to “shoot Republicans in the face and a$$”?

    But the difference in liberal reaction to Christian vs Muslim perpetrated violence is flabbergasting.

    Muslim extremists get all the media attention, while Christians extremists get away with murder

    Pro-lifers have really killed more people than 9/11 did? Really?

    From Wikipedia:

    In the U.S., violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eight people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort.

    According to statistics gathered by the National Abortion Federation (NAF), an organization of abortion providers, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings committed against abortion providers.

    According to NAF, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, property crimes committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 100 attacks with butyric acid (“stink bombs”).[18] The New York Times also cites over one hundred clinic bombings and incidents of arson, over three hundred invasions, and over four hundred incidents of vandalism between 1978 and 1993.

    Middle aged veterans are the prime source of domestic terrorists, not young newly-immigrated males? Really?

    Who says that?

    Geriatric nuns with urine-collecting bags and toddlers with diapers are just as likely to blow up planes as one-way ticket, young males with little or no luggage? Really?

    Laws and statutes are universal and applied indiscriminately. That’s how a just society works.

    Christians are more likely to decapitate or stone sexually loose women or homosexuals as members of certain other religions? Christians are in practise the most chauvanistic, homophobic, intolerant group in the world so we have to focus all our anti-bullying, anti-discrimination, anti-sexism efforts on them first and foremost and almost exclusively? Really?

    There are plenty of Christian-based hate groups and militias operating in North America and around the globe. Just because they don’t openly advertise on Fox News (yet) doesn’t mean they don’t exist; and simply pleading “They’re not TRUE Christians” to distance yourself from their actions is a cop-out. Nor is this problem limited to special interest groups. Hatred and bigotry are spewed from Christian pulpits across the country every week. You might think that they are anomalies, but preachers like Jeremiah Wright and Fred Phelps dot the landscape. Yet you seldom see mainstream churches speak out against these extremists. In effect, their silence becomes a tacit approval.

    I commend the fact that you recognize global terrorism in the name of any religion (not just Christianity) to be abhorrent, and accept that you troll me on Christianity and conservatism because I’m a Christian conservative.

    Actually, I’m opposed to all -isms and ideological absolutes. And if by troll you mean “post frequently” then you are correct. However it has little to do with you being a self-proclaimed Christian conservative.

    But seriously, your fellow libs are ridiculously politically correct/multicultural/self-deceiving to the point of impending assisted suicide. Or maybe they’re just being realistic and practical, because few are the times Christians actually riot, burn, kill, behead and bomb because someone drew a picture of Jesus or held a Bible funny. (Reality: Government sponsored ‘art’ goes much, much further than merely neutrally depicting Jesus or Mary or mishandling a Bible.)

    The phrase “politically correct” has become a tiresome cliché — one used most often by people who hate being called out for harboring deep-seated prejudices.

    Multiculturalism does work. See Canada.for an example.

    On the subject of art…

    While I support freedom of speech 100%, I don’t necessarily support government-assisted freedom of speech in the form of arts funding, especially when shock value is the artist’s only purpose.

    Good luck to you when Dems get back majorities in both houses, the Supreme Court and win the Presidency. Your utopia of tolerant, progressive secular humanism will be quite the model nation before it takes a few dozen bombings and turns into the IR like in Prayers for the Assassin.

    Why do I get the distinct impression that you secretly long for such a scenario solely for the satisfaction of pointing out “I told you so.”? And as the Tea Party Republicans demonstrated during the budget crisis, there are plenty of conservative extremists eager and willing to sacrifice an entire nation on the alter of their misguided ideology.

  41. Scott Thong Says:

    Ah, so Sarah was telling surveyors to ‘reload’ their transits, theodolites, and levels. Then why did she tweet “bullseye” icon on her Twitter account? Thank Zeus for the Internet where memories can last a lifetime.

    Speaking of shooting, how’s your own foot? That tweet clearly shows that her intention in targeting them was to win the seats, not slay the seated.

    Yeah, it sounds crazy now but Hellenistic Palestine wasn’t privy to that knowledge. To someone living in an era when people believed that the stars were tiny lights fixed in the heavens a literal interpretation would have made complete sense. It’s only the 21st century apologist who must resort to claiming the passage is metaphor because a literal reading would nullify his beliefs in biblical inerrancy when it comes to cosmological reality.

    Firstly, I don’t dismiss the possibility of actual stars hurtling millions of lights years and physically impacting Earth. God made the universe with a word, what’s a few stars thrown like faster-than-relativistic speeds pebbles?

    I just don’t think it is the most probable interpretation, as a listener would have likely thought of that phenomenon where streaks of light course through the sky. And what the listeners would have thought does not determine what Jesus actually meant – He was fond of using parables and metaphors. Like the time He warned the disciples against ‘the yeast of the Pharisees’ and they went “Oh it’s cos we forgot the bread”.

    Since you’re so much the ancient history expert, do tell me whether ‘shooting stars’ was a term used for meteors in the Greek-speaking world.

    Re: John 14:6

    Alright, since you interpret this passage as a literal and divine proclamation let me ask you this: What do you believe happens to everyone who lived prior to Jesus birth? Are they going to roast in Hell? What about those who’ve never heard of Jesus or the gospel? Or those who have but nonetheless sincerely believe their religious text is the correct path to heaven? Or those who simply find the Bible to incredulous to believe but still lead otherwise honest, peaceful and productive lives? In your opinion, are all those people doomed to eternal damnation as well? And assuming that the Christian version of Heaven and Hell actually exist, who would you rather spend the rest of eternity with:

    a) bitter misanthropes like Luther, Calvin, Dobson, Falwell, Robertson and the Phelps clan; or

    b) fun-loving, outgoing liberals?

    This is a hard topic that I have pondered on before. Similar to these scenarios, I cannot say for certain what the outcome would be.

    What I do believe is that since God is perfectly just, no one who is given his or her fate will be able to retort that the judgment they receive is unfair.

    As for who to spend eternity with, the next life will see the currently sin-tainted personalities of all believers stripped down and refurbished into perfect, good-as-new models.

    **AHEM** These verses refer specifically to prophecies and false prophets, not scriptural interpretation.

    Wow, so you DO know how to apply context when it suits you! Unlike, say, the Breivik manifesto’s citations.

    When did Obama say he wants us to “shoot Republicans in the face and a$$”?

    Being snarky. It’s my inference from Obama saying get in people’s faces, bring a gun to a knife fight, and kick oil exec butt, as processed through your patented logic that you apply to Palin’s quotes.

    Pro-lifers have really killed more people than 9/11 did? Really?

    In the U.S., violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eight people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort.

    Sooooooo it’s just like I snarked, Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the liberal media seeks to convince you that 7 > 3000.

    Middle aged veterans are the prime source of domestic terrorists, not young newly-immigrated males? Really?

    Who says that?

    Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security. You know, the one who thinks the environment is a greater threat than Mexican drug runners armed to the teeth by Eric Holder’s flunkies. Talk about synergy!

    Laws and statutes are universal and applied indiscriminately. That’s how a just society works.

    Then pardon the expression, but you Westerners are morons – especially you self-sure irreligious libs who pride yourself on seeing the ‘pattern’ of violence among Christians and Conservatives, whom you just know are the number one existential, physical threat to secular civilization.

    Like I said, enjoy life under ‘secular’ Islam.

    You might think that they are anomalies, but preachers like Jeremiah Wright and Fred Phelps dot the landscape. Yet you seldom see mainstream churches speak out against these extremists. In effect, their silence becomes a tacit approval.

    Careful, Obama’s yes-men have just recently scolded libs for daring to criticize His Majestic Majesty. Though I suppose his former pastor of 20 years and a former Democrat primary runner are far enough detached to fly under the radar.

    But as for the lack of condemnation from other churches, I agree with you.

    In fact just this week I was pondering on the fact that ‘moderate’ Muslims don’t condemn and try and avert their more violent brethren nearly enough.

    But what about churches who lend little or no voice of condemnation and chastising when groups like Phelps’ harass homosexuals and military funerals? If the rest of the world unfairly thinks that Christians as a whole hate homosexuals when we merely do not agree that homosexuality is permitted by the Bible, is that not partly our own fault for letting the loud minority get away with their antics?

    I was thinking about putting up a post on this. Give me some time and I probably will. Thanks for the reminder and added incentive.

    Actually, I’m opposed to all -isms and ideological absolutes. And if by troll you mean “post frequently” then you are correct. However it has little to do with you being a self-proclaimed Christian conservative.

    I meant that in the context of, why don’t you bash Islam or Buddhism etc on my blog. Because I am not a Muslim or Buddhist, am I right?

    On the subject of art…

    While I support freedom of speech 100%, I don’t necessarily support government-assisted freedom of speech in the form of arts funding, especially when shock value is the artist’s only purpose.

    On this we agree – whether it is a girl painting with her own ‘abortion-derived’ blood or a sculpture of dogs doing it, eh?

    Why do I get the distinct impression that you secretly long for such a scenario solely for the satisfaction of pointing out “I told you so.”? And as the Tea Party Republicans demonstrated during the budget crisis, there are plenty of conservative extremists eager and willing to sacrifice an entire nation on the alter of their misguided ideology.

    Ah, that would be schadenfreude, would it not?

    But seriously, the world would be a far crappier place without an economically, militarily and culturally strong America. Hence while Rush hoped Obama fails, I hoped he succeeds.

    We may disagree on the value of a strong, indeed sometimes belligerent and interfering America. But hey, I am Chinese whose ancestors fled the homeland, and the nation I live in went through Communist insurgency. I am sincerely thankfulfor the American blood and treasure that I can never repay which saved me from being a paddy farmer instead of an idle capitalist pig.

  42. wits0 Says:

    “…which saved me from being a paddy farmer instead of an idle capitalist pig.”

    And us baby boomers here are also glad and grateful to America’s Greatest Generation because we don’t have to bow to the Emperor and speak Japanese.

  43. Ron Says:

    Speaking of shooting, how’s your own foot? That tweet clearly shows that her intention in targeting them was to win the seats, not slay the seated.

    Straw man.

    The fact remains that Palin’s media aide lied on camera when she stated the images were surveyor symbols.

    Firstly, I don’t dismiss the possibility of actual stars hurtling millions of lights years and physically impacting Earth. God made the universe with a word, what’s a few stars thrown like faster-than-relativistic speeds pebbles?

    In that case God would have to violate both the laws of physics and logic, because once our own star — the giant fusion reactor we call the sun — gets magically “darkened” ( i.e. shut down), there won’t be anything left for the remaining billions of stars to “impact” with. It’s the equivalent of saying that a napalm strike impacted a microbe. Nor will there be anyone left to witness the event…that is unless you also propose that God will miraculously keep everyone alive to experience a momentary cold snap followed by an intense fireball and a ultra-high dose of radiation. (Hey, I just thought of a teaser for the final program on the Food Network: “Today on Cooking with YAHWEH: things really heat up as God prepares His favorite cosmic specialty — Terrestrial Shake and Bake.”)

    I just don’t think it is the most probable interpretation, as a listener would have likely thought of that phenomenon where streaks of light course through the sky. And what the listeners would have thought does not determine what Jesus actually meant – He was fond of using parables and metaphors. Like the time He warned the disciples against ‘the yeast of the Pharisees’ and they went “Oh it’s cos we forgot the bread”.

    I think the parable/metaphor interpretation is highly improbable given that the verse in question is joined by a comma to the preceding verse, which reads: “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light.”

    Besides, meteorites are chunks of rock and/or iron debris; comets are composed mostly of rock, ice, dust, and frozen gases; and stars are humongous balls of gas. Shouldn’t the divine creator of the universe know this stuff?

    Since you’re so much the ancient history expert, do tell me whether ‘shooting stars’ was a term used for meteors in the Greek-speaking world

    I don’t think there’s a Greek word for meteorite, but Acts 19:35 appears to mention a sacred stone that fell from heaven. However, the footnote states that the Greek meaning is uncertain, and KJV-only advocates strongly contest the “falling from sky” interpretation contained in other translations.

    What I do believe is that since God is perfectly just, no one who is given his or her fate will be able to retort that the judgment they receive is unfair.

    If the tenets of evangelical faith stipulate that the only road to Salvation is through acceptance of Christ as one’s personal LORD and Saviour, then logic dictates that the answer to my question can’t be anything other than a resounding “No!” But that would contradict Paul’s assertion that God is an impartial judge. (Romans 2:11)

    As for who to spend eternity with, the next life will see the currently sin-tainted personalities of all believers stripped down and refurbished into perfect, good-as-new models.

    But I thought Christians claim that God doesn’t want us to be mindless, subservient robots? And even if that’s the case, why not just refurbish everyone — sinner and saint — for a heavenly stay, and dispense with hell altogether?

    Being snarky. It’s my inference from Obama saying get in people’s faces, bring a gun to a knife fight, and kick oil exec butt, as processed through your patented logic that you apply to Palin’s quotes.

    Ok, but it seems rather disingenuous to claim those were his exact words when in fact they were just a disjointed compendium of random quotes.

    Sooooooo it’s just like I snarked, Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the liberal media seeks to convince you that 7 > 3000.

    If total body count is your primary metric, then yes, the 9/11 attack is worse that the abortion bombings. However, if you measure it by the total number of incidents occurring on US soil, then the reverse scenario is true. And the “at least Christian followers don’t kill as many innocent lives as Muslims do” argument doesn’t exactly strike me as a major selling point towards Christianity. Is this really something you can be proud of?

    Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security. You know, the one who thinks the environment is a greater threat than Mexican drug runners armed to the teeth by Eric Holder’s flunkies. Talk about synergy!

    Synergy indeed. This was a conservative tempest in a teacup. The assessment report was commissioned by her predecessor and released three months after she took took office. Furthermore, she apologized to anyone who might have misconstrued her original comments as an accusation against veterans. As for the drug cartels, it’s an open secret that the CIA conducts a lucrative weapons for drugs trade to finance its operations and keep armaments manufacturers in business. They even established and ran their own airline — Air America — for a while to facilitate the process.

    Then pardon the expression, but you Westerners are morons – especially you self-sure irreligious libs who pride yourself on seeing the ‘pattern’ of violence among Christians and Conservatives, whom you just know are the number one existential, physical threat to secular civilization.

    Maybe you and Ann Coulter think that profiling is a-ok, but those of us who value civil liberties aren’t prepared to go down that road.

    Like I said, enjoy life under ‘secular’ Islam.

    The way to combat becoming a theocratic nation is to strengthen the wall which separates church and state.

    I meant that in the context of, why don’t you bash Islam or Buddhism etc on my blog. Because I am not a Muslim or Buddhist, am I right?

    I refrain from bashing Islam because I’ve noticed you routinely censor comments (not mine) you consider to be too critical of that religion. And Buddhists don’t get in anyone’s face, issue death threats, or disturb my sleep on weekends.

    … or a sculpture of dogs doing it, eh?

    Actually, if done by a skilled artist that would probably be a popular exhibit. Humans seem to have an ingrained fetish for watching animals engaged in sexual activities. If you don’t believe me, just search “youtube monkey masturbating everland zoo” and while you’re enjoying the video please note that it has received well over 2.5 million hits to date and the sidebar suggests many more videos in that genre.

    Ah, that would be schadenfreude, would it not?

    Nah, shadenfreude is merely enjoying someone’s misfortune. “Malevolence” is probably the more apt description for actively wishing ill will upon someone.

    Re: Manifest Destiny & American Exceptionalism

    Think how much better the world might be if the trillions pumped into fighting nebulous targets (War on Terror, War on Drugs, etc) were diverted towards foreign aid and the betterment of humanity.

  44. Scott Thong Says:

    The fact remains that Palin’s media aide lied on camera when she stated the images were surveyor symbols.

    So slap my eyes out and call me blind.

    Meanwhile, Obama caused the Carson shooting!

    In that case God would have to violate both the laws of physics and logic

    Whiiiiiiiich the irreligious regularly accuse God of doing anyway, so what’s the problem?

    I think the parable/metaphor interpretation is highly improbable given that the verse in question is joined by a comma to the preceding verse, which reads: “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light.”

    Figure of speech then, which is what I’ve been saying all along.

    Back to the yeast of the Pharisees exampl, the yeast is a figure of speech but the Pharisees are meant to literally be the Pharisees.

    If the tenets of evangelical faith stipulate that the only road to Salvation is through acceptance of Christ as one’s personal LORD and Saviour, then logic dictates that the answer to my question can’t be anything other than a resounding “No!” But that would contradict Paul’s assertion that God is an impartial judge. (Romans 2:11)

    I’ll leave it to the special Powerpoint presentation at the end of time to make God’s case.

    But I thought Christians claim that God doesn’t want us to be mindless, subservient robots? And even if that’s the case, why not just refurbish everyone — sinner and saint — for a heavenly stay, and dispense with hell altogether?

    The taint of sin on our psyches and bodies will be removed, not our free will.

    If total body count is your primary metric, then yes, the 9/11 attack is worse that the abortion bombings. However, if you measure it by the total number of incidents occurring on US soil, then the reverse scenario is true. And the “at least Christian followers don’t kill as many innocent lives as Muslims do” argument doesn’t exactly strike me as a major selling point towards Christianity. Is this really something you can be proud of?

    You’re right, “At least Christian followers don’t kill as many innocent lives as de facto atheists under Communism” sounds much better.

    Maybe you and Ann Coulter think that profiling is a-ok, but those of us who value civil liberties aren’t prepared to go down that road.

    Wow, it’s like you aren’t living in a time of assymetric, nontraditional warfare where civilians are regularly and intentionally targeted.

    I refrain from bashing Islam because I’ve noticed you routinely censor comments (not mine) you consider to be too critical of that religion. And Buddhists don’t get in anyone’s face, issue death threats, or disturb my sleep on weekends.

    Good point.

    Think how much better the world might be if the trillions pumped into fighting nebulous targets (War on Terror, War on Drugs, etc) were diverted towards foreign aid and the betterment of humanity.

    Well personally I think we all benefit from thousands of jihadists dead and otherwise preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan instead of where we live.

  45. Ron Says:

    So slap my eyes out and call me blind.

    Palin’s map — introduced to her twitter followers with “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!” Pls see my Facebook page.” — says: It’s time to take a stand” followed by crosshairs and the names of Democratic congress members.

    DML map: identifies states with “Bush margins of less than 10%” followed by a paragraph which states: “To win the next presidential election, assuming no further erosion in the blue states, a Democratic candidate would have to win about 20 percent of those votes. And by targeting these states and contesting them vigorously, Democrats would enhance the prospects of boosting their popular vote and sweeping more Senate and House candidates into office.”

    Meanwhile, Obama caused the Carson shooting!

    One was a random shooting of citizens in a restaurant; the other a targeted shooting of a Congresswoman at a political event.

    Whiiiiiiiich the irreligious regularly accuse God of doing anyway, so what’s the problem?

    Well, the first problem is that the sticky “i” key on your keyboard needs attention. The second problem is that your all-knowing god’s knowledge of the universe appears to be just as limited as that of the audience which he’s addressing.

    Figure of speech then, which is what I’ve been saying all along.

    As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3)

    The disciples asked for a literal sign, not a figure of speech. Your case is further weakened by the fact that Jesus explicitly points out when he is using a parable (Matthew 4:32).

    Back to the yeast of the Pharisees exampl, the yeast is a figure of speech but the Pharisees are meant to literally be the Pharisees.

    Yes, and according to the text in Matthew 16:5-12, the metaphor was an epic fail. Jesus had to spell out what he meant because his disciples didn’t know what the hell he was talking about. In fact, he even he had the audacity to blame his poor communication skills on their lack of faith. Talk about chutzpah!

    I’ll leave it to the special Powerpoint presentation at the end of time to make God’s case.

    And I’ll just take that response as a tacit admission that you’ve swept the contradiction under a rug in order to avoid dealing with the cognitive dissonance it generates.

    The taint of sin on our psyches and bodies will be removed, not our free will.

    So then everyone in Heaven will still possess the capability of rebelling against God, just as Satan once did?

    You’re right, “At least Christian followers don’t kill as many innocent lives as de facto atheists under Communism” sounds much better.

    Find me a quote where Stalin attributes his actions to non-belief in God. However, you do raise an interesting point: namely, dogmatic adherence to both religious and political ideology often leads to brutal atrocities.

    Wow, it’s like you aren’t living in a time of assymetric, nontraditional warfare where civilians are regularly and intentionally targeted.

    Maybe you’re right. Let’s start by detaining and interrogating everyone who employs violent metaphors at Tea Party rallies. I’m sure that one or two (or three) waterboarding sessions at Gitmo will quickly establish whether or not Sarah Palin’s gun analogies are merely figures of speech or literal directives to right-wing loons.

    Well personally I think we all benefit from thousands of jihadists dead and otherwise preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan instead of where we live.

    Call me crazy, but I think it’s easier to strike at the root of the problem rather than flailing about at the branches.

  46. Scott Thong Says:

    One was a random shooting of citizens in a restaurant; the other a targeted shooting of a Congresswoman at a political event.

    Yes, three of the victims were National Guardsmen in uniform, by pure unadulterated random chance. (But you atheists are real big of extremely low probability events.)

    The disciples asked for a literal sign, not a figure of speech. Your case is further weakened by the fact that Jesus explicitly points out when he is using a parable (Matthew 4:32).

    At this point I can’t tell if you’re really convinced Jesus wasn’t using figurative, apocalyptic language. So I’ll just let it drop with the ‘personal standards of proof’ caveat.

    And I’ll just take that response as a tacit admission that you’ve swept the contradiction under a rug in order to avoid dealing with the cognitive dissonance it generates.

    Actually my position has always been that all difficult and no-clear-cut-answer matters, including those of seeming cognitive dissonance or even outright contradiction (e.g. perfect love vs perfect justice) will be settled after our time.

    So then everyone in Heaven will still possess the capability of rebelling against God, just as Satan once did?

    Likely so. See also the last rebellion after the 1000 year reign of peace on Earth.

    Maybe you’re right. Let’s start by detaining and interrogating everyone who employs violent metaphors at Tea Party rallies. I’m sure that one or two (or three) waterboarding sessions at Gitmo will quickly establish whether or not Sarah Palin’s gun analogies are merely figures of speech or literal directives to right-wing loons.

    I’ve a better idea. Let’s go with your excellent suggestion to avoid all prejudices and unobjective profiling. Let’s instead input all the data we have on planned and implemented terror attacks on US soil into a computer and let the emotionless program predict the most likely perpetrators. We can then focus the majority of screening efforts on individuals with the highest predicted probability of terrorist acts.

    It might look something like these 29.

    Or perhaps, these 292.

    Hey, seeing is believing and base conclusions on evidence and all that, right Mr. Rational Atheist?

    In any case, you seem perfectly willing to profile and generalize when it comes to Christians and Conservatives.

    Call me crazy, but I think it’s easier to strike at the root of the problem rather than flailing about at the branches.

    Once as a kid, there was a nest of fire ants in my house. Being bored, I whacked each ant individually as they came out of their little hole. Eventually the rate of mature ant death must have outstripped the rate of birth/resource intake, and the fire ants disappeared from the house. That or they shifted their scouting away from the Death Lands.

    Works pretty well with terrorist pests too. (RE avoiding the Death Lands, there is a reason why gutless jihadis aim for ‘soft’ targets instead of military outposts.)

    Okay, so what do you suggest will solve the root of the problem? (Let me guess, the abolishment of all religious belief?)

  47. Ron Says:

    Yes, three of the victims were National Guardsmen in uniform, by pure unadulterated random chance. (But you atheists are real big of extremely low probability events.)

    Considering that the shooting took place in a small city with seven military facilities, what are the odds that three out of the eleven victims shot were National Guardsmen? Not to mention that the first victim killed was a (non-military) woman outside the restaurant, or the fact that he continued firing randomly at neighboring businesses after leaving the IHOP.

    At this point I can’t tell if you’re really convinced Jesus wasn’t using figurative, apocalyptic language. So I’ll just let it drop with the ‘personal standards of proof’ caveat.

    Based on the context of the passage, I’m convinced that author’s narrative was meant to be taken literally. But I’m not in the least surprised that you’d now like to drop the issue because of the obvious implications raised by such a literal reading — namely, Jesus didn’t know sh*t from Shinola about the workings of the cosmos he supposedly created.

    Actually my position has always been that all difficult and no-clear-cut-answer matters, including those of seeming cognitive dissonance or even outright contradiction (e.g. perfect love vs perfect justice) will be settled after our time.

    That’s odd, because in John 16:13 Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit will guide you into all truth.😉

    I’ve a better idea. Let’s go with your excellent suggestion to avoid all prejudices and unobjective profiling. Let’s instead input all the data we have on planned and implemented terror attacks on US soil into a computer and let the emotionless program predict the most likely perpetrators. We can then focus the majority of screening efforts on individuals with the highest predicted probability of terrorist acts.

    It might look something like these 29.

    Yet Sencion was of Mexican descent; Timothy McVeigh, Colleen LaRose (Jihad Jane), Jared Loughner and all these people appear to be Caucasians. The FAA reports over 1760 incidents of unruly passengers aboard airlines since 2001. Are we to assume they were they all non-white Muslim males? Because according to this TSA report a woman tried to smuggle aboard a sword concealed within a cane. And Texas Governor Rick Perry proudly stands behind his state execution record despite the fact that he sent an innocent man to his death. I guess he’s not familiar with the passage in Deuteronomy 27:25.

    Hey, seeing is believing and base conclusions on evidence and all that, right Mr. Rational Atheist?

    Absolutely… Mr. Superstitious Theist.

    In any case, you seem perfectly willing to profile and generalize when it comes to Christians and Conservatives.

    Nah, it’s just amusing to watch Christian conservatives engaged in judging others cry foul when the tables are turned against them.

    Once as a kid, there was a nest of fire ants in my house. Being bored, I whacked each ant individually as they came out of their little hole. Eventually the rate of mature ant death must have outstripped the rate of birth/resource intake, and the fire ants disappeared from the house. That or they shifted their scouting away from the Death Lands.

    Interesting anecdote. But it now appears that you’ve stepped up your game to bash atheists, liberals and other non-Christians. As for your Death Lands scenario, did it perchance ever occur to you that perhaps you may have been an undesirable intruder encroaching upon an autonomous and highly organized community which caused you no threat — just for the lulz?

    Okay, so what do you suggest will solve the root of the problem? (Let me guess, the abolishment of all religious belief?)

    Well, as I wrote earlier, providing aid to underdeveloped nations has a higher likelihood of resolving conflict than engaging in armed occupations.

  48. Scott Thong Says:

    Based on the context of the passage, I’m convinced that author’s narrative was meant to be taken literally. But I’m not in the least surprised that you’d now like to drop the issue because of the obvious implications raised by such a literal reading — namely, Jesus didn’t know sh*t from Shinola about the workings of the cosmos he supposedly created.

    I state that I am dropping the issue simply because I do not feel you can be convinced of my point of view, hence it would be pointless to continue bringing in more arguments and comparable examples. Attribute what you wish to my motives if it pleases you. (Or in your less unabashed parlance, ‘Whatever gets you off’.)

    The FAA reports over 1760 incidents of unruly passengers aboard airlines since 2001. Are we to assume they were they all non-white Muslim males?

    Surely even you see your own fallacy of comparing ‘unruly passengers’ (which likely includes all those drunken tirades) to attempted bombings or shootings of dozens of civilians in Times Square, passenger flights or army bases. Has moral equivalency really brought your vaunted logical rationale this low?

    And Texas Governor Rick Perry proudly stands behind his state execution record despite the fact that he sent an innocent man to his death.

    Citation please. Honestly, the MFM would be harping on this issue much more if it were as bad as you infer.

    Nah, it’s just amusing to watch Christian conservatives engaged in judging others cry foul when the tables are turned against them.

    I support identical rulings and treatment for all.

    To wit, if you Separation of Church and State types want to ban Bibles from schools, don’t give public funded Muslim footbaths in colleges a pass. If you’re going to go all Chicken Little about scary Bible thumpers, give a hoot about the guys who actually cut off heads these days.

    Well, as I wrote earlier, providing aid to underdeveloped nations has a higher likelihood of resolving conflict than engaging in armed occupations.

    And here we come to the root of our own disagreements. A totally differing worldview where you really think that being nice and smiley will make the bad men repent. No wonder you guys love Gandhi ‘hey let’s all suicide until they give up’ so much.

    Should I even bother to give my reasons for why I disagree with your proposed course of action?

  49. Scott Thong Says:

    On another subject, just thought you might like to know what the new WordPress counter reports:

    Top Recent Commenters
    Commenter / Comments
    Ron / 209
    Scott Thong / 197
    wits0 / 97
    simonthongwh / 87
    Zack T / 36

  50. Ron Says:

    I state that I am dropping the issue simply because I do not feel you can be convinced of my point of view, hence it would be pointless to continue bringing in more arguments and comparable examples. Attribute what you wish to my motives if it pleases you. (Or in your less unabashed parlance, ‘Whatever gets you off’.)

    Hey, it’s your call. But you never presented any evidence to back your claims that the text should be read figuratively. And I’m curious to know how that particular passage could even be read metaphorically. What could it possibly allude to?

    Furthermore, why resort to talking in riddles when you can be concise? Wouldn’t a divine being know that the meaning would get lost in translation many years down the road?

    For instance, imagine an alien race reading a translation of comments loaded with current cultural memes contained on the only functioning blog server they can find 2000 years from now. How likely are they to decipher the intended meaning without reference to outside sources?

    Surely even you see your own fallacy of comparing ‘unruly passengers’ (which likely includes all those drunken tirades) to attempted bombings or shootings of dozens of civilians in Times Square, passenger flights or army bases. Has moral equivalency really brought your vaunted logical rationale this low?

    My point was that people of all stripes and colors get violent on airplanes. Making sure they don’t bring aboard weapons which could escalate the violence and casualty count is in everyone’s best interests.

    Citation please. Honestly, the MFM would be harping on this issue much more if it were as bad as you infer.

    I support identical rulings and treatment for all.

    To wit, if you Separation of Church and State types want to ban Bibles from schools, don’t give public funded Muslim footbaths in colleges a pass. If you’re going to go all Chicken Little about scary Bible thumpers, give a hoot about the guys who actually cut off heads these days.

    Excuse me, but when and where did I state that I was in favor of public funding for the Muslim foot baths? Or represent myself as a spokesman for the ACLU?

    For the record, I am unequivocally opposed to the expression of all religious activities on public property. That is what churches, mosques and temples — which already enjoy tax free exemptions — are there for. However, I do think that including religious studies courses covering ALL of the world’s major religions at a high school or university level would be beneficial to imparting a better understanding of the cultural and philosophical differences that inform our world views.

    And here we come to the root of our own disagreements. A totally differing worldview where you really think that being nice and smiley will make the bad men repent. No wonder you guys love Gandhi ‘hey let’s all suicide until they give up’ so much.

    Contrary to what you may think, I’m a pragmatist — not an idealist. I know that we face some very complex challenges; and expecting to resolve all of the world’s problems overnight is neither realistic, nor simple.

    However, I’m confident that we possess the ability to find solutions to our problems through logic and reason. That means acknowledging that all change begins from within; it cannot be imposed upon others by force.

    To date, US foreign policy has been overtly aggressive and self-serving — i.e., rather than building bridges, America has been sewing discontent.

    Ever heard of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs? People engaged in co-operative and productive pursuits towards a better quality of life are less likely to join terrorist organizations founded on political discontent.

    For example, CHRF reports that the cost of building community wells that serve up to 1200 people with clean drinking water for 20 years is around $3000. Think of all the wells or water and sewage treatment plants, or other infrastructure that could have been built in Afghanistan with the $400 billion dollars (and rising) now spent on fighting a hopeless war.

    Should I even bother to give my reasons for why I disagree with your proposed course of action?

    Well, Internet blogs and forums provide the perfect opportunity to exchange ideas and expose our opinions to criticism at a global level.

    So the question is: Are you up to the challenge of entertaining serious discussion, or will you continue using your blog as a soapbox to dispense political talking points?

    I’ll let you decide.

  51. Scott Thong Says:

    Hey, it’s your call. But you never presented any evidence to back your claims that the text should be read figuratively. And I’m curious to know how that particular passage could even be read metaphorically. What could it possibly allude to?

    Fine, fine.

    What I’ve been saying all along is that you are mistaken in interpreting the Bible like some sort of scientific treatise full of precise and literal terms, when you should be reading it like a casual conversation or stirring speech.

    For example, again as I’ve given before, when Mark 1 says about John the Baptist: ‘The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him’ – do we take this literally to mean ALL the people of Jerusalem, including the Pharisees, Romans, lame, aged and infants? How about even more literally, that the whole Judean countryside – including the grass and trees and very soil of the earth – ripped itself out to make its way to John?

    Or is it a figure of speech, a kind of exaggeration for effect, meant to convey the meaning that many people from many strata of society came to hear John’s message? Like saying “Everybody loves ice-cream!” when it is a known fact that there are people who are lactose intolerant, diabetic, etc.

    Hence, as noted by your ‘cultural memes’ observation, Jesus was speaking to the crowd in terms they understood. How many of the farmers and fishermen would have understood (or cared to listen) if Jesus spoke of ‘chunks of rock and/or ice entering the planet’s atmosphere and burning up’? The same effect and mental image would be better achieved by referring to ‘stars falling from heaven’, which the rural folk would likely have seen before – and referred to as such.

    Or when Jesus says that the mustard seed is smallest of all seeds. What, He didn’t know about certain species of orchid which have near microscopic seeds? But who among His audience would appreciate such a culturally deaf metaphor?

    Furthermore, why resort to talking in riddles when you can be concise? Wouldn’t a divine being know that the meaning would get lost in translation many years down the road?

    That’s going into possibilities again. Why didn’t God make humans with four arms? Choose Chinese as the Chosen People and Japan as the Promised Land? Send Jesus in 1985 (as the finale of Jesus Christ: Superstar ponders)?

    For instance, imagine an alien race reading a translation of comments loaded with current cultural memes contained on the only functioning blog server they can find 2000 years from now. How likely are they to decipher the intended meaning without reference to outside sources?

    But that is an accurate description of what accurate Biblical exegesis requires. Just as modern novels, films and songs are a product of their culture, Biblical passages are steeped in Middle Eastern culture.

    When the prodigal son asks for his share of the inheritance – it’s not just that he wants to run off, it’s that the inheritance is supposed to be given when the father is DEAD. Way to show how much he thinks of his dad! And at the end, the father of the prodigal son runs to meet his returning child. Shocking enough for a rich man to exert himself like some lowly laborer, but add to this the fact that he would need to pull up his robes and expose his pale legs to trot.

    And of course, one would need to know how the elder brother and his reaction relates to the Pharisees to understand why they got so huffed up about the parable’s ending.

    Knowing the intricacies of the language is important too. Psalms makes several references to ‘horns’, which sounds poetic enough. But the cultural meaning from the Hebrew is that horns represent strength. Double meanings and inferences abound too – I have a post on this subject, Irony and Wordplay in the Old Testament.

    It is when people ignore all historical and cultural context that we get such oxymorons as Islam calling Jesus the Christ, but denying His deity and kingship (deity implied by Messianic prophecies; kingship implied by the meaning of Christ = Messiah = Anointed One = kings were anointed with oil ref Samuel and David). Same goes for the Islamic apologist text the so-called Gospel of Barnabas.

    My point was that people of all stripes and colors get violent on airplanes. Making sure they don’t bring aboard weapons which could escalate the violence and casualty count is in everyone’s best interests.

    Agreed, but surely basic pattern regonition would

    Excuse me, but when and where did I state that I was in favor of public funding for the Muslim foot baths? Or represent myself as a spokesman for the ACLU?

    Point taken and I apologize. I should not lump you into the general amorphous cloud of liberals.

    So the question is: Are you up to the challenge of entertaining serious discussion, or will you continue using your blog as a soapbox to dispense political talking points?

    I take back my opinion that you are one of those Heal/We Are the World types. And yes, I’m open to serious discussion (as well as dispensing talking points, and for the lols),

  52. Scott Thong Says:

    Breaking: Tea Partiers hurl racist slurs and lynch a stuffed monkey at protest!

    You were right all along!

    Just another in the long line of horrifically racist, outrageously murder-inciteful Tea Party violence!

  53. Ron Says:

    So North Dakota is 80% Republican, 86% Christian, 90% Caucasian and 100% racist.

    Color me surprised. :O

  54. Ron Says:

    What I’ve been saying all along is that you are mistaken in interpreting the Bible like some sort of scientific treatise full of precise and literal terms, when you should be reading it like a casual conversation or stirring speech.

    Actually, I read it as Hebrew mythology. It’s Christians who interpret it as an infallible, inerrant and divinely inspired guidebook to life.

    For example, again as I’ve given before, when Mark 1 says about John the Baptist: ‘The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him’ – do we take this literally to mean ALL the people of Jerusalem, including the Pharisees, Romans, lame, aged and infants?

    I would conclude that the author was prone to hyperbole. But then again, it’s not unusual for large crowds to flock together when tent preachers, faith healers, and religious revivals set up shop in small town America.

    How about even more literally, that the whole Judean countryside – including the grass and trees and very soil of the earth – ripped itself out to make its way to John?

    I don’t think any sensible person would think that the vegetation had uprooted itself.

    Or is it a figure of speech, a kind of exaggeration for effect, meant to convey the meaning that many people from many strata of society came to hear John’s message? Like saying “Everybody loves ice-cream!” when it is a known fact that there are people who are lactose intolerant, diabetic, etc.

    Yes, but exaggeration and metaphor are not the same thing.

    Hence, as noted by your ‘cultural memes’ observation, Jesus was speaking to the crowd in terms they understood. How many of the farmers and fishermen would have understood (or cared to listen) if Jesus spoke of ‘chunks of rock and/or ice entering the planet’s atmosphere and burning up’? The same effect and mental image would be better achieved by referring to ‘stars falling from heaven’, which the rural folk would likely have seen before – and referred to as such.

    Shouldn’t the meaning of the prophecy transcend time? Plus why would ‘chunks of rock and/or ice falling from the sky’ pose a serious challenge to his listeners’ understanding? Didn’t Jesus himself say that with God all things are possible?

    Or when Jesus says that the mustard seed is smallest of all seeds. What, He didn’t know about certain species of orchid which have near microscopic seeds? But who among His audience would appreciate such a culturally deaf metaphor?

    It’s fairly obvious that Jesus didn’t know: a divine being would have said “one of the smallest seeds known to man” thereby keeping the metaphor in harmony with science across all ages.

    That’s going into possibilities again. Why didn’t God make humans with four arms? Choose Chinese as the Chosen People and Japan as the Promised Land? Send Jesus in 1985 (as the finale of Jesus Christ: Superstar ponders)?

    Since you’re evading the question, let me be more direct. If the God of the Bible is all-knowing and all-powerful, then he should be able to effect whatever changes he desires (Setting aside for a moment that a perfect being would have no needs or desires to begin with). So it would seem highly illogical for him to do things that have undesirable consequences or achieve the opposite of what was intended. Yet in fact, the god described in the OT seems to blunder his way through from one disaster to another, i.e. he’s completely inept — and hot-tempered, mean, vicious, petty, and cruel to boot — just like the teabaggers.🙂

    But that is an accurate description of what accurate Biblical exegesis requires.</p

    Exegesis? To me the word means making things up as we go along. Christianity has had 2000 years to weave together a coherent narrative intertwining the Old and New Testament, yet the story changes every time science makes a new discovery. Heck, you guys still haven’t settled on an acceptable definition for the words “inerrant” and “infallible” in all this time.

    But the real fly in the ointment for theists is that evolution discredits the creation account — without a literal Adam and Eve, there can be no original sin or need for salvation — which makes the gospel narratives irrelevant.

    Just as modern novels, films and songs are a product of their culture, Biblical passages are steeped in Middle Eastern culture.

    Yes, I agree. But I doubt that anyone will ever decipher the true meanings in those passages because there were just to many unknown authors and redactors involved in creating them — each of which added their own biases and political agendas to the documents. The Bible isn’t one comprehensive book; it’s a collection of stories woven together over the centuries by a nation trying to make sense of its place in history.

    Agreed, but surely basic pattern regonition would

    I’m not sure if this is a complete thought or it was accidentally truncated. But nevertheless, what is a bassic pattern? How many times have you heard or read about someone who’s gone off the deep end and all the acquaintances interviewed expressed shock at the turn of events? Usually they’re saying things like: “he seemed like such a normal person, never bothered anyone, always kept to himself, went to church, volunteered at the local charity, yada, yada, yada.”

  55. Vendas de produtos online, importados com frete grátis Says:

    Vendas de produtos online, importados com frete grátis…

    […]Norway Oslo Shooter, Anders Behring Breivik – A Non-Practicing Christian « LEADING MALAYSIAN NEOCON[…]…

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: