Jesus Didn’t Tell Caesar What To Do? The Religious Right’s Most Confusing Claim

Jesus Didn’t Tell Caesar What To Do? The Religious Right’s Most Confusing Claim March 1, 2018

“Jesus never told Caesar what to do” is the confusing new battle cry of some leaders among the Religious Right.

While there’s plenty of things my former tribe have said and done over the years that have left me scratching my head, nothing is more confusing to me than their use of this claim:

Saying “Jesus never told Caesar what to do” is a way of stating the correct claim that Jesus never told the formal government how to operate.

That’s entirely true, but for a few reasons not germane to this post. This point on Jesus and Caesar does get used in Christian circles from time to time, but it’s typically an argument that’s used by my fellow Anabaptists as a partial reason for why some Christians don’t believe in voting or participation in government at all. It could also be used to support an argument if one wanted to claim that we should refrain from imposing Christian values or principles on government entirely, but those are the only two possible uses for this term I can come up with.

But for a Religious Right leader to use this argument to support their position that some biblical principles need not apply to government because “Jesus didn’t tell Caesar what to do?” The premise itself is a living contradiction to the entire purpose of the Religious Right.

Day in and day out, the religious right tells us that our nation needs to turn to God—not just individually, but corporately. We are told that we need “Godly leaders” who will stand on “God’s word.” When choosing between two candidates, we’re always told to vote for whoever is committed to running the country on “biblical principles”.

In fact, even the entire past presidential election was based on this: the Religious Right’s number one selling point for Trump was convincing people he’d appoint conservative Christian judges who would steer the nation’s laws in a more “biblical” direction.

And those laws that Christians on the right think are unbiblical? They’ll not only condemn them all day long, but the Religious Right as a movement was established for the purpose of changing laws they find unbiblical.

First it was abortion. Then it was same sex marriage. Who knows the next issue they’ll rally around, but the undeniable truth is this: everyone knows the Religious Right is a movement that exists to change or establish laws in accordance with (what they think are) biblical principles.

Folks like Franklin Graham even traveled the country encouraging Christians to run for any elected position they could find, so that Christians could influence government and laws on every level possible.

Let’s put it this way: their entire purpose for existing is to tell Caesar what to do.

So why would someone like Jerry Falwell even use this term?

The key is in context: they use the term when it would come at a cost to them.

They’re fine with telling Caesar what to do when it comes to their favorite issues—because in these cases, what they’re really doing is telling other people what they can or can’t do.

But when it comes to biblical principles about caring for the poor, the sick, and the hungry?

Well all of a sudden when we get to that principle, they realize the same hand that points a finger all day long… now has four pointing right back at them.

And in that case?

Well, all of a sudden “Jesus never told Caesar what to do.”


unafraid 300Dr. Benjamin L. Corey is a public theologian and cultural anthropologist who is a two-time graduate of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary with graduate degrees in the fields of Theology and International Culture, and holds a doctorate in Intercultural Studies from Fuller Theological Seminary. He is also the author of the new book, Unafraid: Moving Beyond Fear-Based Faith, which is available wherever good books are sold. www.Unafraid-book.com. 

Be sure to check out his new blog, right here, and follow on Facebook:

"The class war is over. Spoiler: The rich people won."

10 Signs You’re Actually Following TRUMPianity ..."
"And you're arguing that they're not ? Do their bodies and clothes not get tainted ..."

10 Reasons Christians Should Affirm Women ..."
"Though down-votes are always appreciated, they usually serve as poor substitutes for (counter)arguments (or, rather, ..."

10 Reasons Christians Should Affirm Women ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • $144948586

    “They’re fine with telling Caesar what to do when it comes to their favorite issues—because in these cases, what they’re really doing is telling other people what they can or can’t do.”
    Good job noticing that this is indeed what’s happening, does this mean you’ll give up voting or seeking for government to impose your will on others (as in the case of feeding the poor or forcing subsidization of failing public schools, etc)?

  • Newton Finn

    Several points should be made to supplement this perceptive article. First, in Jesus’ day, the line between Jewish and Roman leaders and officials was a thin one at best, and Jerusalem was largely governed by the temple priesthood. When Jesus dressed down these religious officials, he was talking not only to religious but also to governmental power. Second, when Jesus walked this earth, democratic government, empowering all citizens, had not yet been invented. The so-called democracies of ancient Greece had been slave societies, administered by the privileged few. Only post-Enlightenment did there begin to be actual democracies, which themselves had to undergo long periods of evolution to enfranchise (theoretically) all citizens.

    So what should an American Christian do with this new form of government that has only recently, relatively speaking, come into existence? The egalitarian principles set forth in the Preamble to our Declaration of Independence dovetail nicely with the Golden Rule. Democracy, according to this Preamble, is created by human beings as a tool to secure and protect their God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Why would any Christian refuse to make use of this tool to do just that–to assert the collective political will, in an orderly and egalitarian manner, to lift people out of poverty, exploitation, and oppression? If you come across a sheep in a pit, you lift it out.

    In the late 19th Century, a forgotten genius named Edward Bellamy created a national sensation with his books “Looking Backward” and “Equality,” which painted a vivid and detailed portrait of an America that, following a nonviolent populist revolution, operated according to the Golden Rule and the lofty principles of the Preamble. If you haven’t read these two works of genius, please consider doing so. Bellamy’s revolution never came, but his vision has lost little luster. Read his books even today, and your spiritual and political lives become one flesh.

  • Trump told us that he would appoint judges who would interpret the Law not legislate from the bench and he has.
    Abortion and same sex marriage are non-biblical.
    People lobby for their issues and beliefs all day long. Isn’t that how same sex marriage got approved?
    Our Laws are for all the people and we must obey them whether we like them or not. If we don’t like them we have to work to get them changed.
    Many people do not care about the poor and sick among us. It is not divisible by political affiliation.

  • Chuck Johnson

    “Our Laws are for all the people and we must obey them whether we like them or not.”

    You must obey them whether you like them or not, Bob.
    Martin Luther King, Gandhi and many others were not constrained in this way.

    Slavish, obsessive obedience to authority is a form of slavery.
    It is not a good practice.

  • Chuck Johnson

    Well, all of a sudden “Jesus never told Caesar what to do.”-Benjamin

    Religions are an endless source of hypocrisy, contradiction, paradox, compartmentalized thinking, etc.
    The conservative and fundamentalist versions have the worst problems with this.
    Thank you Benjamin, your criticisms are clearly true.

  • Bones

    So the US is based on Ancient Israelite Law is it.

    Well so much for the Constitution then.

    Btw derpy Trump’s not changing same sex marriage.

    Lol this from a guy who lobbied against the black president for the past 8 years.

    “Many people do not care about the poor and sick among us.”

    Well at least you’re identifying yourself now.

  • Bones

    I think by Law, Bob means the Old Testament.

    That’s why he’s looking for concubines.

  • Bones

    I’ll say….

    It seems Jesus had more of a problem with modern Western democracies than ruthless ambitious tyrants.

  • Matthew

    I´ve tried to strike a balance here. I recognize that the interests of empire are not that of the kingdom and that the church has historically made a mess of things the closer it has gotten to the empire agenda. That said, I still think Christians are supposed to influence (I emphasize influence) the state in positive ways that support policies of justice, mercy, and compassion. I also think that although the church should be doing social justice as part of its calling, there is absolutely no reason why the state cannot also do its part. Doesn´t Romans 13 say the government is a servant of the good?

  • Chuck Johnson

    That Jesus has evolved into a crude political tool.

  • I believe that part of being citizens of the kingdom of God is increasing God’s will on Earth–‘Your kingdom come; your will be done; on Earth as it is in heaven.’ But it is NOT to be done by force or through politics but by our influencing increasing numbers of people to align with God and practice kingdom values.

  • Matthew

    Do you think it´s OK for Christians to be actively involved in politics?

  • SamHamilton

    Thank you Mr. Corey for holding Mr. Falwell accountable for his inconsistency. I appreciate the direct quote so your readers know to whom you’re referring when you confront this inconsistency. To be fair, however, I see Christians (and non-Christians) from across the political perspective employing the “Christians shouldn’t force their beliefs on me” mantra when it comes to policy proposals they don’t like, but they’re perfectly willing to try and get the government to put into place their own policy preferences. Neither Falwell nor the Religious Right are the only inconsistent ones here. Our Anabaptist brethren are at least consistent.

  • SamHamilton

    Hi Bob,
    I don’t think Mr. Corey was arguing that advocating for your beliefs is immoral, but just that Mr. Falwell is inconsistent regarding what the proper role of a Christian is.

    Can you expand on your statement that we should obey all laws? What about a law that directly violates God’s commands to us?

  • SamHamilton

    Josh,
    I don’t think Mr. Corey was arguing that it is wrong for Christians to advocate for their preferred political preferences. He was pointing out the inconsistency in Mr. Falwall doing so while also telling other Christians to knock it off because Jesus didn’t try to tell Caesar what to do.

  • Artistree

    The traditional Ana-Baptist and Early Church Fathers answer to your question would , “No”.
    We belong to another Kingdom.

  • Matthew, I think believers can participate a lot in the political system. I pay my taxes; I vote; I advocate for certain policies and even contribute to certain candidates. As a citizen of a democracy I am allowed to do these things.

    However, I do not try to impose my religious beliefs on other citizens. And at the same time I keep in mind that my first allegiance is to the kingdom of God. ‘Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not’. For example, as a citizen of the kingdom of God I cannot serve in a jury on a capital case; I could not serve in the military (in the Vietnam War), and I haven’t pledged allegiance to the flag since 1968.

  • Matthew

    Thanks.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Artistree.

  • ashpenaz

    Has Falwell never read the Old Testament? It’s full of prophets telling political leaders what to do. There are 12 whole books of prophets who do nothing but rail at kings and tell them what God wants. There’s also all those instructions in the Torah about how to run a government in a Godly way (spoiler alert–redistribute wealth and make allowance for the poor). Has Falwell read Matthew 25? Or the Book of Revelation? I’m pretty sure that there’s a certain amount of confrontation with political leaders in that vision. And when Jesus meets with tax collectors, or calls Herod “That fox,” or yells at the Pharisees, or forgives the adultress, or snaps a whip at the Temple, He is telling political leaders His opinion of their domination system.

    If Falwell wants to have his Christianity branded as Trump Church, that’s fine–but accept the consequences of that brand. Look what happened to Trump Steaks and Trump University.

  • $144948586

    I recognize this, but if one can see the hypocrisy in such a thing, why can’t one see the hypocrisy of doing what Jesus didn’t do?
    In fact, Jesus had very furtive things to say about the government as do other book in the bible.

    Thus if one can recognize such hypocrisy, it’s not a giant leap to the further issue: did Jesus tell Caesar what to do?

  • Interesting thoughts but I would suggest that “their entire purpose for existing is to tell Caesar what to do,” might be exaggerated, to say the least. The primary purpose of any Evangelical is to share the Good News of the Lord Jesus Christ. Next, to teach believers how to best live for God, and share the Gospel. Then they would want to positively affect the culture and government.

    At least one would hope so.

  • Evermyrtle

    I really don’t think JESUS CHRIST has any problems, HE is the only begotten SON OF GOD, except the breaking of HIS heart at every person’s sins!. They made the rules, laid out in GOD’S WORD, that if we would follow, we would have no hatred in the world, no wars, not even death, I beleive! There has been one person, ever been born, in a natural human wy, that never broke one of GOD’S laws.

    Reading these blogs, we can see how far we are from GOD’S commandment, “Love thy neighbor as we love ourselves! There is so much hatred displayed as when we read about those who do not believe “exactly” as we believe!! The hardest thing that I find to understand, is that so many people think they are exactly right and are willing to share their perfection and these people vary so much in their beliefs!! The only thing I really understand about it is that each one of us, is so sure, that he/she is exactly correct!!!

    2 Timothy 3 tells us that conditions , the breaking of GOD’S laws will continue to get worse and worse in these last days, and we can certainly understand that these Bible writers certainly knew what they were talking about!! Of course, we all know that it was not talking about “ME!”

  • Evermyrtle

    The same GOD and HIS SON who created the world and ruled in those days, are still in complete control, today!!! They can shut it down any minute that/if they chose to!

    The constitution is still our law.

    Most people care about the poor and sick and we as a group, are getting millions of dollars of assistance every year, even though many whine, “It is not enough!”, you are identifying yourself as a whiner!!!

  • Wile F. Coyote

    CPAC annual convention rhetoric (and daily activities by politicly active right wing Evangelical Christians) is substantial evidence contrary to your assertion that their intended “positive” affect upon culture via governmental policy is only the third most important of their three primary purposes which you list.

  • Bones

    Jesus was political.

  • Bones

    “The only thing I really understand about it is that each one of us, is so sure, that he/she is exactly correct!!!”

    You mean like you?

    ” the breaking of GOD’S laws will continue to get worse and worse in these last days, ”

    You’re right, we stopped killing gay people and burning people alive for having wrong beliefs.

    Yep must be the end times.

  • Bones

    This is the same constitution which gives rights to gay people, right?

    Your constitution is not my law.

    Neither is it the law of most people in the world.

    “Most people care about the poor and sick” – lol, that’s obviously not the case.

    Seems someone’s whining about gay people.

  • Bones

    Yet you’re happy for Caesar to lock up immigrants and gays.

  • Bones

    Yeah, you’re full of hypocrisy Josh.

    The Trump lover who whines about gays and immigrants and paying taxes to help people.

  • Lord Fnord

    Christianism is a political movement. Christianists are currently the dominant faction within the Republican Party.

  • Lord Fnord

    “”their entire purpose for existing is to tell Caesar what to do,” might be exaggerated,” Ken?

    ‘Fraid not. That’s the convention of graceful understatement.

  • Lord Fnord

    ” influencing increasing numbers of people to align with God and practice kingdom values.”

    Anonymous “jesuswithout…”

    That’s called politics. The only difference is that Jerry Falwell has a particularly rancid rightwing platform. The Robert Taft program of Ayn Ryan and The Turtle is not good enough for him. When he’s programmatic he wants Golden Age anarchism. I think his core value, and that of most of these guys, is boy-toy fascination with Il Douche.

  • Lord Fnord

    Now this, imho, is a perfectly reasonable position for a decent person to hold. Why, then, the peculiar imprecations against politicians in general? What you state here is the program of the entire center and left of American politics; it is anathema to the Christianist Right.

  • Hello Sam. He probably was. You see I believe that Graham and Falwell try to preach the Jesus of the bible. You can have differences with their interpretations as you can with Catholics and Protestants. Ben preaches the Jesus of Ben by and large. His views are about as non-biblical as you can get and still say you believe in the bible. When he says the “radical Jesus” he is not exaggerating.
    I would not obey a law that I thought violated God’s commands. I am curious which laws you think those are? Off the top I can’t think of any.

  • ollie

    The USA was a slave society. And in order to change that the Constitution was reinterpreted by judges that were influenced by the people.

  • I find it fascinating how Corey doesn’t know what Biblical Christianity, Biblical morals, and Biblical ethics are. The Bible is not written to be complicated, and God is not the author of confusion. Abortion is wrong because it is murder. Gay marriage is wrong because God, not man, formed the institution of marriage and it is between a man and a woman. America is great because America was birthed through and on the ethics and morals of the Bible. And since this nation is a government by the people, it is our duty to try to maintain the Judeo-Christian ethics of God’s Word. Christianity is all about the Gospel of Jesus Christ, however, we have to be good stewards with what we are entrusted with, and we must attempt to be salt and light to a culture that has become perverse and unethical. Further, Jesus spoke to sinners as well as saints, and that includes Caesar. Did He speak to Caesar face to face? Most likely no. But His message was for all – including Caesar. So, the fact of the matter is Jesus did instruct everyone, including Caesar.

  • Segregation laws for example were reprehensible; something had to be done.
    The people gave their authority to those who govern. In response obedience is mandatory.
    The founding fathers were concerned about individual liberty and wanted a small federal government.
    They were wise beyond their time. You can see what is happening today. As our government grows
    larger out liberty diminishes.

  • Fnord, I am not exactly certain what you are saying but I don’t think my statement represents the entire center and left of American politics. What I said was: ‘For example, as a citizen of the kingdom of God I cannot serve in a jury on a capital case; I could not serve in the military (in the Vietnam War), and I haven’t pledged allegiance to the flag since 1968.’ I don’t think this is the center and left; it is due to my citizenship in, and primary allegiance to, the kingdom of God.

  • steve

    Gods are imaginary. Jesus didn’t tell anyone anything, because he NEVER FUCKING EXISTED.

  • Fnord, I am not anonymous; my name is Tim Chastain. I think there is a great difference between “influencing increasing numbers of people to align with God and practice kingdom values” and national politics. I do not impose my religious beliefs on others.

  • I confess I speak from a Canadian perspective.

    If what you say is true in the USA, then they have sadly lost their way. Should they try and have a positive effect on the culture, and government? Certainly. But the most powerful transformation happens on a individual level, when people hear and believe the Good News, and through the ministry of the Holy Spirit they have a life transforming encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ.

  • Chuck Johnson

    “The people gave their authority to those who govern. In response obedience is mandatory.
    The founding fathers were concerned about individual liberty and wanted a small federal government.”

    Obedience is mandatory within the language of the written law.
    The world that we live in is much larger than the language of the written law.

    “Our Laws are for all the people and we must obey them whether we like them or not.”

    You don’t obey all of the laws, Bob.
    You are very confused as to what laws are for.

  • Chuck Johnson

    “Our Laws are for all the people and we must obey them whether we like them or not.”

    Except on July 4th, 1776.

  • Bones

    Was Graham preaching the Jesus of the Bible when he told Nixon to blow up the dikes in North Vietnam? Advice which Nixon heeded and expanded the airwar into north and west of Vietnam even though Graham was warned it would take over a million lives.

    What about when Graham told Nison that something had to be done about the Jews running America? And then lied about saying it.

    “I would not obey a law that I thought violated God’s commands.”

    What about not killing adulterers and gay people????

  • Bones

    Jesus railed against the socio-political climate of his day.

    He was, though, more concerned with the very present effect of the fundamentalist theocratic rule of the Pharisees than he was with the Romans.

    That’s not to say the Biblical writers weren’t critical of the Romans. (Even if they did dress up Pilate to be something he wasn’t)

    Revelation is a war polemic against Imperial Rome written by an Ebionite..

  • $144948586

    Calls me a hypocrite and gets two likes. Repeatedly discusses with me at how I strongly disagree with Republicans and Trump. But, whatevs. You probably don’t even know what hypocrisy is; and if you did you shouldn’t use it in this context. And if you do use it in this context, I’m glad you teach in Australian schools and not in mine.

  • $144948586

    This just isn’t true. Gah, you’ve got so much hate in your heart, Bones.

  • Bones

    Gushes over how successful Trump is while congratulating the government for arresting immigrants. Whinges about abortion and gays and paying taxes to help poor people.

    Yep…massive Hypocrite.

    Your typical conservative who only wants the government to legislate their morality.

  • Matthew

    Have you read “Prisoners of Geography” by Tim Marshall? I thought of you while reading it yesterday.

  • Of course God is the author of confusion, since God is the author of EVERYTHING.
    Abortion is not murder, and it’s not really even in the Bible at all (maybe two minor instances that support it).
    God set many different institutions of marriage including bigamy when a widow is required to marry her dead husband’s brother. That was for her protection because 4000 years before the dark ages women were treated like $#@! Old Testament Law is similar to Sharia Law in that is was written in ancient times and much of it is not valid today at all. Do you want to institute the death penalty for adultery? Divorce was not allowed except in cases of infidelity, do you want to outlaw it similarly now? Why pick on gay people?

    Mainly, the ethics and morals of the Bible include that it is NEVER OK to force our beliefs on other people by law. Unfortunately in a democracy that’s very common.

    Jesus said that ALL the law and prophets are based on 1) Love God and 2) Love our Neighbors (this includes people who hate us). If you deny gay people the right to marry you are violating both.

    This reply is probably a waste of time! :p

  • R/R 2016

    Would you agree that in every instance of abortion a child is killed?

  • Just a note outside of my previous comment. When Jesus says “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s…” based on the coin, what he’s saying is:
    Who made that coin for us? We OWE THEM for making the coin for us. In other words we owe our taxes to those who made our coins, built our roads, provided our fire, police and military services, regulated our surroundings to make us safer and prevent us from being exploited (to they extent they can), etc.

  • Matthew

    I didn´t read helping the poor and marginalized on your list. Is this only something the church is responsible for in your opinion?

  • IT (what many call “God”) is REAL; so real IT will pour over you like liquid love and you will bawl your eyes out with tears of joy and release beyond any earthly rationalization. But beyond that, most attempts to define IT are going to be as limited as humans (which is pretty limited compared to infinity). It seems like BEing flows “downhill” like water so you might need to be open to IT first (God can’t friend you if you are blocking IT!). Whether Jesus physically existed i don’t think matters, as even fairy tales contain truths, but those who believe in his way of BEing and treating people (love, heal, give, forgive, don’t judge, etc.) think that it’s the way to find, channel, or become a “child” of God.

  • SamHamilton

    I agree with most of what you write here, but it sounds like you’re taking issue more with what Mr. Falwell was saying than what Mr. Corey wrote. Falwell was the one saying Jesus wasn’t telling Caesar what to do.

  • “The world that we live in is much larger than the language of the written law.” Please elucidate.
    Ok. What laws don’t I obey? Unconfuse me…

  • So are you advocating for a new government? Let me guess? A world where the government decides what we can and cannot do and takes care of us like cattle in a slaughterhouse. Something between Sander’s world and Kim Jong-un ism…

  • Chuck Johnson

    Traffic laws.

  • Chuck Johnson

    People, including you, pick and choose what laws to obey and which ones to not obey.

    Also, many times people violate laws out of ignorance.

    “We must obey them whether we like them or not. ” is a fantasy.

  • The answer is accurate but unresponsive to the larger issue…

  • Chuck Johnson

    The larger issue is “What are laws for?”
    The answer is to offer guidance to the public as to good behavior.

    (A) Obeying a law is good behavior under certain circumstances.
    (B) Disobeying a law is good behavior under certain circumstances.

    Making wise, perceptive judgements and decisions concerning (A) and (B) is good behavior.

  • $144948586

    “Gushes over how successful Trump is while congratulating the government for arresting immigrants.”

    Where?

    “Whinges about abortion and gays and paying taxes to help poor people.”

    You know my beef is with forcing people to pay taxes; if you can’t tell the difference, then, again, I’m glad you teach in Australian schools.

    “Your typical conservative who only wants the government to legislate their morality.”
    Except that I’m not doing such a thing; I repented from these things two-ish years ago.

  • kaydenpat

    America was birthed on the genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. It’s not greater than other countries which are democratic and wealthy.

    Good try though. Keep believing nonsense. You’re not fooling anybody.

  • kaydenpat

    Nope.

  • R/R 2016

    Do you agree that if X is a child, then X has a parent?

  • Bones

    No…..but the kingdom of god is a political kingdom.

  • Bones

    No, you’re the one cheering Caesar on as he locks up immigrants.

    But the real issue for you is public education where your kids might be told gays are ok and meet blacks and immigrants..

  • Bones

    Derp…..we don’t forget what you post. I’m glad I teach over here as well where I don’t have idiots telling me I need a gun in my desk to defend kids from shooters.

    Of course you spent most of the immigration thread moaning about poor Christian bakers not being able to discriminate.

    “Except that I’m not doing such a thing; I repented from these things two-ish years ago.”

    Lol…..the nature of conservatives is to conserve……..especially in the area of public morality….

    Seems you have more repenting to do.

  • I must admit that even though the pilgrims wanted to co-exist with the Indians, and there was enough land to do so, the two groups ultimately did not get along. I too think the whole thing is a travesty. There was battles and war, and that grieves my heart as I’m sure it does yours. We did not come with the intent to ‘take their land and destroy them’. We came to live with them and articulate the Gospel of Jesus Christ. However, that is another topic. I simply stated the fact that this nation was born on Christian values and ethics, and most importantly on the principals of the Bible. And for slavery, that was everywhere, not just here. And it is the Christians who finally were able to get it abolished!!! Both in England and here. I only believe the facts, and if I am wrong, give me some facts and I will retract what I have stated. Blessings!

  • Then Falwell was wrong and for that part of the discussion, I must agree with Mr. Corey. Blessings!

  • Matthew

    Read it … I think you will like it :-)

  • Yes, God is the author of everything, but He didn’t intend for it to be confusing. We make it confusing, not Him. The Bible asserts that it is God who forms us in the womb and calls us by name even before we are born. So yes, from inception, this is a developing viable person. It is a federal offense to take an eagles egg (could we call that aborting the eagle that would be born? YES! That’s why it is against the law!!), but we can kill a human developing in the mother’s womb and call that O.K.??. It. Is. Murder. Further, regarding women, the Bible was the first book from antiquity giving them rights and protection!!! Read Proverbs 31!!! And, The Old Testament law was a weight and burden that no one could bear, that is why Jesus came to set us free from the law. And to address your last point, I can love someone who is gay (fact is, we must love even our enemies), however, since the Bible defines marriage between a man and a woman, we cannot support gay marriage. Call it a ‘legal or civil union’, just don’t call it marriage.

  • Absolutely !

  • Yes. However, I must say X has two parents – a Father and a Mother ONLY!

  • $144948586

    Where did I cheer Caesar? Quote?

  • $144948586

    Its the same freedom of religion; its hypocrisy to honor one and not the other. Doesn’t Corey have a problem with his own hypocrisy?

  • Bungarra

    Why do about 35% of fertilized eggs in a natural situation die before birth?. “Natural Abortion” also known as a miscarriage. I feel that we have been subject to a far too reductionist definition/debate of when does human life commence.and of the rights of the Mother.

    Of course when this is coupled with a neglect of the born infant, with serious discrimination due to class, racial heritage etc and the stripping of resources from the poor for the rich, that is the obscenity. That the USA does not have as good a health care system as does places like Japan , NZ, Singapore and even Australia, but spends more on defense than the rest of the world is the SIN.

  • Charles Winter

    There were probably several itinerant preachers of that era who got themselves crucified for offending the priests or the Romans or both, so there may well have been a model for the gospels. But Christianity is a creation of philosophers who combined Judaism with Platonic philosophy to give us the worst of both worldviews. Instead of a religion that celebrates life (L’Chaim), we have a life that promises perfection after death after enduring hell on earth. As Joe Hill put it, “There’ll be pie in the sky when you die (that’s a lie).”

  • Herm

    Which LORD God “is the author of everything” Brett?

    This one?

    “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

    Exodus 21:22-25

    “ ‘Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death. Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution—life for life. Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury. Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a human being is to be put to death. You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.’ ”

    Leviticus 24:17-22

    Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

    Deuteronomy 19:21

    … or this One?

    “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

    Matthew 5:38-42 (NIV2011)

  • Charles Winter

    The genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans is another topic?! No, it is part and parcel of our American story.

    Did Christians end slavery? Don’t forget that many Protestant denominations divided because of the Civil War, with the Southern Baptists, Methodists, etc. supporting slavery.

    Since the time of The Roman Emperor Constantine, Christianity has had a record of supporting the dominant secular power, despite the fact that that secular power usually oppressed the poor and weak, rejecting the gospel teachings attributed to Jesus.

  • Herm

    Brett, would you agree that in every instance that a child of God is crucified on the cross they carry, as disciples (students) of the Messiah (the one Instructor) (Matthew 23:8-12), a child is prematurely aborted from life on this earth, as was Jesus by request of our Father (Luke 22:42)?

    Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.
    Luke 14:25-27

    As you pronounced earlier: Where does God, the Instructor, definitively say abortion is wrong? Where does God, the Instructor, definitively say that gay civil marriage is wrong, any more wrong than celibacy or not propagating the species of mankind as a eunuch (Matthew 19:12)?

  • Herm

    I have one Father (Matthew 23:9). Who, then, is my mother ONLY?

  • Richard Worden Wilson

    The history of Christian groups failing to follow Christ’s teaching is not hard to establish. Granted. But it is an historical fact that it was Christian activists that led the movement against slavery (and that was based on/in Christian biblical principles and teaching. Yes, the “Church” has often sided with the “powers that be” rather than power of God in support of the oppressed. Nevertheless, the teaching of Jesus is still accessible to those like yourself who see what they are, and the word of God still produces fruit.

  • Herm

    The LORD said to Moses,

    Leviticus 20:1

    “ ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Because they have cursed their father or mother, their blood will be on their own head.
    “ ‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.
    “ ‘If a man has sexual relations with his father’s wife, he has dishonored his father. Both the man and the woman are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
    “ ‘If a man has sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, both of them are to be put to death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their own heads.
    “ ‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

    Leviticus 20:9-13

    So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

    Matthew 7:12

    Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

    Matthew 22:37-40

    Tell me Bob, please, why you choose to differ from Graham and Falwell, who you believe “try to preach the Jesus of the bible“, by writing, “Abortion and same sex marriage are non-biblical.” It is because of those very Laws that each, and the majority of fundamentalist Evangelic “christians”, chose to back Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, isn’t it?

    Do you subscribe to the commands of God in Leviticus? Are you working to get the laws of the United States of America changed to fit?

  • Charles Winter

    Many Christian denominations split over the issue of slavery, so it is false to claim that Christians are Christianity ended slavery.

    As for the issue of abortion, Note that the only reference to abortion in the Bible is Numbers 5:11-15, which prescribes abortion as a test for adultery.

    Fact is that abortion was prohibited by the pagan Assyrians, not the Israelites. And Jesus did not condemn it either.

  • Charles Winter

    And that is a tragedy. Human life is full of tragedy. Many pregnant women face the question of bearing a life that they know that they cannot support. What are you doing to support that life?

  • R/R 2016

    Do women have the right to kill children they cannot support?

  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah, I believe society is actually progressing. I grew up being taught that gays brought down the Roman Empire, and that the U.S. would follow the same path. The U.S. may very well crumble, but not for the reasons I was taught. Conservatives fear the U.S. is becoming like Sodom. Well it has, but not for the reasons they think. I can see it now, 500 years from now the religious elite will be saying, yep, the U.S. fell just like Sodom, still thinking the gays were at fault lol.

    Much of the younger generation actually seems to have picked up on the religious hypocrisy of the generations before them and want no part of it. They’re more accepting of others. My son gets “fag” yelled at him maybe once every 6 months. 10 years ago it would have been maybe once every 3 months, 30 years ago once a month, 50 years ago every day. Yep, seems each generation gets a little better. A friend of mine said we’re slowly getting better, but certainly not there yet. Still a long ways to go, but I have hope.

  • Al Cruise

    “We came to live with them and articulate the Gospel of Jesus Christ” Where is committing genocide in the Gospel of Christ? If you couldn’t practice what you preached especially through the rough times, you were bearing false witness and were false witnesses to the Gospel. The following from the the Great Plains Encyclopedia. WOUNDED KNEE MASSACRE
    On December 29, 1890, on Wounded Knee Creek in southwestern South Dakota, a tangle of events resulted in the deaths of more than 250, and possibly as many as 300, Native Americans. These people were guilty of no crime and were not engaged in combat. A substantial number were women and children. Most of the victims were members of the Miniconjou band of the Lakota Sioux who had been intercepted by military forces after they fled their reservation in South Dakota for refuge in the Badlands.

  • ““ ‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” Thanks for pointing that out!

    “Abortion and same sex marriage are non-biblical.” Yes most emphatically they are.

    Donald Trump won the presidency with support of many, many groups including Evangelicals. Each person is one vote and has their own reason for that vote. Trump’s campaign promises are what got him elected and he is fulfilling them one at a time. Jobs, Border Security and a Conservative Supreme Court are the big ones. He’s already achieved two out of these three. Abortion and Same Sex Marriage are not part of his promises.

    Leviticus describes the Laws to govern a society. Notice especially what they did to people who refused to obey certain laws to prevent them from infecting the whole community. Unfortunately those laws are not in effect in nations today and so you have a long slow slide into lawlessness and debauchery: 2 Tim 3:2-5: For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

    Do you deny we are in this state?

  • Herm

    Bob, I don’t know where to begin.

    Do you have any idea why the vast majority of Evangelicals tell the world why they voted specifically for a “Conservative” Supreme Court?

    Trump’s administration has added less jobs, in reality, than the previous administration, by a lot.

    Border Security has definitely not improved under the Trump administration, especially with the roll back of the previous administration’s policies, no matter what is hyped by the President.

    We are not, today, in a worse state than was the Jewish and Roman state who could find it within themselves to crucify a child of God in God’s name.

    I agree that President Trump is the perfect example of men who are “lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God“, but it is he who the conservative and fundamentalist “christians” overwhelmingly chose as their champion. Are you trying to tell us that President Trump demonstrates less of a “slide into lawlessness and debauchery” than all previous Presidents of the United States of America? Get your head out of FOX News!!!

  • That is not Biblical and those that carried out that slaughter were not true Christians. I, as well as you, am horrified by that. My point of fact is they came to live in peace and love and just proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ. What some did (like this) is sin, wrong, and against all that the New Testament teaches.

  • White evangelical vote for Donald Trump; Black vote for Obama 93-6. Do you have any idea why Blacks voted overwhelmingly for Obama?
    Trump’s first year 2.06 million jobs added in 2017. Obama’s last year 2.24 million jobs created in 2016. Way too early to compare. But as always your “by a lot” comment is self-serving.
    Border security under Obama was non-existent. Open borders – come one; come all. Yahoo!
    What is your proof that we as a society are any better than the Romans at the time of Christ?
    Lawlessness was a hallmark of the Obama administration exhibited by his refusal to enforce immigration laws; allowing his Secretary of State, the Great Criminal Hillary Clinton, to amass hundreds of millions of dollars for their bogus charity by selling her influence – think Uranium One for example; spying on American citizens despite the Fourth Amendment to try and influence the election for Hillary, etc., etc….
    The mainstream media does not even try to report the news anymore. That is why we watch FOX News!

  • Herm

    Like I said Bob, get your head out of FOX News. Read about the true numbers of “illegal” immigrants in the United States of America: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

    There was no illegal immigrant crisis any worse than during the Bush administration. These are the real facts: https://openborders.info/terrorism-and-illegal-immigration-in-the-united-states/

    Here’s some real facts not carried on FOX News: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-12-28/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-2017

    Please, note that under the Trump administration arrests fell by 24% and deportations fell by 6%.

    These are closer to the facts: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-fact-check-border-agents-hands-tied-obama

    Trump and FOX News has lied all along because the economy was robust, according to over 90% of our world’s economists, at the end of President Obama’s tenure. We were not in any crisis economically as we were after the last Republican administration. If we had not had a full onslaught Republican obstructionism effort for the last 6 years of the Obama administration the economy would have been even stronger.

    It was Trump’s foundation that was shut down for illegally using it for pay for play and buying Trump’s portrait for himself, plus much more. There was never anything proven, all investigated, illegal at all relative to Hillary Clinton. Just because Trump, Hannity and Nunes say there was does not make it so except for the suckers for the art of the con who can’t do their own research.

    There wasn’t a pizza parlor sex ring run by Hillary. There was nothing under the control of the Secretary of State that was illegal relative to Benghazi. There was never any pay for play relative to the Clinton Foundation. All decisions made relative “Uranium One” had nothing at all to do with Hillary’s influence, none. Hillary Clinton was only a bad candidate because of the pressures put on her, paid mostly by tax payer dollars, by the Republican congress because she was the leading Democratic candidate for the Presidency for three years. Now, we all have to live with the naive incompetency of our Manchurian Candidate, now Republican President, who, after taking office, had to pay over 20 million in fines for his universally acknowledged con called Trump University and has never called anything negative relative to Russia or Putin.

    You know nothing about the Fisa Court that the Republican congress renewed just before the Nunes memo. Bob, you’re truly rushing in where angels fear to tread.

    You may be right that we are not better than those who crucified Christ. The conservative fundamentalist “christians” still don’t recognize God in their midst and rule exactly like the Pharisees, teachers of the law, and the high priest Caiaphas.

    In passing, the Dreamers, though undocumented immigrants, were never illegal immigrants because they were not of the age of consent when they were brought, by adults who were, into the United States of America. We do not, as a nation of laws, hold children liable to the crimes of their adult guardians.

    There have been, in the last fifteen years, more crimes and unlawful deaths attributed to domestic white nationals and hate crimes than all undocumented immigrants combined.

    You are deceived to choose the wrong targets for your fears!

  • George Lee

    Where in the world, and in what world did you study American history?

  • Richard Worden Wilson

    Worse perhaps than slavery and possible genocide (versus just mostly war) against “native” Americans, the killing of other avowed Christians to get what one wanted (my own nation) is probably the worst travesty of New Testament teaching and principles.

  • Bones

    What do clowns like Falwell think government is for?

    Just to protect him from Commies and black people?

    And why do we need governments? (Hint has to do with laws and laws are required to ensure that everyoné’s rights are protected).

    What we have here is a fundamental disagreement over what governance actually is.

    Does the government only offer protection (ie to the rich)?

    Or does it ensure that the right to happiness and welfare extends to ALL it’s citizens?

    How the hell are we having this conversation in the 21st century?

  • Bones

    Wrong…..one is denying rights, the other isn’t.

    Your attempt to equate Christians giving water to immigrants with Christian bakers denying cakes to gay people falls flat on its arse.

    It’s like saying Christians giving water to immigrants is the same as some ultra-conservative’s right to have sex with little children.

    The hypocrite here is you who was quite happy for the government to round up immigrants.

  • Who in the world but a blind devotee believes the recent economic boom has to do with Obama. You don’t need the internet to know this. Wake up! Trump has already had three quarters of 3% GDP growth. Obama GDP dismal!

    Uranium One is being investigated by the DJ. Wait for it. Kaboom Baby! Hillary will finally pay for her crimes despite every Obama holdover desperately trying to cover for her. This time her time has come. Only a pardon by Trump will save her. How embarrassing for her. Bad candidate? She was Deplorable!

    The dossier paid for by Hillary and the Democrat Party was used to get a Fisa Court warrant on Carter Page purely to spy on Trump. This required the complicity of the FBI and DOJ top echelon like Strzok, Page, Ohr and McCabe:
    Washington Post 1-23-18:
    “Yet each day brings credible reports suggesting there is a massive scandal involving the top ranks of America’s premier law enforcement agency. The reports, which feature talk among agents of a “secret society” and suddenly missing text messages, point to the existence both of a cabal dedicated to defeating Donald Trump in 2016 and of a plan to let Hillary Clinton skate free in the classified email probe.

    You are dreaming that DACA kids are not illegal. Note your democrats passed on Trump’s offer of citizenship for 1.8 million of them! Truly eye opening. Your stats on illegal immigrant violence are partisan babble.
    As it was said, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.

  • Steve, you are wrong on that statement. There is proof that Jesus existed in the record. Doesn’t prove He is God but that he existed.

  • $144948586

    “one is denying rights, the other isn’t”
    What right? The right to do what one wants with one’s property?

  • jekylldoc

    Here are some facts. America is great because an agrarian, feudal culture extended into land held mainly by hunter-gatherer cultures, with the population of Europe and the ruthlessness of Andrew Jackson behind them. America is great because the Industrial Revolution coincided with this dramatic expansion into a huge area of fertile land, as it would when human ingenuity reached the level necessary for both those events. America is great because the Enlightenment principles of separation of powers and checks and balances were put to work for the first large-scale federation, and fought the bloodiest war the world had seen up to that time [edit: checked on that. Not even close, but pretty bloody. Sorry] to stop the option of secession from undermining its compact.

    I would never deny that Judeo-Christian principles played a role either in the Enlightenment or in our implementation of it. However, the attempt to link the might of the US to some roots in godliness and biblical principles is a fraud. And the attempt to have it both ways, as in “slavery was everywhere, but only in America were people godly enough to get rid of it” is a fraud as well.

    It’s all well to endorse “telling Caesar what to do” based on religious principles. But when we condemn other Christians for interpreting what Jesus wants differently from how we interpret it, the issue is not decided by citing bible passages but by willingness to hang on a cross.

  • jekylldoc

    So if a woman does anything (anything) that risks a miscarriage, she is committing manslaughter? I think not. Most of us understand that the “human developing in a mother’s womb” does not start out as a person from the first cell division. I honor your effort to stop casual ending of an embryonic life, but I will not go along with equating it with murder. Nor is there a biblical principle that says it is.

  • jekylldoc

    And those of us who would not agree? Are we cast into the outer darkness?

  • jekylldoc

    I agree with you about Evangelicalism in general. But the Religious Right? Understatement, not exaggeration. Their purpose is to BE Caesar. Read up on the roots of Liberty University, for example. Then read about Rushdoony and the people who follow his thinking today.

  • jekylldoc

    Well, it can be both. The exercise of politics and force should not be to force people to do the right thing, but to protect people from those who do not. This includes fostering a political structure that will permit people to pursue a Godly vocation without offending Caesar for, e.g. refusing to take bribes, or speaking the truth.

  • jekylldoc

    Well said.

  • R/R 2016

    You’d be mistaken, morally obtuse, and likely already existing in the outer darkness beyond the space of civil discourse.

  • jekylldoc

    Wow. Incapable to (or is it “not permitted to”) participate in civil discourse because we don’t equate a miscarried two month embryo with someone who deserves a burial and a name? Hmm. Sounds kind of extreme to me.

  • R/R 2016

    Sounds like you can’t read. Or think ontologically.

  • jekylldoc

    Well, feel free to explain yourself, but I don’t try to formulate responses to comments phrased that vaguely.

  • R/R 2016

    If X is a child, then X has a parent.
    If X is a parent, then X has a child.

    Do you agree with these two premises?

  • Realist1234

    Read ‘Historyforatheists.com’ site, written by an atheist. Search ‘mythicism’ for relevant articles.

    PS no need for the language. It doesnt make your opinion more right or wrong (it’s wrong btw).

  • Realist1234

    Nonsense. Read the ‘mythicism’ articles at ‘historyforatheists.com’ .

  • jekylldoc

    I don’t agree with the the exclusionary categories you take to be implied by your terms.

    Try this: If X is a soldier, then X is in an army.
    If X is an army, then X is made up of soldiers.

    True, except when it isn’t. The same for your example.

    If X is money, then it is accepted for payment.
    If X is accepted for payment, then it is money.

    True, except when it isn’t.

  • R/R 2016

    A child is never without a parent. A parent is never without a child. If a child/parent is dead, then their parent/child is of relation to a dead child/parent.

    So unless you can provide an exception, my premises stand as tautology. If you don’t accept them, then our disagreement is too fundamental for further discussion.

    By the way, if X is a soldier, X is in an army. There are other designators for modes or branches of armed service (marine, sailor, airman, etc.).

  • Brett,

    You are just making stuff up out of thin air as you go along. If you ever want to come down somewhat closer to reality, you might want to consider the use of the adjective “Pauline” here and there in your inventions.

  • jekylldoc

    But X may be in an army and be a child. X may be in an army and be someone who is utterly repelled at the idea of making war. X may be in an army and faint dead away at any sign of conflict. Is X a soldier?

    An army may be made up of robots, or dogs. Are they soldiers?

    A two-month embryo is not a child. Maybe some parents think it is, and I have no interest in talking them out of it. Nor in talking out of it a parent who thinks the child they’ve been dreaming of is an actual child, or that their false pregnancy is an actual child. That is what we call a private matter.

    Most of us would mourn a miscarriage (especially if it is ours), but we would not give it a name, inquire as to its sex, or give it a funeral.

    A fairly large share of twins in pregnancies die in the womb, leaving their twin to be born normally and have a life. The parents usually never knew about the other twin. Most of us are willing to accept that and not get into morbid inquiries as to whether the twin needs to have a birth certificate and death certificate, whether the parents took proper care, etc.

  • Herm

    Do you mean this Carter Page? https://www.justsecurity.org/46786/timeline-carter-pages-contacts-russia/

    Have you read the Nunes Memo and the Democrat rebuttal? Here is a more recent article, than, 1-23-18, from the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nunes-memo-continues-to-backfire/2018/02/26/6647de50-1b2d-11e8-b2d9-08e748f892c0_story.html?utm_term=.6fa4d76b5eda

    You are what happens when one’s only source for “intelligence” is FOX News:

    You wrote, “Note your democrats passed on Trump’s offer of citizenship for 1.8 million of them! Truly eye opening. Your stats on illegal immigrant violence are partisan babble.

    Thhis is part of what really happened (read the whole timeline for yourself):

    The “Common Sense” plan would have:

    Provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children
    Offered $25 billion for border security
    Prevented DACA recipients from sponsoring their parents for legal status
    It failed 54 to 45. Democrats almost unanimously backed the plan, along with eight Republicans. But the rest of the GOP conference and a handful of Democrats blocked the bill.

    What it means: The “Common Sense” plan seemed like it had the best chance of winning 60 votes, but the White House threatened to veto it, and Republicans who had previously been more moderate on immigration refused to support it. This is the most damning vote on Thursday: No other bill seemed viable, and yet even this plan, after the White House’s intervention and amid intransigence from conservatives, could not win the necessary support.

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/15/17017682/senate-immigration-daca-bill-vote-failed

    All the DACA kids were brought to the United States of America illegally and were undocumented until the Dream Act. They themselves have no legal responsibility for having been brought here and found themselves trapped as adults, if born after June 15, 1981 outside the USA, with no sense of society beyond that of the USA where they were raised. There used to be a day when we, as a nation, were proud of our humanitarianism, seeking to empathize with all mankind in spite of our minority of self centered and self indulgent “ugly Americans”. There used to be a day when we wouldn’t even consider seeking to send another human being back to be raped or suppressed by backward regimes. Today we are the backward regime who can’t accept perfectly adept and constructive children/adults who, are undocumented for no reason of their own, to continue living the productive lifestyle to which they have grown accustomed. You make me sick!!!

    Oh, and there are no scary “agents of a “secret society”” within our “premier law enforcement” agencies. And, there is no fear of illegal immigrants robbing, raping, and murdering our people any greater than the very real fear from our domestic minority of self centered and self indulgent hate groups, of which you, your President and your fellow FOX News (which is where “he” gets his news, also) disciples promote.

    Sometimes the horse is smart enough to know that the well from which it was led to drink is tainted. Compare your sources, that you have available to drink from, and you, if you are sincere, will smell out the poison offered by FOX News and its like. Global warming is a fact and the coal industry is not coming back. President Trump has aided and abetted President Putin while denigrating all who oppose him. Poison!!!

    Are you actually a secret Russian agent sowing the seeds of anti-democratic dissent? At least Carter Page claims openly that he was, may still be, an adviser to the Kremlin. All who appear to be clowns and/or idiots are not harmless.

  • R/R 2016

    Does the embryo have a parent? Yes or no. Because you said this:

    “Maybe some parents think it is…”

    One is not a parent unless one has a child. It’s a relation statement. Again, you’re demonstrating your failure to think ontologically.

    And again, “soldier” is an army-specific designator. No matter the soldier type. But enough red herrings.

  • Good points, Jekylldoc. However, I don’t think Christians should try to force specifically Christian values on other citizens as some try to do.

  • I would have thought that opposition to slavery started with the slaves themselves. Your “Christian groups” came rather later to the party — and they were, after all, dealing with other Christians.

    Surely the most extreme case you can make in favour of your “Christian groups” is that they were divided among themselves on the question of slavery, and only many centuries after the question arose.

  • jekylldoc

    I had a friend once who was thrown in the brig for not thinking ontologically. Specifically, his crime was using a synonym. The regime under which this absurdity occurred was the Argentine fascist autocracy of the 80s. Some people have a need for their thought to be everyone’s thought, but I am not one of them.

  • R/R 2016

    Speaking of absurdity, why are you ignoring my question?

    Some thoughts are wrong. Whether dictated or otherwise. This is fun

  • jekylldoc

    I am not ignoring your question, you are ignoring the answer I already gave. You argue that parenthood implies childhood, and I am telling you that for most situations that works, but there is a huge exception, that people usually only think about in private contexts, and your logic doesn’t follow. You have not addressed the difference, but merely reasserted the category you believe follows from the use of words.

    I realize there are a lot of people out there who have convinced themselves that a fertilized ovum is the equivalent of an infant in the cradle. I don’t think that for the most part those people are either taking account of how most people think about the situation or being honest with themselves about what their true concern is. But they have the right to their views.

    I was worried that for a minute there you were claiming I don’t have the right to disagree. It brought to mind a certain case of someone being imprisoned for using a synonym. But I get that’s not really what you are about.

  • R/R 2016

    Child =/= infant. I am a child of my mother’s (parent), but I am not an infant. Again, the parent-child link is an essential relation attribute. You therefore can’t say one is a parent of an embryo while saying also the embryo is not a child of the parent. Therein lies a logic that “doesn’t follow”.

    I also said explicitly that you can disagree and thereby no further discussion is necessary. But you would be wrong, and that is your prerogative.

  • Pathetic response.
    Denigrating the most watched Cable News Network in the world because you don’t like what it reports. We all know what CNN and the others report. Think of this, if Carter Page is a Russian agent why hasn’t he been indicted. He was simply the vehicle used to gt the illegal warrant granted. And buy the way, General Flynn, will be exonerated because that warrant was obtained fraudulently. And all the news networks will be forced to report the truth and eat crow.

    You make me sick!!! – Childish tantrum response.

    Congress has oversight responsibility over the FBI and DOJ. The democrat memo confirmed the Nunes memo. You will see how reputable CNN is after they are forced to admit they have lied to the American people for 18 months now.

  • $144948586

    “And why do we need governments? (Hint has to do with laws and laws are required to ensure that everyoné’s rights are protected).”
    The Jews thought their rights were being protected?

    “Does the government only offer protection (ie to the rich)?”
    There is a strong correlation.

    “Or does it ensure that the right to happiness and welfare extends to ALL it’s citizens?”
    North Korea, anyone?

    “How the hell are we having this conversation in the 21st century?”
    Because the 20th century leaders asked the question, “How the hell are we having this conversation in the 20th century?” and then murdered more people under the guise of “your protection” than any nation or PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL before COMBINED.
    Of course, this fascism is rising up again with leaders asking the question, “How the hell are we having this conversation in the 21st century?”

  • jekylldoc

    Yes, you have made it clear that you think the meaning of the word (or of the relation) excludes the possibility that an embryo is not equivalent to an infant. You’re wrong, according to most people, and according to me. Considering how much of people’s lives hinge on this, it’s unlikely you are going to convince most people. Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas will agree with you, but frankly that’s not company I would want to be in.

  • Herm

    Does a fertile married couple, male and female, have a right to deny life to “children” based on a sense that they cannot support them? Perfectly healthy eggs are discarded every month, half of a potentially unique and constructive child, due only to the choice of potential parents not to unite each with a sperm, the other half of a potentially unique and constructive child. Is that not choosing to kill children they cannot support? Where, exactly, do you draw the line? Can murder be construed as choosing not to use all the potential we have to propagate the population of our species, increasing the random chance that mankind might survive longer beyond each parent?

    Part of the cross I carried as a parent, choosing to be responsible to and for my child, was that I, first, had to do whatever I must to nurture her/his development and simultaneously not allow my child to be destructive to my species. I was prepared to turn my child, if out of control and dangerous to my species, into the legal forms of my tribe to control such behavior to no longer be a risk, and if not available, or would not take responsibility for my child’s behavior, I would have responsibly and prematurely aborted my child’s destructive life that my species might survive, rather than risk one more life be lost to those whose life I was responsible to.

    Oh, that mankind’s ultimate survival, founded on the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for each member, could be achieved as simply as just manufacturing cells to the body of Man in as many numbers as we can. Our cute little children pull at our heart strings, more so than do adults, only because they are otherwise helpless to survive on their own, as adults have a chance on their own. It is an animal instinct. Most other species of animals walk away from or kill their own spawn, still feeling all the grief from the loss, when that spawn threatens their species. We raise them, ignore them and then cast them out of our control equipped and armed to destroy other far more constructive and productive children.

    A mother who knows her child is a certain menace to mankind, and knows (even if only from her maternal instinct) that she cannot provide for, nurture, or protect her child, is primarily responsible to the life, death and consequences of her child. If there were others, in her community, who could accept all responsibility to the correction nurture and protection for her child then that is an alternative that would be “nice” to pursue but there isn’t always such available and what is available, today, is not necessarily conducive for the survival of mankind (Nikolas Cruz). Triage is founded on choosing which lives have more chance of survival and would be more constructive to the community. No individual has the right to life who would destroy the rest of their species. All responsible parents, and potential parents, are most responsible to providing life to their species that is constructive and productive (good) and isolating the lives they are directly responsible to from destroying (evil) their species.

    Did I make this too sterile for you to understand what each of us is most responsible to?

    I feel as deeply as any of my species for each of my fellow members and the whole body of Man. I love to love and I hate to hate. I empathize with, am compassionate for, am forgiving of, and even more tolerant of all others of mankind as I am myself. I grieve for all the losses of life, skills, abilities and potentials I have forever gone from my life on this earth. I am productive and constructive enough, by my fruits, to know that I will be grieved all too shortly. I do all I can to give mankind, and each of its members, the longest opportunity possible for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I grieve for a miscarriage we had. I would deeply love my children and grandchildren even if they were destructive, but am not so self centered and self serving to allow them to continue to be destructive. I am spared mounting that cross because I have been blessed with spawn that are intentionally, at least, as constructive and productive as am I. They all, today, do to all others as they would have all others do to them to the best of their ability.

    This might sound like the most callous sense of life you have ever heard, but I know that women, and men, have the ultimate responsibility to kill any chance of destructive influence (isolate from the body) from children, and adults, who will not choose, or cannot choose, to support the survival of mankind in the pursuit of life, liberty, happiness and longevity for all of Man. That begins with the parents; with first their choices to conceive, then their continued aware nurture of their children and their responsible influence to protect and promote mankind at the cost of their, and theirs, own life. That’s the healthiest cross we all should bear that the most should live.

    It isn’t as simple as you continue to try and make it seem.

  • TJ the Good

    Fortunately, the government cannot impose your weirdo religious beliefs on me anymore.

  • R/R 2016

    Right. Because the company you keep has bearing upon the veracity of your claims. More outstanding logic.

    I’m done here.

  • Herm

    I actually do make every effort to impose my values, to the best of my ability, by first doing to all others as I would have all others do to me. I don’t warn others, give what I do a name or accept membership applications to become subject to my rules. What I give to all others is theirs to do with as they will. I will continue to love them all. That is an imposition of values most don’t realize they’ve accepted or rejected. I am most happy to move on anonymously. I truly do hope that makes me a constructive model citizen of mankind.

  • R/R 2016

    An egg does not have a parent. An egg has a host. It’s clear that abortion is dogma for very little minds. I’m done here. Good day.

  • Herm

    The truth is, an embryo has no less a dependency on a responsible host, for it’s sustained quality of life, than does an egg or sperm.

    The crucifixion of Christ was an abortion of the Son of God. As many an old time fundamentalist has confessed to me in my childhood, demanding that I keep my hands above the blankets, that masturbation is life aborted. Eggs are not dead and have nearly as much potential for a full life as does an embryo, and is equally as helpless to fulfill that potential (the same for a sperm).

    dogma – noun – a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

    Those who subscribe to dogma usually are unable to discern truth for themselves. The truth is, life for each member of mankind will cease before mankind, except at that one final moment when the last members cease with the whole of mankind. The truth is, there is no guarantee for how long each of us is aware and influential on this earth. The truth is, we prematurely abort fully developed young members of mankind when we coerce them to defend their tribe, of birth or choice, with their lives.

    The truth is, it is not the little minds that are of as much concern to our quality survival as are the little hearts, who cannot empathize to support and protect the whole of mankind because they can only instinctively feel for no more than the helpless little child.

    You have a good day!

  • I observe the American religious/political culture with a mixture of amusement, confusion, wonder, admiration, and sometimes horror. Makes me very glad to be a Canadian.

  • Herm

    http://www.indiewire.com/2017/12/highest-network-ratings-2017-most-watched-hbo-cbs-espn-fx-msnbc-fox-news-1201911363/

    Carter Page publicly announce in 2013 that he was an adviser to the “Kremlin”.

    The FISA warrant in question has been declared perfectly legal by congress, just not by FOX News. All information required to be given to the judges was included when they had it. The first FISA warrant was actually issued before the Steele dossier. If you would have read what I offered you then you would know what I am telling you is true.

    General Flynn cannot be exonerated because he has already plead guilty, without any coercion, and his guilty plea had nothing to do with the FISA warrant.

    Bob, you really do make me and our nation sick by poisoning the well of fact and truth with your alternates.

    You obviously have not read either congressional memo. … and, again, you did not read what I offered you.

    You offer no substantiated response here except the propaganda you know from FOX News. You have not refuted, with any other substantiation than FOX News, anything I have said you are wrong about. Can’t you see what’s wrong with this picture?

  • Congress does not approve FISA warrants. No one in Congress has been allowed to read the FISA warrant applications at this time. Congress has oversight responsibility for the FBI and DOJ. In 2015, Nunes became the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. They are investigating the FISA warrant and have said that it was obtained without full disclosure in their memo. The democrat memo did not deny this. I have read it. Hillary and the Democrat National Committee paid for the dossier that was The basis for the warrant. This fact was withheld from the judge. Then FBI Assistant Director McCabe told Congress that without the dossier no warrant would have been approved.

    Carter Page was just the patsy the democrats needed for the warrant because of what he did say; nothing more.
    General Flynn will be exonerated after this mess is fully documented because of that fraudulent warrant; my prediction.

    Herm, your childish comments achieve nothing.

  • jekylldoc

    I admit to a little jealousy. Canadians seem so . . . sane, by contrast. But I have a lot of Canadian friends and I think it’s true that American evangelical culture doesn’t make sense to them. Especially, but not only, the Southern variety.

  • jekylldoc

    Okay. It was interesting.

  • Great answer, Herm! I totally agree. However, I would call this ‘influence’ rather than ‘imposition’. And it certainly is not political imposition by force. Good stuff!

  • Herm

    This is FISA defined:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court

    Republican House voted to renew FISA this year reported by FOX News:
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/11/house-votes-to-renew-fisa-program-following-mixed-messages-from-trump.html

    Republican Senate voted to renew FISA this year:
    http://fortune.com/2018/01/18/president-trump-set-to-sign-fisa-surveillance-law-what-that-means-for-you/

    Republican President signed the FISA renewal into law this year:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/19/trump-surveillance-extension-351136

    Nunes conceded that full disclosure had been provided on the Carter Page FISA warrant:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/fbi-footnote-carter-page-warrant-390795

    Nunes had recused himself from any and all campaign Russian involvement investigations because he had been caught faking news given to him by the White House. He had no business trying to fake this news, through his memo.

    You, Bob, are poisoned and trying to be contagious.

    Oh, by the way, the GDP in 2017 did exceed 3.0 for two quarters, under President Trump, but averaged out for the year at 2.3. This was less than the GDP growth in 2014 and 2015. 2016 GDP was poisoned by the election year, and Republican House constraints, not by anything President Obama did.
    https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543

    General Flynn will be exonerated after this mess is fully documented because of that fraudulent warrant; my prediction.
    Predict as you will but it cannot happen. There was no fraudulent warrant that caused General Flynn to plead guilty to lying to the FBI. Your FOX teachers are certainly not your friends.

    These are the facts from a normally conservative news agency:

    The FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into whether Trump campaign officials had improper contacts with Russia was triggered by information the bureau obtained about George Papadopoulos, a former adviser to the campaign, according to the memo released Friday by House Intelligence Committee Republicans.

    http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/372043-memo-papadopoulos-info-triggered-fbis-russia-investigation

    Bob, you come off here appearing ignorant and duped when you spread these lies that can be all too easily refuted. Your President lies, and FOX News lies, each flat out regularly to support only their flawed agenda, which is themselves. The only reason you, and all too many others, accept those lies, without researching them for truth, is because those lies support your agenda, as flawed as it is, that you want so much to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth. You are responsible to the consequences from the lies that you freely share as though true. It may make you feel smart and empowered but it hurts many more others just by the seeds of doubt you plant conditioned and nurtured only by your ignorant need to be important on a progressive blog. The Russian bots do more than enough damage through our social media without you so freely helping their cause.

    Sorry to have to be so harsh on you, but what I am sharing with you is researched truth from many, many more discerning sources than just from FOX News. Break free, please, because no democracy can sustain itself when those who vote, or attempt to influence the vote, don’t responsibly research to discern truth for themselves. Read everything I have shared with you, especially if you don’t agree with it, because I have read everything I share with you and more, even from such sources as FOX News.

    Study is not childish. My comments are true, yours are false, misleading and misconstrued. This is serious, and people get hurt needlessly when you’re wrong in your oblivious certainty of presentation, and you’re wrong.

  • FISA Program is totally different than getting a FISA warrant. Sorry.
    “Nunes conceded that full disclosure had been provided on the Carter Page FISA warrant” BIG LIE. He did not. Just saw him last night for an hour. Sorry Fake News. Nunes says the warrant is disgusting and a threat to our democracy/
    “Nunes had recused himself from…” He did not. An ethics complaint was lodged against him by the Democrats and he had to step away for six months while he was cleared! He twas completely exonerated then came back and is back and roaring ahead.
    “Predict as you will but it cannot happen” My prediction not Fox.
    Your opinion editorial is also ALL wrong. Really. I look ignorant and duped. You can’t even figure out what the subjets are let alone defend them.
    Answer two questions:
    1. Why did Andrew McCabe recently resign?
    2. Why was Bruce Ohr demoted twice?

  • Bones

    Derpy, governments existed as a protection for its citizens.

    And that’s going right back to tribes of hunter-gatherers.

    That people have abused power does not delegitimise governments.

    Lol at thinking North Korea gives a rats about the happiness of its citizens.

    What a pathetic line of reasoning.

    Lets pick out the very worst governments from the thousands that have ever existed.

    You really do have a stupid view of the world.

    But all you’re interested in is your own money and whether or not people can discriminate against gays.

    Apparently thats like north korea.

    The simple fact is your laws are regulated and enforced by government whether you like it or not.

  • Bones

    The right to discriminate….

    Some muslims think they have a right to kill gays because their religion says.

    I bet you’d like to enforce their rights.

    Some ultra – orthodox jews and muslims think it is their religious right to have sex with little kids.

    Some muslims think it is their religious right to remove the clitoris of young girls.

    Thankfully the government has laws which regulate these supposed religious rights.

    Regardless of whose property its on.

    As usual you’ll try to conflate christians helping migrants with muslims not being allowed to kill gays.

    Your argument is utterly ridiculous.

    Btw there are islands you can go to and have no hovernment.

    Would be paradise for you and your kids.

  • Herm

    No, getting the FISA warrant is dependent upon the judges in the FISA court, offered solid and trustworthy evidence, not vague hearsay from those seeking the warrant. You have a computer. Google FISA, Carter Page, and the Russian Investigation and begin to find other more reliable sources for your edification.

    Nunes has lied, and got caught, ever since Trump took office. He is disgusting. He recused himself in shame for getting caught and has now res inserted himself. Yes, you are correct, you look ignorant and duped, as you flatly stated, “I look ignorant and duped.

    This is why Andrew McCabe resigned, read it if you can to comprehend just how bad this is, to know the truth: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/andrew-mccabe-s-fishy-resignation-exposes-house-oversight-committee-cowardice-ncna842776

    Again, there were some potential justifications. Ohr’s contact with Steele had come under scrutiny because his wife worked for Fusion GPS, the firm that was paid for the Steele dossier (at the behest of Clinton’s campaign). The FBI personnel changes can be explained as a new director wanting to select his own top staffers — though of course, we only have a new FBI director because Trump fired the old one.

    Read the whole story at: https://www.vox.com/2018/1/9/16863000/trump-doj-clinton-emails-russia-appointees

    Are the allocations brought to light by the Steele dossier real or fabricated? You tell me what has been proven false to date, please? If our election system was influenced by Russia, and a candidate’s emails were hacked by the same adversarial nation to be published worldwide, while the other candidate appears unscathed cannot you see the damage done to an otherwise fair election that was determined by 77,744 votes in three states for the winner, and lost to the other candidate who had 2.9 million more votes? Especially when during the voting, while votes were being cast, the FBI infuses doubt by bringing up possible damaging emails, which weren’t, that wouldn’t have been an issue without the Russians driving the email issue?

    I am done with your prevailing ignorance. bye

  • $144948586

    You don’t have the right to discriminate?

  • You may be done but I am not. Each time an Obama type is indicted for this abuse I will let you know. Wait till the unmasking abusers are identified…

  • newenglandsun

    “But all you’re interested in is your own money and whether or not people can discriminate against gays.”
    Where’d you get your psychology degree from? Butt-Hole University?

  • You can’t read either. You said, ” Nunes conceded that full disclosure had been provided on the Carter Page FISA warrant.” What a crock.
    He said,”A footnote saying something may be political is a far cry from letting the American people know that the Democrats and the Hillary campaign paid for dirt that the FBI then used to get a warrant on an American citizen to spy on another campaign,” Nunes said on “Fox & Friends.”
    So who is making…”our nation sick by poisoning the well of fact and truth with your alternates.” Basically your research is not sound either.

  • Herm

    The memo released Friday by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee excoriated FBI leaders for what it described as a crucial omission in that application: The fact that the dossier, compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele — was financed by the campaign of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.

    “Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials,” the memo alleged.

    But in an appearance on “Fox & Friends,” Nunes was asked about reports over the weekend that the FBI application did refer to a political entity connected to the dossier. It is unclear precisely what language the application might have used.

    Nunes conceded that a “footnote” to that effect was included in the application, while faulting the bureau for failing to provide more specifics.

    “A footnote saying something may be political is a far cry from letting the American people know that the Democrats and the Hillary campaign paid for dirt that the FBI then used to get a warrant on an American citizen to spy on another campaign,” Nunes said on “Fox & Friends.”

    LOOK, READ and TRY to COMPREHEND HERE at the webpage noted directly below:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/05/fbi-footnote-carter-page-warrant-390795

    Grow up Bob! I can get the transcript, also, as can you. You didn’t read. The “footnote” was on the application for the FISA warrant, where it legally belonged, and was never meant for the “American People” but was for the FISA court’s eye’s alone. Nunes, abusing his oversight privileges, divulged the warrant to the “American people” that blew all classified security meant to protect the privacy of the subject of the warrant.

    You may not believe you are spreading lies in your childish naivety, supported by your inability to comprehend, but you are being lied to on FOX News and by representative Nunes. You are a menace to all you say you stand for. You are supporting the destruction of the republic and democracy of the United States of America as a fundamentalist disciple fighting for the spirit of FOX News. Your obsession to find your self worth by outsmarting us progressive idiots, who you go out of your way to seek out on this blog, with your brilliance is mentally, socially, politically and spiritually sick when compared against, “in everything do to others as you would have others do to you”. Your sickness can be, and often is, a contagious carcinogen for the body of mankind. You make us sick.

  • R/R 2016

    Yes to dogma. Yes again to small minds. Example:

    “Eggs are not dead and have nearly as much potential for a full life as does an embryo, and is equally as helpless to fulfill that potential (the same for a sperm).”

    So you’re saying an egg by itself and a sperm cell by itself has the same potential for “full life” as an embryo? Yes or no.

  • Herm, again you cannot read.
    I am not spreading lies. You are naive in the extreme. Discussing politics is perfectly appropriate. So stop the self serving Liberal approach to life.
    Nunes is the head of the committee. Schiff is the democrat traitor and abusive liar.

    The footnote does not tell the court that the document was paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC! What is wrong with you. Open your eyes. Thsi is not Fox news this is life and your country. The warrant was obtained from the court by hiding this fact from them. Get it. “political entity” does not do it.

    This lase section of your post is outrageous. You are not normal and very, very dangerous in your approach to life. Words like menace, destruction, obsession, mentally sick belong to Progressives. Trying to hide the conduct of top FBI and DOJ officials to pervert our election is perverse in the extreme. Read your last paragraph below and tell us why you do not belong in a mental institution!

    “You may not believe you are spreading lies in your childish naivety, supported by your inability to comprehend, but you are being lied to on FOX News and by representative Nunes. You are a menace to all you say you stand for. You are supporting the destruction of the republic and democracy of the United States of America as a fundamentalist disciple fighting for the spirit of FOX News. Your obsession to find your self worth by outsmarting us progressive idiots, who you go out of your way to seek out on this blog, with your brilliance is mentally, socially, politically and spiritually sick when compared against, “in everything do to others as you would have others do to you”. Your sickness can be, and often is, a contagious carcinogen for the body of mankind. You make us sick.”

  • $144948586

    “Our Anabapist brethren are at least consistent.”
    Could you be more specific about which Anabaptists? Corey identifies primarily with Anabaptism–he has an article dated some time ago about it–, but he’s certainly not consistent, as attested to his article taking sides in the government crackdowns of two men’s different religious expressions.

  • Al Cruise

    “My point of fact is they came to live in peace and love and just proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ” Totally false, they came to install their culture into every aspect of the Native Americans lives and make that culture the rule of the land for everyone. When any resistance to this by the Native Americans happened, peace, love and the Gospel of Jesus Christ was quickly abandoned and violence ruled the day. This happened across the board not just in isolated incidents.

  • Herm

    Rest and Relaxation, this is what I wrote verbatim:

    Eggs are not dead and have nearly as much potential for a full life as does an embryo, and is equally as helpless to fulfill that potential (the same for a sperm).

    I did not say, “an egg by itself and a sperm cell by itself has the same potential for “full life” as an embryo“.

    An egg or sperm is separated by less than 9 months in potential for the good of mankind which is greater than 200,000 years old. If the male and female hosts are 11 to 50 years of age then you can do the math to understand why the egg or sperm is closer in potential for the good of mankind than are the potential parents.

    Anyone who wants a “yes” or “no” answer when not questioning what what said verbatim and in context has a hidden agenda.

    Yes to small hearts.

    Tell me, are an egg and/or a sperm alive with instinctive, programmed, awareness and potential?

    How much more alive is an embryo?

    How much DNA dies in masturbation and menstrual cycles?

    Search your carnal heart and mind, with your gifted spirit heart and mind, to see if, just maybe, you are as confused as any other once wild animal who has been domesticated. You have the ability, that no other once wild instinctive animal has, to comprehend where our species is at on an infinite and eternal stage. Your arguments are confused when you, as no other animal from any other species we know on earth can, have the big heart and mind ability to consider what happens, just a 1,000 years from now, if we continue to over populate this planet only because we strove to protect every embryo at the cost of mankind. The number one reason our population has exploded in the last 9,000 years is that we have learned to protect our tribe by propagating larger numbers than the other tribe. Not so strangely this was , also, the first time mankind began farming, ranching and hoarding in place of the rest of Man on earth hunting and gathering.

    You salute the flag of your tribe in patriotic allegiance to their survival over that of the rest of mankind. Your confusion lies, if patriotically “christian”, also, that over populating means conquering your enemy than loving your enemy. You love your little piece of the body of mankind more than the whole of mankind. How can you possibly even begin to love your infinite and eternal God, with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, with all your mind, if you cannot love the whole of mankind trapped together to share this minute little planet?

    Just what do you compare against to determine small hearts and small minds?

  • Al Cruise

    Good points, Trump evangelicals feel that their culture is the only culture that represents the Gospel of Jesus Christ and is the only true culture a government can be based on.

  • Richard Lambert

    What a glaring difference :( … what happened exactly?

  • R/R 2016

    In potential for the good of mankind? An embryo and a sperm cell are “nearly” the same in potential as the embryo? My agenda is hidden? There is way too much to unpack here, and I just don’t have the energy.

    The Nazis justified their Final Solution by making arguments that stripped Jews of their humanity. You do the same when you reduce children in the womb to nodes of “near” potentiality. The insanity is, you do so in the name (only) of compassion. Small minds indeed.

  • Herm

    There you go, thank you. Tribal!

  • R/R 2016

    Yes, your definition of tribal is just as ridiculous. You’re very welcome.

  • Matthew

    Hello Peter. I trust all is well with you.

    Do you believe in theistic evolution, and if so, how do you reconcile the cruelty of natural selection with an all loving God?

  • SamHamilton

    I was referencing the Anabaptist philosophy identified in Mr. Corey’s post. I’m sure there are inconsistencies regarding individual Anabapists, as they’re human as well. I was unaware Mr. Corey is an Anabaptist.

  • Realist1234

    Hi Matthew. Slightly off-topic!

    I can only say I ‘tend’ to accept theistic evolution – in the sense that evolution as a mechanism is designed to lead to living organisms – but tbh Im still not wholly convinced. Ive recently read a book called ‘Heretic’ by Matti Leisola, a bioscientist with a specialism in enzymes and sugars. He presents quite a good case against evolution, at least on the macro level – the emergence of new species. He made particularly pertinent arguments regarding so-called biogenesis, the beginning of life. The problem is as I dont have a background in chemistry or biology (mine is physics/maths to degree level) I simply dont know if the points he makes are valid. I would like to see a review of his book by an equally qualified chemist/biologist who accepts evolution as fact. If anybody on this blog could point me to such a review it would be greatly appreciated. It was interesting getting a view from a European scientist rather than the seemingly continuous stream of American ones – no offense intended!

    But I suspect I will never come to a firm conclusion on the matter.

    As for the ‘cruelty’ of natural selection, I suppose it depends on how you define ‘cruel’. Im not sure if I would use such a word to describe nature. Is it ‘cruel’ for a lion to kill and eat a buffalo? I dont think so. In the same way, natural selection is caused by mutations within a gene which then lead to increased reproduction and therefore survival, if the change leads to better adaptation to the organism’s environment. Is that ‘cruel’? I dont think so. It’s just part of life. I wonder if you are thinking about death in general, whether of species or humans, when you use the word ‘cruel’? Even if you understand Genesis literalistically, there is nothing to indicate there was no plant or animal death before the ‘fall’ of man. Unless one wants to argue that for example, whales were vegetarians then and did not eat plankton! Death, whether of plants, animals or humans, is part of life. Yet, I still hate it. The recent death of my beloved mum reminds me of that every day. But one day…

    In a related note, I tend to view the first couple of chapters of Genesis as primarily a polemic against existing Near Eastern creation stories, where often elements of the creation were viewed as ‘gods’ (particularly the sun, moon and other heavenly bodies). Genesis says NO, they are just part of the creation, made by the Creator, and are therefore not to be worshipped or deified. Having said that, there are tantalising elements in Genesis which still make me think, eg that recent research has indicated that the earth was for a period of its development 98% covered with water. Was that before the Spirit hovered over the deep?!

    Well, that’s my tuppence worth.

    Peter

  • It’s only our government that’s at risk;

    Gowdy, Goodlatte demand appointment of special counsel, citing FISA abuses:

    House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Rep. Trey Gowdy on Tuesday demanded the appointment of a special counsel to investigate “conflicts of interest” and decisions “made and not made” by current and former Justice Department officials in 2016 and 2017, noting that “the public interest requires” the action.

    Gowdy, R-S.C., and Goodlatte, R-Va., penned a letter Tuesday to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

    “Matters have arisen—both recently and otherwise—which necessitate the appointment of a Special Counsel. We do not make this observation and attendant request lightly,” Gowdy and Goodlatte wrote.

    They pointed, specifically, toward the use of the infamous anti-Trump dossier used in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain a warrant to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

    “There is evidence of bias, trending toward animus, among those charged with investigating serious cases,” they wrote. “There is evidence political opposition research was used in court filings. There is evidence this political opposition research was neither vetted before it was used nor fully revealed to the relevant tribunal.”

    Asked why a special counsel was needed, Gowdy told Fox News, “Congress doesn’t have the tools to investigate this… We leak like the Gossip Girls.”

    They added: “Questions have arisen with the FISA process and these questions and concerns threaten to impugn both public and congressional confidence in significant counterintelligence program processes and those charged with overseeing and implementing these counterintelligence processes.”

    Goodlatte also told Fox News he thought the FISA process “was abused.”

    Gowdy and Goodlatte wrote that because the “decisions of both former and current Department of Justice and FBI officials are at issue,” they do not believe the DOJ is “capable” of investigating the “fact patterns in a fashion likely to garner public confidence.”

    Last week, Sessions announced that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz would investigate allegations of government surveillance abuse in light of memos released on Capitol Hill by the House Intelligence Committee which suggested, at least on the Republican side, that the dossier compiled by ex-British Intelligence officer Christopher Steele was used to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil Page.

    President Trump, though, blasted Sessions’ decision, saying he appointed an “Obama guy” to investigate “potentially massive FISA abuse.”

    Horowitz also is investigating former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and whether he wanted to avoid taking action on new Clinton emails found on disgraced Democratic New York Rep. Anthony Weiner’s laptop, reports said. According to records, McCabe knew about the emails belonging to Hillary Clinton in September 2016, but did not choose to brief former FBI Director James Comey until October 26, 2016 — prompting the re-opening of the Clinton email investigation just one week before the presidential election.

    “While we have confidence in the Inspector General for the Department of Justice, the DOJ IG does not have the authority to investigate other governmental entities or former employees of the Department, the Bureau, or other agencies,” Gowdy and Goodlatte wrote. Gowdy also serves as chairman of the House Oversight Committee.

    GOP LAWMAKERS RENEW CALLS FOR SECOND SPECIAL COUNSEL, SAY IT MAY BE ‘UNAVOIDABLE’

    They added: “Some have been reluctant to call for the appointment of a Special Counsel because such an appointment should be reserved for those unusual cases where existing investigative and prosecutorial entities cannot adequately discharge those duties. We believe this is just such a case.”

    Goodlatte, who penned a letter to Sessions in July 2017 and September 2017 calling for the appointment of a second special counsel, received only one response from the Justice Department, suggesting that Sessions had directed senior federal prosecutors to investigate matters involving the Clinton Foundation and the sale of Uranium One — leaving the door open to consider whether “the matters merit the appointment of a Special Counsel.”

    House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., slammed Goodlatte and Gowdy, saying they are “simply off base.”

    “Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy are simply off base–just as they were last year, when they called for a new special counsel to investigate a slew of Hillary Clinton conspiracy theories,” Nadler said in a statement in response to their letter. “Where there is no crime, there is no criminal investigation for a second special counsel to manage.”

    Goodlatte and Gowdy’s letter comes just days after more than a dozen other House Republicans penned a similar note, requesting the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate the same issues.

    The 13 lawmakers signed onto the letter that stated: “Evidence has come to light that raises serious concerns about decisions and activities by leadership at the highest levels of the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding how and why the Clinton probe ended and how and why the Trump-Russia probe began.”

  • Herm

    Richard, the difference really lies in how we accept, or reject, the Christian Bible.

    If we make it the inerrant and definitive word of God we will find conflict and not God (by any name).

    If we accept the Bible as one, possibly the first, evolving hard copy chronicle of mankind’s sincere relationship with God, within the period that each author sincerely just had to testify (get it off their chest), then we will find the same God they talk about but now in our time, in our hearts and in our minds. We will begin as little infants of spirit to learn the language of spirit, as versus carnal, to share our own hearts and minds directly with and in God’s hearts and minds.

    That is what I had to share first for this explanation to even be considered.

    This really is the short explanation.

    The descendants of Israel (son of Issac who was the son of Abraham) had become slaves to the Egyptians. They were led out of captivity by Moses with God’s help. God then called Moses up to the mount (Sinai) at which time God wrote the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) in stone (twice). God then had the descendants of Israel build an ark to keep the stone tablets, containing the Decalogue, while traveling (for 40 years in the wilderness) and, also, while behind the curtain in the Holy of the Holies of the mobile tabernacle of God’s design. Moses and his brother Aaron were of the tribe of Levi from which God anointed all priests to be responsible for the Tabernacle and all that was holy.

    From that relationship we get the writing of the Torah which was not canonized until 400 BC. Moses lived from 1391 to 1271 BCE.

    All books of the Bible were written separate from all other books, though the first five were written in the same time period. The books (some as letters) were collected, reviewed, sometimes edited, compiled into one book which was hand copied (and sometimes edited on purpose or as error) by scribes as the document was passing though town to town, until the printing press could print in mass, so that each community had a Bible. The last book of the Bible was written no later than 95 AD (The Epistles of John) and the first book of the New Testament no earlier than 50 AD (James). Job is considered the first book written in the Old Testament but we can’t date it. Genesis (and the next four books) does follow written between 1445 and 1405 BC. We have no certain originals (autographs) of any book of the Christian Bible. All books have been copied at least once by a local scribe. We have many copies of the same book with minor differences.

    Now, before Christ, 2,018 years ago (give or take three years) we have no recorded authority who spoke as directly with, from and in God. The Levite priests were the anointed caretakers and authorities for the words and laws of God. They laid down the law as sincerely as they could using the power vested in them by God (known as the seat of Moses) to maintain unity, control and survival of all the Israelite people. They used (and misused) the name of the Lord God as their power. Who could fault them when the Israelite people survived and prospered?

    Christ saved us from others using the name of God to maintain unity, control and survival through religious orders ascribed to the Lord God. Better, yet, the Holy Spirit, who appeared as a dove to whelm (baptize) as one with and in the Christ, was given (when the curtain was torn top to bottom) to all able and receptive to be whelmed as one with and in the Christ, the Father and all of God … today.

    Now, the Levite high priest could have consulted with the Holy Spirit (Spirit of truth) at any time, found behind the curtain to the Holy of Holies with the Ark, to make their proclamations truly be the will of God. They did not. Caiaphas, the high priest in Jesus’ time, did not waste his time to verify whether Jesus was the prophesied Christ (they were looking for a divine all powerful king, not a shabby carpenter) by consulting with the Holy Spirit as was his right. In not doing so, Caiaphas, not knowing what he was doing, is most responsible for crucifying the Son of God in the name of the Israelite’s Lord God; the tradition established by the Levite priests of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy (written between 1445 and 1405 BC).

    Jesus, of the New Testament, is today, as He was then, the Messiah (the one Instructor). The Holy Spirit/Spirit of truth (available to all of receptive mankind all already given the image of God) is the one Teacher who teaches us what to say when brought before the court. The heavenly Father is the one Father of all who are with and in the Spirit of truth now and forever more. Our Father in heaven is the will of God that we follow as children of God.

    Well Richard, you asked “exactly”. There is no one on this earth who has the authority to speak for God but many can boldly speak the word of God when filled, whelmed, with and in the Holy Spirit. We are saved by our Lord Jesus, who has all authority on earth and in heaven (no more is there authority from the seat of Moses), not from our sins paid on the cross of Jesus because we each still carry our own cross in the same love for our enemy (who know not what they do), but by making it possible for all with the image of God, all mankind, to become one with God in the Spirit. God is spirit and children of God, even when still children of physical Man, are spirit, not carnal.

    What exactly happened for the Levite priests to so badly mistake the will of God is that they didn’t ask God. They used their “common sense” to project from the Decalogue (the only law written by the hand of God for the people of Israel) to assume the will of God. We have our modern day Levite priests who project on their study of God (theology) to assume the will of God in the Lord God’s name. They are all sincere and through some of their sincerity I have made it to the only way, the Spirit of truth with and in me without pause, without end.

    Have I got it all exactly right? I am a child, what do you think? Just know, that to keep from killing other children of God in God’s name, consult with God, in your midst as the Spirit of truth, the Advocate of God with and in you, first.

    Did you notice how politically correct Jesus was to begin with, “you heard it said”, not, “your most beloved scripture of over 1,400 years is wrong”?

    I hope I was able to shed some new, and more lasting, light on why such a glaring difference. I have shared with you who can be even more correct and perfectly exact. Love you and your question.

  • Herm

    Benghazi all over, again. And to think I once thought that you couldn’t possibly be this gullible.

    Did you notice that all these trumped up FISA abuses are considered biased only because the Steele dossier was paid for by opposition research from first a Republican and then the DNC? Did you notice that none of the Steele dossier was used against Trump during the election cycle? Russian hacked emails against Hillary Clinton were.

    Have you thought for a moment what if the accusations in both Steele dossiers are even partially correct? Wouldn’t that, even in your mind, warrant an FBI investigation? … or, maybe, you haven’t read either Steele dossier.

    When the first FISA warrant was issued for investigating Carter Page the FBI did not have the Steele dossier.

    You are that gullible.

    We are, as a nation, in very serious trouble.

  • Bones

    It seems you got your masters from there derpaderp.

    Honestly is the US College system this poor?

  • Bones

    In my job?

    No.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Peter. I know my questions are a bit off topic, but without being able to email you or PM you I really had no other option. I really wanted your opinion on this topic.

    I suppose when I think of cruelty in the animal kingdom, it´s not so much that I object to a lion eating a buffalo per se, but rather the amount of suffering that many animals endure during this whole circle of life thing. It seems inconsistent with the character and nature of the God I have come to know.

  • Matthew

    No. It´s my understanding that U.S. universities are arguably some of the best in the world.

    That said, it doesn´t mean someone who attended or even graduated from a U.S. uni is any smarter than before they entered the institution.

    There is the ability to just “slide by” …

    [Edited]

  • $144948586

    So you can elsewhere?

  • What is the proof of this statement: “When the first FISA warrant was issued for investigating Carter Page the FBI did not have the Steele dossier.” I want to see a quote with a source please.

  • $144948586

    Yes; it gets money from the state, so it is that poor.

  • $144948586

    “It´s my understanding that U.S. universities are arguably some of the best in the world.”
    All the Ivy Leagues you refer to have a massive private donor base and are, wait for it, private.

    Out of the top 20 universities in the US, only 5 are public AND the first one doesn’t score until the 10th spot. It’s world ranking: 22, and it dropped 4 points.
    https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings-articles/world-university-rankings/us-universities-rankings-public-versus-private

  • Glad2BGodless

    Ever since the rise to power of the Cheeto Mussolini, evangelicals appear to have lost any interest in protecting our country from the Russians.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Josh. In 2013, Shanghai University listed what experts judged the top 20 universities in the world: 17 were in the U.S. — from Tim Marshall’s book “Prisoners of Geography”.

    I wasn’t arguing “private” versus “public”. Was Bones??

  • Matthew

    What about UC Berkeley?

  • $144948586

    It’s an important distinction, Matthew.
    To praise the U.S. for what private companies has done is asinine when we considered that U.S. has tried several times to create “great things” and have been dominated by companies which didn’t have a safety net to fall on (and their performance has been so great that a need for a safety net is practically unthinkable for them)–unlike every underperforming school funded by tax payer money, that is to say ALL of them in which MORE money is spent and their resulting academia is miserly.

  • Matthew

    Thanks. What about the space program, Josh? Are you against that?

  • $144948586

    I am against taxing people.

  • Matthew

    So are you against anything that’s government funded?

  • $144948586

    There’s no such thing.

  • Matthew

    Can you be more specific?

  • $144948586

    The government is not a producer of goods; it does not gather it’s revenues voluntarily through the will of consumer by providing a service only to those who want it.
    Therefore, the spending “it does” is not government funding. It’s redistribution from those that have to those that *government determines* have not.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Josh.

  • Badda boom, badda boom! Hit the nail on the head! Excellent post. They just can’t have it both ways.

  • “I find it fascinating how Corey doesn’t know what Biblical Christianity, Biblical morals, and Biblical ethics are.”

    You need to study HOW we arrived at the 66 books of the current Protestant Orthodox canon. It’s an eye-opener. In Jesus day the OT canon was still being finalized by the Jews and did not contain everything we today have. The first 30 years of so the early church had a few circulating letters by Paul, but no gospels or writings by other Apostles. The first gospel written was later attributed to Mark, but like the others was anonymous. None of the Gospels were eye witness accounts but were written decades after the events described. The information based on third hand, fourth hand, etc. accounts and at times conflicted. John was the only gospel to attribute deity to Jesus and was written at the end of the first century. You’d think if Jesus thought he was God, he’d have mentioned it in Mark, written considerably earlier than John.

    The early church didn’t have set orthodox doctrine. There were Marcionites, Gnostics, Ebionites. Each had their own take on who Jesus was and what was the meaning of the crucifixion. Each group vied for control and had their own holy scriptures, purported to have been written by this or that apostle. The early church was very fluid and the arrival of orthodoxy took almost 300 years to develop. It was the Roman church that eventually gained control because of the marriage of Roman government under Constantine and the Roman church under the Bishop of Rome. Eusebius, the 4th century church “historian” and polemicist rewrote the struggle for orthodoxy so that it appeared the Catholic dogma had always been the “norm” or Apostolic faith…it wasn’t.

    As for the NT we inherited, there are numerous books that are forgeries, i.e., written by unknown authors but attributed to Apostles (either by the forgerer, or by later church leaders wishing to promote that particular book as canonical). But at various times, and depending on location and which group we are talking about, there was not a general consensus as to what the NT was supposed to look like. What we HAVE inherited is a Catholic Bible with a thin Protestant veneer. The post-Nicene theology of orthodoxy in all likelihood, bears little resemblance to first century theology, let alone the theology of Peter and Paul.

    The reason Paul’s letters (the authentic ones) appeared fairly soon within the early church was because he was literate. It is highly doubtful that the other disciples and followers of Jesus could write, including Jesus himself. Hence, the decades that passed before the other books were written, long after the disciples had passed from the scene.

    It may well be that “God is not the author of confusion,” but you are sorely mistaken if you think the Bible is this cohesive, inerrant, logical and clearly articulated “letter” written by God himself and dropped down intact from heaven. No, the NT books were a definite human struggle for canonicity.

    But getting back to Cory’s article and your marriage of church and state, the first century Christians were not in a position to marry the two. In fact, by the time the Book of Revelation was written by John (no not that one), the church was beginning to face terrible persecution from Rome, hence John’s bleak picture of Rome getting it’s “just deserts.” There was, until Emperor Constantine a stark contrast between the government and the Christians it rounded up and killed. The problem for the church today, is it still wishes to compromise itself with the state. Just look at any photo or video of VP Pence standing behind the “Abomination of Orange Desolation” with love in his eyes, and you’ll know what I mean. It’s disgusting.

  • steve

    Rubbish

  • Bones

    In your house? Yes. (Although you cannot do anything you want in your house eg abuse)

    In your business? No.

  • Bones

    Good.

    Imagine how shithouse it would be if it didn’t.

  • Matthew

    I graduated from a public, U.S. uni. I think I received a good
    business education there. I also took a lot of liberal
    arts/humanities courses as well throughout my college career.

    I don´t think the education I received was poor at all and
    I wonder if I would have received a better business education
    at, say, Princeton or Harvard … ???

    [Edited]

  • $144948586

    What’s so special about a business that you can’t discriminate?

  • $144948586

    Exactly. So then they’d rightfully go out of business and be replaced by something better for the consumer and not kept on life support by USA.edu

  • Matthew

    Have you read anything by John Polkinghorne, Peter?

  • Realist1234

    Not directly, more some quotes from him in other books. I know he is a quantum physicist as well as an ordained minister. He poo-poo’s the multiverse theory, as I do too, as pure conjecture with zero actual evidence, and probably no evidence ever.

  • Realist1234

    But even if evolution is false, and what we see now is due to ‘special creation’, God still allows a lot of suffering, whether in the human or animal world, so that may also seem inconsistent with a loving, all-powerful God. I dont have any easy aswers for the problem of evil and suffering, but I do think human beings are supposed to be part of the solution.

  • Matthew

    I think the point is that many conservative theologians simply say that the problem of evil has to do with the fall and free will.

    The problem with the old earth scenario is that one has to consider evil and suffering happening even before the fall of humankind. This aspect of things puzzles me Peter.

    I do agree with you … humans should be part of the solution even if we cannot understand fully why God allows evil and suffering to happen in our time and space.

  • TJ the Good

    You lick your mom with that tongue?

  • Testimony of Historians re Jesus theChrist:

    “For instance, consider the testimony of Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian who was a Pharisee. He referred to Jesus Christ in the book Jewish Antiquities. Although some doubt the authenticity of the first reference where Josephus mentioned Jesus as the Messiah, Professor Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University says that few have doubted the genuineness of the second reference. There Josephus said: “[Ananus the high priest] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200) Yes, a Pharisee, a member of the sect many of whose adherents were avowed enemies of Jesus, acknowledged the existence of “James, the brother of Jesus.”

    “Tacitus, born about 55 C.E. and considered one of the world’s greatest historians, mentioned the Christians in his Annals. In the account about Nero’s blaming the great fire of Rome in 64 C.E. on them, he wrote: “Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.” The details of this account match the information regarding the Jesus of the Bible.”

    Not rubbish; documented attestation from non-biblical sources.

  • steve

    Debunked. Interpolation and forgery.

  • Realist1234

    Hi Matthew

    I think you might mean ‘unthinking conservative theologians…’ lol.

    Because of our rather simple reading of Scripture we tend to think there was ‘perfection’ before the ‘fall’ and afterwards the whole world went to pot. I dont think so. Before the fall, mankind was told by God to ‘subdue’ the earth. Why would perfection need subduing? And before the fall, God already noted something was ‘not good’, man being on his own with no companion. Even with the fall of mankind, however that actually happened, again we tend to think that the ‘death’ that was a consequence was physical death. That is, up to that point, man was in some sense eternal in nature. But again, is that what it actually says?

    I reread the first few chapters of Genesis. God creates man from the dust of the earth, and after the fall He says:

    ‘ By the sweat of your brow
    you will eat your food
    until you return to the ground,
    since from it you were taken;
    for dust you are
    and to dust you will return.’

    I get the impression that the main point here is that man will no longer automatically enjoy the work God had originally given him. It seems ‘Eden’ was something of an oasis, and once ejected mankind was prone to all the ‘chaos’ of an unsubdued earth. He was already ‘dust’ and he would naturally be returning to dust at the end of his life. If you take Genesis literalistically then Adam lived for 930 years. It took a very long time for him to ‘die’ .

    I remember a Simpson’s episode where Homer and Marge were playing Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Homer was able to fall from a great height and simply bounce around when he hit ground. And strip off pork from a living, talking pig. I sometimes think that is how many of us still imagine Eden. Funny episode though!

    You might find these links from Biologos helpful, especially the 1st one:

    https://biologos.org/common-questions/human-origins/death-before-the-fall/

    https://biologos.org/blogs/jim-stump-faith-and-science-seeking-understanding/gods-good-chaos/

    Food for thought!

    Peter

  • Fine to say. Do you have anything to back that up? Perhaps some modern biblical scholar?

    Remember, the Great Criminal, Hillary Clinton told us that the Uranium One scandal had been debunked but now we find out that is wasn’t.

    I am not sure about the pedigree of Tacitus but I know that Josephus is held in high regard by a majority of biblical teachers, historians and scholars from Jews to Christians. For example, ” Although some doubt the authenticity of the first reference where Josephus mentioned Jesus as the Messiah, Professor Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University says that few have doubted the genuineness of the second reference.”

  • You said, “When the first FISA warrant was issued for investigating Carter Page the FBI did not have the Steele dossier.” Do you have a direct quote and cite for this statement?

    You don’t because it is not true. The Obama administration’s first application for a Fisa warrant to surveil Carter Page in June 2016 was denied. Denied! We have learned this 8-months ago by watching Fox! It is old news.

    None of the accusations in the Steel dossier have been vetted. If you can quote differently now is the time? Tell us what accusations have been verified if you can?

    They could not get the warrant without it but hid the fact that it was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC. Putting an unverified document in a Fisa application is a felony. Getting a warrant to spy on the Trump organization during an election cycle is the largest abuse of power in memory. But democrats lost and so the scheme has been exposed. Rant all you want but this is not going away like the Mueller investigation because it did happen.

    Only a “handful” of Republicans and Democrats have been allowed to read the FISA application. John Ratcliffe of the Judiciary Committee is one; he was interviewed this morning and confirmed their was abuse that needs investigated. He is pushing for a special counsel due to the number of people involved; those in government and those now out of government like the disgraced ex FBI direct Comey and his second, Andrew McCabe. Kaboom Baby!

  • Matthew

    Thanks so much Peter.

  • newenglandsun

    Lol…I don’t even have a master’s degree yet. Can’t afford it.

  • Bones

    “Out of the top 20 universities in the US, only 5 are public AND the first one doesn’t score until the 10th spot. It’s world ranking: 22, and it dropped 4 points.”

    Did anyone mention (cough) Trump University (cough)

    Yes, conservatives gain much pleasure in destroying public education……Like your hero…..

    “When Reagan assumed office, he immediately set about doing exactly what he had promised. He cut state funding for higher education, laid the foundations for a shift to a tuition-based funding model, and called in the National Guard to crush student protest, which it did with unprecedented severity. But he was only able to do this because he had already successfully shifted the political debate over the meaning and purpose of public higher education in America. The first “bums” he threw off welfare were California university students. Instead of seeing the education of the state’s youth as a patriotic duty and a vital weapon in the Cold War, he cast universities as a problem in and of themselves—both an expensive welfare program and dangerously close to socialism. He even argued for the importance of tuition-based funding by suggesting that if students had to pay, they’d value their education too much to protest.

    It’s important to remember this chapter in California history because it may, in retrospect, have signaled the beginning of the end of public higher education in the United States as we’d known it. It’s true that when the Great Recession began in 2008, state budgets crumbled under a crippling new fiscal reality and tuition and debt levels began to skyrocket. It was also in the context of the California student movement that the slogan “Occupy Everything, Demand Nothing” first emerged, in 2009, when students occupied campus buildings in protest against budget cuts, tuition hikes, and staff cutbacks, and were crushed by the same kind of overwhelming police force that was later mobilized against Occupy encampments across the country. But while university administrators have blamed budgetary problems on state legislatures—and scapegoated individual police officers, like the now-notorious (and former) UC-Davis “pepper spray cop,” for “overreactions”—these scenarios are déjà vu all over again for those with long memories. When Mitt Romney urges Americans to “get as much education as they can afford,” or when university administrators call the police as their first response to student protest, it’s Ronald Reagan’s playbook they’re working from.

    Books such as Christopher Newfield’s Unmaking the Public University connect the dots between the post-’64 cultural politics of neoconservative backlash and the rise of Reagan as its standard bearer, but advocates of public education have been playing defense for so long that the vision animating the first century of American public education can be difficult to recall, much less recover or put forward persuasively. Thanks to the Reagan revolution, in short, we’ve forgotten that the United States was building public schools and universities for a lot longer than it has been letting them crumble. If we want to tell a different story than the decline of public education—and especially if we want to see it rise again—it behooves us to move past Reagan and the backlash, and to think more clearly about what they destroyed, and what we’ve lost.

    For the first half of the twentieth century, the University of California was a nearly sacred institution in the Golden State. Before ever-rising tuition and apocalyptic budget cuts had become a regular feature of the state’s legislative season—now an annual ritual heralding the end of summer—the UC’s public mission was as close to a bipartisan consensus as you could find. In the 1950s, it would have been completely uncontroversial to credit the university with playing a critical role in building California into the Golden State: the UC was where nuclear energy and weapons were first invented and developed, where the foundations of California’s aerospace industry were laid, where the Cold War was being won (and where federal research grants were being soaked up and spent). Research done in its labs would make it possible for California wine to compete on the global market and to develop the Central Valley into a regional breadbasket. It was where the establishment sent its children out of choice, and where the rising middle class sent its children to be educated for free.

    This consensus had everything to do with the fact the UC was built by a kind of Republican that doesn’t really exist anymore: the moderate.

    It is worth taking a minute to understand how abysmal the numbers on the for-profit college industry really are. They show what a poor substitute for-profit education is for traditional public higher education, especially community colleges. This isn’t surprising: in addition to leading to price increases and rationing, conventional economics would suggest that capping the supply of quality higher education results in a type of “fake supply” or in attempts to mimic the supply at a lower quality.

    Studies find graduates of for-profits leave with worse employment prospects than their peers at community colleges, in large part because these companies spend less on instruction than they do in pursuit of profit margins. Recent investigations found that for-profits have ten recruiters for every career services staff member, and several of the leading for-profits have no career services at all. If their programs lack accreditation for a specific occupational field, they often acknowledge this in fine print or other obtuse disclosures.

    For-profit schools are also more expensive than their peers, with bachelor degree programs roughly 20 percent more expensive than at a flagship public university, and associate degree and certificate programs roughly four times the cost of a comparable community college. It therefore isn’t surprising that graduates of for-profit schools have the highest student debt loads, averaging $33,050 in 2008, compared to $20,200 for public school graduates and $27,650 for private nonprofit grads. Even with high dropout rates, 96 percent of for-profit students take out a student loan.

    Government spending still structures the higher education market, however; for-profit schools get most of their revenues from federal funds. They also receive a disproportionate amount of student aid: while only educating about 10 percent of post-secondary students, they receive around a quarter of all Pell Grants and student loans. A recent Senate study found that “the 15 publicly traded for-profit education companies received 86 percent of revenues from taxpayers.” This sector couldn’t exist if the federal government didn’t provide this funding, and couldn’t thrive without a shortfall in state revenue.

    The for-profit industry that we understand today is much different from the small, local certification programs that used to compose the industry. As of 2009, more than 75 percent of students at a for-profit college are attending one owned by a private equity firm or a company traded on a major stock exchange. Modern concerns with for-profits’ potential abuses—both in duping students and exploiting federal programs—didn’t begin until the expansion of GI benefits for higher education in the period following the Second World War.

    In the early 1990s, for-profits were subject to a series of Senate investigations. Georgia Democratic Senator Sam Nunn noted that students were “[v]ictimized by unscrupulous profiteers and their fraudulent schools” and “have received neither the training nor the skills they hoped to acquire, and instead, have been left burdened with debts they cannot repay.” Nunn said this after the committee learned about an Ohio repair school operating out of a fruit stand and recruiters who targeted welfare offices and housing projects for enrollees. Current recruitment practices are just as bad, if not worse. According to internal documents recently made available by a Senate investigation committee, recruiters at the for-profit college ITT were given diagrams of a “pain funnel,” with a series of questions designed to “poke the pain” of potential recruits. A Kaplan document told recruiters that their interactions with potential students should be “all about uncovering their pain and fears.”

    The hearings in the 1990s led to a series of for-profit sector reforms and regulations. One key regulation required that at least 50 percent of students be enrolled at a physical campus in order for a program to be eligible for federal student aid. A 1998 pilot program allowed some schools to go below the 50 percent threshold and still receive federal aid, in order to study the effects, but it was the George W. Bush administration that sought to comprehensively remove regulations unfavorable to the industry. A former lobbyist for the (for-profit) University of Phoenix, Sally Stroup, became Bush’s assistant secretary for post-secondary education at the Department of Education and led a successful effort to remove restrictions on for-profit schools, including the 50 percent rule, and to grant them greater access to federal funding. The legislation was only several lines long, and was sneaked into a massive spending bill, but it opened the door to an expansion of the industry beyond what most people could have imagined at the time.

    The standard political criticism of the for-profit industry is that it exists only to vacuum up government subsidies; that it is a problematic byproduct of government actions. This diagnosis is perfectly in line with the Reaganite complaint against government interference in the workings of the market. If we look at California, however, we see that this critique has it backward. For-profit education flooded the market only after the state began to abandon its responsibility to create sufficient institutional capacity in the public system. The problem is not government action, but inaction. As the government gave up its Master Plan responsibility to educate California students, the for-profit sector expanded to fill the demand.

    Education expert (and UC Berkeley scholar) John Aubrey Douglass has found a similar pattern in countries such as Brazil, Korea, and Poland, which modernized too fast for the public sector to keep up with demand. The for-profit sector absorbs and even monopolizes the very subsidies that were intended to foster mass education, while providing poorer outcomes than the public sector. But whereas this problem, referred to as the “Brazilian Effect,” arises in developing countries as they seek to build a public higher education structure from scratch, the United States suffers instead from decay.

    Under the neoliberal public policy regime of the past thirty years, the United States has moved from providing public goods directly toward providing coupons for the purchase of those goods in the private market. The private market encourages choice, competition, and innovation, its proponents say, especially compared to the gray, static, and inefficient public sector. Government grants, subsidized loans, and tax breaks would unleash market forces and use them to tackle the problems of higher education.

    Such an approach would work only if high-quality private universities increased the amount of students they were willing to educate—if, in other words, the supply of good education were “elastic,” stretching to meet the demand of additional students. Instead, students are finding an inelastic market with collapsing public provision. They face skyrocketing prices and the rationing of quality education, with for-profits purveying counterfeit goods to make up the difference.

    Sometimes policy failures are accidental. Sometimes there is a trail of breadcrumbs. In the case of California higher education, it is hard not to notice that policy failures have meant big business for the for-profit industry. And in some cases, that trail of breadcrumbs leads directly to the men and women who run the UC. UC Regent Richard Blum, for example, is not only the largest shareholder in two for-profit universities, Career Education Corporation and ITT Educational Services, but also, as Peter Byrne reported in a 2010 exposé, oversaw investments for the UC’s $63 billion portfolio at a time when the UC invested in the very same two for-profits. The problem isn’t anything as simple as pure corruption, but the decline of the public university is corporate capital’s gain, and investment firms like Blum Capital Partners know this quite well. The educational infrastructure of the future—and in many ways, of the present—is being built out of the very same crumbling public sector that men like Richard Blum have been entrusted with stewarding.

    Ronald Reagan may not have seen this coming when he first set out to destroy what he saw as the creeping communism of master-planned and state-funded public education. His vision at the time was essentially negative, reactionary. But the conservative project he put in place in California in the 1960s remains with us today. Reagan was the trendsetter in making higher education into a problem to be solved with fee hikes and police. Other governors approached this problem in different ways, but the decision Reagan made to begin the destruction of the Master Plan hangs over all of them. Today, we can clearly see the results. Limiting the ability of the government to plan for the education of its citizens has left us with the worst of both worlds: students and families with too much debt and too few options.”

    https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/from-master-plan-to-no-plan-the-slow-death-of-public-higher-education

  • Bones

    Is Trump University still going?

  • Bones

    Or police…or military….or judiciary…or prisons…..

  • Bones

    And God cursed women with the pain of childbirth….

    What do you think the main point of that was? (Apart from god being a bit of a Prick)

  • Matthew

    He´s a libertarian I believe. I think he´ll say those services can be provided without taxing people.

  • Bones

    I’m sure he would. And that would be a fantasy.

    The simple fact is governments exist as a protection for us.

    Otherwise it’s back to the days of kings where the strong simply take over the weak.

    He obviously wouldn’t have liked the tithes in Ancient Israel.

  • Bones

    “The government is not a producer of goods; it does not gather it’s revenues voluntarily through the will of consumer by providing a service only to those who want it.”

    That’s simply not true….

    In the words of Life of Brian what have the Romans (government) ever done for us……

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7tvauOJMHo

  • $144948586

    Your right; it gathers revenue involuntarily to preemptively pay for things it plans to provide; albeit, it merely transfers this to private companies which construct projects.

    In every case, however, the work is much worse than would be done if revenue were gathered voluntarily–as exemplified by looming budget crises for all advanced nations and why your firefighter and police can’t have their pensions paid and, of course, there’s always the medical rationing.

  • Matthew

    These discussions remind me of when I worked for a cable TV company many years ago (long before streaming and NETFLIX). People would call and demand that they receive service in their area. The point was (and is), if it´s not profitable for a company to go into a particular area to provide service — it will not — and some people have to suffer without the service.

    It´s why it´s also difficult to fully privatize, for example, the postal service. Some people in very rural areas would simply not receive their mail because of the profit motive(s) involved.

    I think I understand the libertarian argument and their dislike for government and taxes, but I´m simply not convinced that as long as profit and shareholder value and wealth are the main drivers behind the provision of goods and services that everyone will be taken care of equitably.

    I just don´t see how purely free markets without government and tax revenue can really work in the real world. The success of libertarianism, as I understand it, is based on consumers making right and good choices, but are they making such choices??

    [Edited]

  • $144948586

    “For-profit schools are also more expensive than their peers, with bachelor degree programs roughly 20 percent more expensive than at a flagship public university”
    This is HEAVILY influenced by the crowding-out effects of government.
    Not to mention, on the grade school level, most parents have to not only pay taxes for a public school but must also pay tuition for a private school…this is called crowding-out–you’ll find this term in your Keynesian/Krugman text as well; so, you know, it’s legitimate.

    From Time.com
    http://time.com/money/3108717/private-school-public-school-costs/
    “How Sending Your Child to Private School Can Save You $53,000”

    Not to mention, the growth in admin of state-run schools speaks directly to the inefficient bureaucracy:
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/28/school-administration-costs-soar-700-percent-1950/

    “Did anyone mention (cough) Trump University (cough)”
    I’ll take this as admission that what I’ve said is true. Unlike public schools whose performance is consistently poor, a private school that produces bad graduates goes out of business.

    Chalk that W up there for me.

  • Realist1234

    ‘The first 30 years or so the early church had a few circulating letters by Paul, but no gospels or writings by other Apostles.’

    – that’s an assumption. I would dispute your 30 years or so figure. There is good evidence to believe Luke and Acts were written before AD 65, and based on Markan priority (which is reasonable) , Mark was likely written in the mid-50’s at the latest. Luke, in the introduction to his Gospel, refers to other accounts about Jesus already in circulation. Whilst that reference undoubtedly includes Mark’s writing, it would seem there were other writings in circulation too, not to mention a very strong oral history particulary amongst Jesus’ Jewish followers, who treated Him as a rabbi.

    ‘The first gospel written was later attributed to Mark, but like the others was anonymous.’

    – another assumption. There is literally zero evidence that any of the Gospels were ‘anonymous’ ie noone knew who wrote them. You might find this link useful: http://www.wall.org/~aron/blog/the-gospels-arent-anonymous/

    Brant Pitre, a former student of Bart Ehrman, shows how highly unlikely the anonymity of the Gospels is in his book ‘The Case for Jesus’.

    ‘None of the Gospels were eye witness accounts but were written decades after the events described.’

    – An eyewitness account is an eyewitness account regardless of when it was written. The timing is irrelevant. For example, would you argue a book written decades after the end of the 2nd world war, containing the eyewitness accounts of the survivors of concentration camps, does not in fact contain eyewitness accounts of those experiences? I think not.

    For a detailed analysis of the Gospels as based on eyewitness testimony, see Richard Baukham’s ‘Jesus and the Eyewtinesses’ (2nd ed revised).

    ‘John was the only gospel to attribute deity to Jesus and was written at the end of the first century. You’d think if Jesus thought he was God, he’d have mentioned it in Mark, written considerably earlier than John.’

    – this is a common, but incorrect view. Yes John is more ‘explicit’ and the Synoptics more ‘implicit’, but it is clear what Jesus is claiming about Himself in the Synoptics. You only have to see the reaction of the Jews listening to Him. This is a useful overview: http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/37/37-3/JETS_37-3_333-350_Doriani.pdf

    ‘The early church didn’t have set orthodox doctrine. There were Marcionites, Gnostics, Ebionites. Each had their own take on who Jesus was and what was the meaning of the crucifixion. Each group vied for control and had their own holy scriptures, purported to have been written by this or that apostle. ‘

    – the only reason you can list those other groups is precisely because their beliefs contradicted the accept truth, primarily about Jesus, in the early church and as such they were rejected. And one of the main reasons the early church rejected some writings which claimed Apostolic authorship was because the early church knew it did not have any Apostolic authority. Michael Kruger’s website is useful on the issue of canon: https://www.michaeljkruger.com/

    Many would disagree with your charaterisation of Eusebius.

    ‘As for the NT we inherited, there are numerous books that are forgeries, i.e., written by unknown authors but attributed to Apostles (either by the forgerer, or by later church leaders wishing to promote that particular book as canonical).’

    – provide the evidence.

    ‘The post-Nicene theology of orthodoxy in all likelihood, bears little resemblance to first century theology, let alone the theology of Peter and Paul.’

    – again provide the evidence, particularly given much of the NT is made up of Paul’s letters.

    ‘It is highly doubtful that the other disciples and followers of Jesus could write, including Jesus himself. Hence, the decades that passed before the other books were written, long after the disciples had passed from the scene.’

    – your statement is highly doubtful. Jesus’ followers came from all ‘classes’, from fishermen to members of the Jewish Sanhedrin. To argue that none of them were able to write is without evidence. And you also conveniently ignore the common useage of amanuensis at that time.

    – what evidence do you have that all of the disciples and other followers of Jesus were dead before the Gospels were written, ie by AD 55-65 for the Synoptics? Whilst, in general terms, people live longer now than then, there are many examples of people from that time who lived into their 60s, 70s and beyond. I understand that typically the data on life expentancy in ancient times includes rates of death of babies and toddlers, which skews the overall picture. In other words, if an individual lived beyond childhood, there was no reason why they could not have lived a reasonably long life.

    ‘Just look at any photo or video of VP Pence standing behind the “Abomination of Orange Desolation” with love in his eyes, and you’ll know what I mean. It’s disgusting.’

    – that made me laugh! I saw that image just last night on the BBC news and I have to agree lol.

  • Realist1234

    Yw Matthew, though I do tend to go off at a tanget sometimes!

    Peter

  • Matthew

    No Peter … what you share here on the forum really helps me (and I suppose many others as well :-)).

    Have a great weekend.

    Matthew

  • Matthew

    Should this really be about winning and losing, Josh?

  • $144948586

    When we’re talking about ruining the opportunities of our youths by pretending the state has the best answers, ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY.

  • $144948586
  • Matthew

    It seems dates are very important, however there is much disagreement about this …

  • Bones

    Derpy all private universities do.

  • Bones

    No, it’s because conservatives like yourself cut funding to public projects.

    Then congratulate themselves about how public projects are failing.

  • Bones

    Lol, private schools would not exist if not for government funding either derpy.

    I’ve worked in both.

    The nice private Christian school I worked for simply told the parents of any kids with learning difficulties they needed to go to the public school down the road because they weren’t interested in them. Same goes for any kids they couldn’t handle. “We can’t cater for those types here”.

    It’s pretty weird talking to parents who paid their fees and were shattered because the nice Christian school had kicked their son (a 6 year old) out for the sin of not being very smart.

    No wonder you love them.

    You really have no idea about public schools. Try teaching indigenous students in central Australia where there is no profit to be made from Aboriginal kids and you spend your mornings picking up kids on the streets, then giving them a feed and trying to teach them the basics of reading and writing. ut of course you would label such schools as ‘poor’…

    The UC was once a powerhouse in the States until conservatives tried to gut its funding.

    Chalk a L up for you right there.

    Conservatives celebrate after defunding public services.

    Nothing new there, Ronald Reagan.

    Chalk up WWWW for me there.

  • Bones

    The state has the ONLY answers for many.

    You have no answers for most apart from selfish idiots like yourself.

  • Bones

    Well the WINNERS are for profit schools.

    The LOSERs are public schools and the staff and students who attend them. Like those who can’t go to for-profit schools.

    Thanks to people like Josh.

  • Bones

    It sure as hell isn’t profitable for private schools to set up in local indigenous or poor areas around here.

    Guess who has to carry that load – the poor public schools…..

    And yes private schools receive even more funding than public schools ….from the government. My church here opened a private school because it was a way of making money. So they can offer things like archery ranges whereas the public school is scrounging money to provide learning support and special education.

  • Bones

    Whose not paying our firefighters and police pensions?

    Over here we have compulsory superannuation which employers pay in throughout their employees career.

    When I retire I’ll be a millionaire.

    That’s a big WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW for me.

    You’d hate that.

    It’s people like you who cut funds to pensions, then whinge about it.

  • Bones
  • Bones

    “…. services that everyone will be taken care of equitably.”

    Dude I’ve worked in private education.

    I’ve seen parents from nice Christian families get told to go to the public system because they couldn’t deal with their kids problems.

    I’ve also written references for kids for interviews at private schools.

    The dumb ones rarely get in.

  • $144948586

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/108130592
    This isnt due to fund cutting; this is due to tax revenues not being enough because, lo and behold, you tax companies and the jobs leave the state. This story is happening across many municipalities.

    I hope you do become a millionaire, but be ready for the debt cliff you government is facing. When it folds so does your retirement system.

  • $144948586
  • David Cohen

    “First it was abortion. Then it was same sex marriage. Who knows the next issue they’ll rally around, …”
    – You skipped over their endorsement of torture.

    https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2009/may/evangelicals-and-torture.html

  • David Cohen

    “There is literally zero evidence that any of the Gospels were ‘anonymous’ ie noone knew who wrote them.”
    – Apparently you have never read the canonical Gospels. All of them are anonymous i.e. they do not identify the author. What there is literally zero evidence for is that they were written by Matthew, mark, Luke and john respectively.

    “An eyewitness account is an eyewitness account regardless of when it was written. The timing is irrelevant.”
    – When the accounts of the eyewitnesses contradict each other, however, it is clear that at least some, possibly all, of the accounts are in error. The Gospel accounts have some significant contradictions. For example, the synoptic Gospels have Jesus sharing a Passover meal with his disciples, while John has Jesus die on the day before the Passover meal.

    ‘As for the NT we inherited, there are numerous books that are
    forgeries, i.e., written by unknown authors but attributed to Apostles
    (either by the forgerer, or by later church leaders wishing to promote
    that particular book as canonical).’
    “- provide the evidence.”
    – The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Peter, The Apocalypse of Peter (there are three of them), The Gospel According to Mary, The Third Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, The Letter of Paul to the Laodiceans…
    Shall I continue?

    ‘The post-Nicene theology of orthodoxy in all likelihood, bears little resemblance to first century theology, let alone the
    theology of Peter and Paul.’
    – again provide the evidence, particularly given much of the NT is made up of Paul’s letters”
    – Will flesh enter the kingdom of God? Jesus said that the dead would be raised to life in the kingdom, but Paul says flesh cannot enter the kingdom (I Corinthians 15:50.) Is Jesus wrong or is Paul?

  • David Cohen

    “And for slavery, that was everywhere, not just here. And it is the Christians who finally were able to get it abolished!!!”

    – There were Christians on both sides of the argument. If you read Confederate arguments regarding slavery they frequently reference the Bible in support of their cause. Similar arguments were used to justify the South’s Jim Crow laws. Here is a reference for you. Note how the author identifies himself as “a servant of God” on the title page

    https://archive.org/details/godsgardenofsegr00mcgo

  • Realist1234

    Anonymity – using the criteria that authorship is not explicitly stated within the main body of the text would also make the following ‘anonymous’:

    Aristotle’s Poetics
    Plato’s Republic
    Aristophanes’ Birds
    Livy’s The Early History of Rome
    Tacitus’ The Annals of Imperial Rome
    Shakespeare’s Hamlet
    Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice
    Kant’s Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics

    Do you believe they are? I doubt it. And assuming you don’t, why not based on your criteria?

    It was customary for the author not to be named in the main body of the text, but rather in the title header or on the outside of the book. This is precisely what we find with the Gospels.

    There is no evidence that the Gospels ever circulated which did not contain the author name in its title or ona an attachment, as was the Roman custom for parchments.

    The historical and manuscript evidence strongly suggest that the authors of the Gospels were known from the beginning, with their names attached.

    In summary –

    There’s an absence of anonymous Gospel manuscripts – they don’t exist. As such there’s no text-critical manuscript evidence to support anonymous Gospels.

    There is absolute uniformity in the authors to whom each of the books is attributed in every language.

    The earliest and best copies of the four Gospels are unanimously attributed to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. There is no manuscript evidence to support the claim that “originally” the Gospels had no titles.

    It is implausible that a book without a title was circulating the Roman Empire for almost a hundred years, then at some point someone attributed an author, and yet there are no traces of disagreement in any manuscripts. And this was supposed to have happened not once, but with each one of the 4 Gospels. If the authors were assigned much later, why aren’t there Gospel manuscripts with conflicting authorship? The book of Hebrews is anonymous and we have manuscript evidence that it has been attributed to different authors. This explains why there was ongoing debate whether or not to include it in the canon. But you don’t find that with the Gospels and there’s no debate about the Gospel authors among ancient Christians.

    If authorship were added at a much later date to give them “authority”, then why choose Mark and Luke – neither of whom was an eyewitness to Jesus? Why not attribute them to Andrew, Peter or Jude?

    The reality is there is no evidence whatsoever for the anonymity of the Gospels, and that view needs to be put out with the rubbish.

    Passover ‘contradiction’ –

    It seems to me problems arise with our modern-day understanding because we fail to understand Jewish customs and the audiences to whom the Gospels were written.

    As another commentator has said ‘ When John’s terminology is properly understood, it becomes clear that John’s chronology does not contradict that of the Synoptics, but actually strengthens and adds further clarity to it — particularly for the audience he was writing to.

    The difficulty is not in the sequence of events, but in properly understanding the terms John used to locate those events in time. The key to understanding John’s choice of terms lies in the historical context of the Gospel.

    Historical Context of the Gospel of John
    Audience: The best we can tell, John probably wrote his Gospel somewhere around 85 AD in Asia — probably Ephesus.1 We can get a bit more specific about his audience by examining literary clues:

    John explained Jewish customs, translated Jewish names, and located Palestinian sites. These facts suggest that he was writing for Gentile readers who lived primarily outside Palestine.2

    Of course, Rome ruled the land in those days, so John would have had to translate much of this Jewish material before his Gentile (“Roman”) audience could understand it.

    Relationship to the Synoptics: As mentioned in the question, there is strong evidence that both John and his intended audience were intimately familiar with the Synoptic tradition. John’s Gospel was thus supplementary in nature, written for a theological purpose, rather than to rehash the historical details they were all already familiar with. This is why John doesn’t spend his time rehashing Jesus’ genealogy, birth, baptism, temptation, calling of the twelve, exercising demons, parables, transfiguration, agony in Gesthemane, ascension, etc. In fact, it is estimated that 93% of the material in John is unique to John.3

    He focused on Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem, the Jewish feasts, Jesus’ private conversations with individuals, and His preparation of His disciples.4

    John 18:28
    This verse indicates the Jews feared that they might be defiled, and thus precluded from eating the Passover. The semantic range of the term “the Passover” includes “the Feast of Unleavened Bread”, as seen elsewhere in Scripture:

    Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching. -Luke 22:1

    This view is supported by both modern commentators and ancient Jewish sources. For example, one esteemed commentator (citing the Mishnah) recently explained:

    The “Passover” was the name that the Jews used to describe both the Passover proper, and the entire festival that followed it, which included the Feast of Unleavened Bread . . . Part of the feast was the offering of two peace offerings, called the Chagigah—one on the Nisan 14 and one on Nisan 15, the latter being the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Jewish law was very strict that no one who was defiled could offer the Chagigah.5

    Thus, John 18:28 seems to simply be indicating that the Jews were concerned that they would not be able to eat the Feast / offer the Chagigah.

    Why did John use the term “the Passover”, rather than “the Feast”? Probably to highlight the irony of the situation: the Jews go to great lengths to preserve their participation in the Passover Feast while, at the same time, going to great lengths to betray the True Passover.

    John 19:14a
    The beginning of the verse says that it was now “the day of preparation of the Passover.” The term “the day of preparation” is a single word in Greek (παρασκευὴ) that normally referred to “Friday” (which is the day of preparation for “Saturday,” the Sabbath.)6 In John’s day, παρασκευὴ had become the colloquial name of the 6th day of the week. 7 So, the most natural rendition of the statement would be “the Friday of the Passover.”

    Given that this is the preferred interpretation exegetically, and that it aligns perfectly with the chronology of John, as well as the Synoptic witnesses, there is no reason to suspect that it means anything different. This apparent contradiction only exists in modern English.

    Why did John use the term “the day of preparation” of the Passover? Probably to help his readers understand the Jews’ request to break the legs of the condemned in verses 31-36; they couldn’t have people hanging on crosses on that Sabbath, “for the day of that Sabbath was great” (being associated with the Passover.) Again we see the irony of the Jews’ high view of the Passover festival, and disregard for the True Passover.

    John 19:14b
    The verse goes on to specify that “it was about the sixth hour” when Pilate brought Jesus out and told the Jews “Behold, your King!” The important question to answer here is: by which clock? At the time of the writing of the Gospel of John the Romans were using a system of reckoning time which would have placed “the sixth hour” at about 6:00 AM,8 as evidenced by recovered Roman legal documents.9 So, was John using the Jewish calendar, the Roman legal calendar, or did he just goof up on a very specific timestamp?

    There are a number of reasons to favor the view that John was using the Roman legal calendar here:

    Recall that John’s late-century, Gentile audience was most likely more Roman than Jewish in culture, and so it is likely that the term “the sixth hour” would mean 6:00 AM to them — especially in reference to Roman legal matters.

    Recall that John and his readers were already familiar with the Synoptic tradition. It would be very odd for John to blatantly contradict that tradition with no explanation. (It would be even more odd for John to accidentally make such a specific mistake!)

    Recall that most of John’ material served to supplement the Synoptic tradition. The idea of John adding a “Roman legal” timestamp to clarify the timing of this event for his readers is highly consistent with the nature of this Gospel.

    “The sixth hour” (by the Roman legal calendar) was the exact time at which the Romans typically began their legal work.10 Given the haste of the Jews in capturing Jesus and bringing Him to Pilate, and the fact that Jesus was captured in the middle of the night, it makes perfect sense for them to get him to Pilate first thing in the morning — and for John to highlight this!

    This would not be the first time that John’s Gospel displayed a more “Roman” focus than the Synoptics. In fact, we have another example in the very next verse:

    The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.” -John 19:15

    This reference to Caesar only appears in John.

    If John was using the Roman legal calendar, John’s Passion chronology aligns perfectly with that of the Synoptics. We’re not talking about a solution that makes it possible to reconcile the accounts, we are looking at a legitimate, historically-vetted definition of the term that fits exactly with everything else we know about the Passion chronology.
    Why did John use the term “the sixth hour” to refer to 6:00 AM? Because that was the term his audience would have been familiar with in regards to Roman legal matters, and being the start of the Roman legal workday, it highlighted the Jews’ haste in driving Pilate to sentence Jesus first thing in the morning.

    1: D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991, 82-87; Dr. Thomas L. Constable, Notes on John: 2013 Edition, http://www.soniclight.com/constable/notes.htm (accessed February 6, 2013), 2-3

    2: Constable, 6

    3: Constable, 4 citing Edwin A. Blum, “John.” In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, 267-348, Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983), 269

    4: Constable, 4

    5: Constable, 281 citing Pesahim 6:3 from The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby (London: Oxford University Press, 1933) . . . cf. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Flavius Josephus, Translated by William Whiston (London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866); reprint ed. Peabody, Mass.: (Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 14:2:1; 17:9:3; See also Carson, 589-590

    6: Carson, 603 citing Charles C Torrey, “The Date of the Crucifixion According to the Fourth Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature, 50:4 (1931), 241; A. J. B. Higgins, “The Origins of the Eucharist”, New Testament Studies 1 (1954-55), 206ff; Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), 776-777

    7: Constable, 292 citing Torrey, 241; Higgins, 206-8; B. F. Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John: The Authorised Version with Introduction and Notes (London: James Clarke & Co., Ltd., 1958), 1:343; Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977), 70

    8: Constable, citing Westcott, 2:324-26; and R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1960), 209

    9: Constable, citing Morris, 708

    10: Constable, citing A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963), 45 ‘

    ‘As for the NT we inherited, there are numerous books that are
    forgeries, i.e., written by unknown authors but attributed to Apostles
    (either by the forgerer, or by later church leaders wishing to promote
    that particular book as canonical).’
    “- provide the evidence.”
    – The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Peter, The Apocalypse of Peter (there are three of them), The Gospel According to Mary, The Third Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, The Letter of Paul to the Laodiceans…
    Shall I continue?’

    – no please don’t continue, as you have misunderstood the original poster’s statement. He is clearly referring to the New Testament documents, some of which he believes are ‘forgeries’ but which were included in the canon. None of the ones you quoted were included in the canon, precisely because they did not have Apostolic authority, despite their titles. The original poster is still to provide evidence that any of the NT writings are ‘forgeries’, though no doubt he has been reading too much of Bart Ehrman.

    ‘Will flesh enter the kingdom of God? Jesus said that the dead would be raised to life in the kingdom, but Paul says flesh cannot enter the kingdom (I Corinthians 15:50.) Is Jesus wrong or is Paul?’

    – seriously? Well, neither. When Paul uses the term ‘flesh’ he always means our current sinful state, in our corrupted bodies. Indeed, translations like the NIV use the word ‘perishable’ to describe our current bodies, whilst the resurrection body will be ‘imperishable’. Hence Paul states, in the same chapter, ‘So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable’ and ‘For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.’

    This is fully in line with Jesus’ view of the resurrection of the dead. To use Paul’s words, when they are raised the perishable will be raised imperishable. Just like Jesus’ own resurrection body which is no longer subject to disease and death.

  • Your comments show a pattern of anger and frustration. But more so ignorance and an inability to communicate: “NEVER FUCKING EXISTED, Rubbish, Debunked. Interpolation and forgery”

    Surely you can do better? Explain to us why Jesus never existed in complete sentences and cogent thought if you can…

  • Realist1234

    Indeed. Though it appears the main reason some scholars insist on a post-70 AD date is that they refuse to accept that Jesus could have predicted the complete destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem within a short few years. They are therefore forced to assert that the Gospel writers made up this prediction after the event, and put those words into Jesus’ mouth. Very convenient!

  • Matthew

    I think it´s plausible that Jesus could have predicted that event within a few short years …

  • Chari McCauley

    Don’t they want to arm the school teachers that teach children?

    So that the next child, who grows up to feel discriminated against, can just be shot, hoping nothing goes astray and hits YOUR child? Oh wait, YOUR child would be a necessary “casualty” in the “greater” picture of things, though, so, there’s comfort in that, I guess….

    I wonder how things would “be different” for Dylann Roof, had the people he shot felt the need to arm parishioners? Aren’t there churches who post armed guards? I’m pretty sure I read that. So do football stadiums.

  • David Cohen

    “The earliest and best copies of the four Gospels are unanimously attributed to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.”
    – Actually, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Gospels are mere fragments, the earliest being a scrap of John the size of a credit card. We do not have complete Gospels until well over a hundred years after they are believed to be written, and even those do not agree with each other (the earliest copies of John do not include the story of the woman taken in adultery.) A hundred years or more is plenty of time for legends to be spread about the alleged authorship of the Gospels. As a side note none of the texts you listed claimed divine inspiration in their authorship (despite being openly contradictory to other allegedly divinely inspired texts.)

    “Why did John use the term “the Passover”, rather than “the Feast”?
    Probably to highlight the irony of the situation: the Jews go to great
    lengths to preserve their participation in the Passover Feast while, at
    the same time, going to great lengths to betray the True Passover.”

    – So you acknowledge that Jesus was in custody when, according to the other Gospels, he was preparing for the Passover feast with his disciples. I can appreciate that John was making a literary point, i.e. Jesus died on the day when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered, and John refers to Jesus as the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Still, in spite of your mental gymnastics, you cannot deny that this is a contradiction.

    “no please don’t continue, as you have misunderstood the original
    poster’s statement. He is clearly referring to the New Testament
    documents, some of which he believes are ‘forgeries’ but which were
    included in the canon.”
    – Actually it is you who have missed the point. People were clearly forging documents in the names of apostles and their followers. How do you know that some of these forgeries did not make it into the New Testament? I know of no current scholar who believes that Hebrews was written by Paul (it is an anonymous text) and Luke Timothy Johnson is the only scholar of note I know of who still believes that the pastoral epistles were written by Paul (a fact Johnson readily admits), and his defense of this stance is pure ad-hoc reasoning, unworthy of a scholar of his credentials.

    So, basically, what you have shown is that Christian mythology is just as important to the Christian identity as theology is. There is nothing wrong with that, in and of itself. The problem comes when people of faith mistake mythology for reality. That is where we get nonsense like young-Earth creationism and the belief that the USA was established as a Christian nation.

  • Questioning

    Yawn…. more like Kafizzle baby! There is a lot more evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, than there is the Clinton campaign and the DNC colluded with the FBI and the Justice department. With respect to the former, there is an “actual” investigation being conducted. Worse case, and probably more than a little truthful, they are both guilty and neither deserve to be President. That’s right, in that event neither Hateful Hillary nor Deplorable Donald deserve to be POTUS. You should agree with this. If you do not, then all your straining and gnashing is nothing more than biased, hateful vitriol. BTW, I still anxiously await the breaking of the “biggest political scandal in US history.” I cannot hold my breath too much longer.

  • Markee B

    “Cheeto Mussolini” – Gotta love it! The cheese-puff dictator! Very disrespectful to that venerated and honorable snack food, though. ;-)

  • David Cohen

    “They are therefore forced to assert that the Gospel writers made up this
    prediction after the event, and put those words into Jesus’ mouth. Very
    convenient!”

    And not without precedent

    http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/tamara_rand

  • $144948586

    “The state has the ONLY answers for many.”
    That is because the state believes price inflation is necessary and thus puts our money on a fiat currency system.
    The state has “most” of the answers, because the state was responsible for the state of the poor in developed countries.
    That is, they incentivized the breakup of familes (and thus kids being born out of wedlock) through the welfare system.
    They damaged unskilled labor employment by instituting the hurdle rate of productivity we know as the minimum wage (they also used this to keep blacks from progressing in the South).
    They bid up housing prices by paying people to be on housing subsidies, and they rent control apartments so that proper repairs CAN’T be made, because the owners are typically losing money in such areas.
    They create structural unemployment by demanding kids spend the first 18 years getting a mostly useless state-determined education for the jobs available, and thus low-skill labor is all that’s produced unless one goes to college.
    They bid up the price of college by making state-loans to people at less than market interest rates.
    They bid up the price of college by licensing universities that waste the first two years of a student progress (typically meaning a minimum of 20-30k of student loan debt).
    They punish people who want to skip to start up small businesses by taxing them heavily (that is, until Trump–and the economy has been taking off).
    They bid up the stock market by printing money during the ’08 crisis and thus you see corrections like what’s been happening in early ’18–and note, before you take this as a measure of economic strength, that jobless claims have been reaching record lows in the U.S.
    But then they decide to do stupid stuff like Trump and impose protectionist policies which also hurt consumers.
    They keep pharmaceutical prices high (and prevent the creation of actual cures btw) by instituting patent law for “cost recuperation”, which becomes a big sick game in which it’s better to keep people sick than to cure their disease (returning customers are always better when their profitability is in droves).
    They drive up medical costs and drive down quality by price fixing on health care and calling it the insurance company’s fault when they’re the one’s who created the AMA so that colleges must become “AMA certified programs” in order to produce doctors–in so doing, colleges can charge a premium 100k for their education and thus doctors pass such costs on to the consumer.
    And then on top of this, they call it the private economy’s fault that the cost of living is too high and that jobs aren’t available to people who have to waste their first 22ish years in a ridiculous education.

  • $144948586

    Private companies build everything the government demands; teaching snot-nosed 10 year olds isn’t “rocket surgery”.
    The reason private companies can’t compete today is because parents, on top of pay for private tuition, would still (barring medical exemption) pay public tuition costs. That’s called crowding-out, dopey.

    For the record, we have a very successful private school for those with disabilities in our community. To go there, you just need get a medical qualification which will allow tuition deductions for your taxes.

    But again, this rest on the government’s approval.

  • Really. There is zero evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians. If you know of any please tell us?
    I noticed in the paper today that Fox News is the most watched cable new network in the world and that Hannity is the number one cable news network program. You should watch one, just one, of his shows and see what you are missing.
    There is now two “investigations” going on as announced by the Attorney General: FISA Abuse and Uranium one. Finally, you won’t have to wait much longer….

  • Questioning

    Correction: zero evidence that we know about at this point. Also note I never said Donald colluded, I said his campaign colluded, although I suspect if one is true so is the other. So why are they investigating poor Donald at all? Well for starters….

    As early as spring 2015, US intelligence agencies started overhearing conversations in which Russian government officials, some within the Kremlin, discussed associates of Trump, then a presidential candidate. In one such conversation, Russian officials said they had cultivated a strong relationship with Michael Flynn and believed they could use him to influence Trump and his team.

    Multiple Trump associates, including Flynn, Manafort, and other members of the Trump campaign had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. In particular, Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak met with several Trump campaign members and administration nominees. Flynn was forced to resign as National Security Advisor on February 13, 2017, after it was revealed that on December 29, 2016, the day that Obama announced sanctions against Russia, Flynn had discussed the sanctions with Russian ambassador Kislyak. Flynn had earlier acknowledged speaking to Kislyak but denied discussing the sanctions. Also in December 2016, Flynn and presidential advisor Jared Kushner met with Kislyak hoping to set up a direct, secure line of communication with Russian officials that American intelligence agencies would be unaware of. Jared Kushner also met with Sergei Gorkov, the head of the Russian state-owned bank Vnesheconombank (VEB), which has been subject to U.S. economic sanctions since July 2014. Flynn and Kushner failed to report these meetings on their security clearance forms.

    FBI agents, working with Mueller, raided Manafort’s home in July 2017. The no-notice, no-knock raid used a federal search warrant, authorizing agents to look for tax documents and foreign banking records. A wide range of documents and other items were seized. Before the raid, Manafort had voluntarily provided some documents to congressional investigators, including the notes he took during the Veselnitskaya meeting.

    The Trump team issued multiple denials of any contacts between Trump associates and Russia, but many of those denials turned out to be false.

    On December 4, 2017, prosecutors filed that Paul Manafort worked on an op-ed with a Russian intelligence official while out on bail, in a court filing requesting that the judge revoke Manafort’s bond agreement.

    Mueller is looking into the meeting on June 9, 2016, in Trump Tower in New York City between three senior members of Trump’s presidential campaign—Kushner, Manafort, and Donald Trump Jr.—and at least five other people, including Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, Rinat Akhmetshin, a lobbyist and former Soviet army officer who met senior Trump campaign aides, Ike Kaveladze, British publicist Rob Goldstone and translator Anatoli Samochornov. Goldstone had suggested the meeting to Trump Jr., and it was arranged in a series of emails later made public. In one email exchange of 3 June 2016, Goldstone wrote Trump Jr. that Aras Agalarov “offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father,” adding that it was “very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump” that he could send to Donald Trump’s assistant Rhona Graff. Trump Jr. responded minutes later “Thanks Rob I appreciate that” and “if it’s what you say I love it. Trump Jr. initially told the press that the meeting was held to discuss adoptions of Russian children by Americans, but after contrary media reports he added that he agreed to the meeting with the understanding that he would receive information damaging to Hillary Clinton. Mueller’s team is investigating the emails and the meeting,and whether President Trump later tried to hide the meeting’s purpose.

    On July 18, 2017, Kaveladze’s attorney said that Mueller’s investigators were seeking information about the Russian meeting in June 2016 from his client, and on July 21, Mueller asked the White House to preserve all documents related to the Russian meeting. It has been reported that Manafort had made notes during the Russian meeting.

    By August 3, 2017, Mueller had impaneled a grand jury in the District of Columbia that issued subpoenas concerning the meeting. The Financial Times reported on August 31 that Akhmetshin had given sworn testimony to Mueller’s grand jury.

    Mueller is investigating ties between the Trump campaign and Republican activist Peter W. Smith, who stated that he tried to obtain Hillary Clinton’s emails from Russian hackers, and that he was acting on behalf of Michael Flynn and other senior Trump campaign members. Trump campaign officials have denied that Smith was working with them. In fall 2017, Mueller’s team interviewed former Government Communications Headquarters cybersecurity researcher Matt Tait, who had been approached by Smith to verify the authenticity of emails allegedly hacked from Clinton’s private email server. Tait reportedly told House Intelligence Committee investigators in October 2017 that he believed Smith had ties to members of Trump’s inner circle—including Flynn, Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway—and may have been helping build opposition research for the Trump campaign. Smith committed suicide in May 2017, several days after talking to The Wall Street Journal about his alleged efforts. Aged 81 and reportedly in failing health, he left a carefully prepared file of documents, including a statement police called a suicide note. An attorney for Smith’s estate said in October 2017 that some of Smith’s documents had been turned over to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    In December 2017 it was reported that the Mueller investigation was examining whether the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee, who worked together on the digital arm of Trump’s campaign, provided assistance to Russian trolls attempting to influence voters. Yahoo News reported that Mueller’s team is examining whether the joint RNC–Trump campaign data operation—which was directed on Trump’s side by Brad Parscale and managed by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner—was related to the activities of Russian trolls and bots aimed at influencing the American electorate. Also that month, the Democratic ranking members of the House Oversight and Judiciary committees asked their respective Republican chairmen to subpoena two of the data firms hired by Trump’s campaign for documents related to Russia’s election interference, including the firm headed by Parscale. On February 27, 2018, Trump selected Parscale to serve as campaign manager on his 2020 reelection campaign.

    NBC News reported on February 28, 2018 that Mueller’s investigators are asking witnesses pointed questions about whether Trump was aware that Democratic emails had been stolen before that was publicly known, and whether he was involved in their strategic release. This is the first reported indication that Mueller’s investigation is specifically examining whether Trump was personally involved in collusive activities.Mueller’s investigators have also asked about the relationship between Roger Stone and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and why Trump took policy positions favorable to Russia. Stone, a longtime Republican “dirty trickster” and Trump confidant has repeatedly discussed his backchannel communications with Assange and claimed knowledge of forthcoming leaks from Wikileaks. He also exchanged Twitter private messages with Guccifer_2.0, which American intelligence has connected to two Russian intelligence groups that cybersecurity analysts have concluded hacked Democratic National Committee emails. Investigators have also focused on Trump’s public comments in July 2016 asking Russia to find emails that were deleted from Hillary Clinton’s private email server. At a news conference on July 27, 2016, days after WikiLeaks began publishing the Democratic National Committee emails, Trump said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

    And so on and so on…. and this is why poor Donald is being investigated.

    I could not care less what the most watched cable news channel is, but it is worth noting that for hard headed conservatives who want to have their confirmation bias with their news, Faux News is the only game in town. For the rest of us there are numerous choices diluting the viewership numbers so I would not crow too much. I don’t watch any news except first thing in the morning, and that is almost always CBS. I would rather have bamboo slivers snuck up under my fingernails than watch Sean Hannity.

    As far as your investigations, I would bet my last dollar that neither is going to turn out to be “the greatest political scandal in US history.” I also noticed you did not agree that if evidence is found against POTUS, that he does not deserve to be POTUS. Pretty much as I suspected.

  • Robert Browning

    You tell us Dave. What is it going to take for Christianity to be destroyed and for the Jew messiah to appear?? How much more suffering and pain are you and your kind planning to inflict on the white Christian world??

  • David Cohen

    You tell us Robert, when are you going to seek help for your deranged paranoia?

  • Robert Browning

    Are you denying you are a Jew, David Cohen?? And are you denying the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation of human kind for the benefit of the Jews?? Here is a Jew rabbi in the video, one of your own kind speaking to the world about the destruction of Christianity and how the destruction of Christianity is a good and wonderful thing for the Jews. Address the premise in the video, Jew.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZfiOmcipoI

  • David Cohen

    You found one Jewish person as deranged as you are (slow clap). That is, assuming this video isn’t a hoax put out by your neo-Nazi buddies. If it isn’t though, all anyone can say is that not all Jews are as crazy as he is, just as not all Christians are as crazy as you are.

  • Robert Browning

    What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people?? Tell us Jew.

  • David Cohen

    Have you stopped beating your wife yet?? Tell us loony.

  • Robert Browning

    The promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation the enslavement of human kind for the benefit of the Jews. And you Jews, Jews no different for you David Cohen murdered your messiah, Gods only son because he refused to make slaves of every none Jew on earth. God damned you Jew. God damned you for the cold blooded murder his only son. God damned you Jew.

  • David Cohen

    Now, see folks, THIS is what poorly handled religion does to a person’s brain

    Sad, isn’t it?

  • Robert Browning

    Who are you talking to? Are you talking to yourself?? And I am the one with the mental trouble?

  • Bones

    Lol our supsrannuation system is in the billions.

    Cutting expenditure is the conservatives mantra, no matter whose lives they screw with.

  • Wow!!! As a Christian, my whole life I studied the Bible. It is the first book I read. When I was called into ministry, I went to Bible College and studied the rich heritage of the Jewish people. I remember the first Jew I met. I was in awe! They are blood relatives of everyone I studied about my whole life! Jesus was a Jew! They are God’s chosen people to proclaim to the world that there is one true God. Sure, they rejected Jesus, but that was prophesied that they would do so. And it had to happen, because Jesus became our final sacrifice for all sin, the passover lamb, the guilt and sin offering. That is why Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them for they know not what they do’. I support, pray for, and would defend with my life any Jew and the nation of Israel. It was all foretold in scripture, that in the last days God would bring the Jews back to THEIR land. This began in 1917, and they have made the desert bloom. They are God’s chosen people, and if you receive Jesus as Messiah, even if you are a Gentile, your are grafted into the vine of Jewishness and child of Abraham. G-d bless Israel. G-d bless the Jews. God bless David Cohen.

  • Bones

    Lol..what a stupid rant…my medication is capped at 5 bucks bscause of our government pharmaceutical scheme.

    Private schools and hospitals arent going out west here derpy.

    Theres no money in small black communities.

    And yeah the minimum wage is great.

    No surprise you’d hate that too given you support child labour.

    Because people having money is actually good for thececonomy.

    Oh and now you’re whinging about colllege fees when it was conservative policy to cut their funding.

  • Bones

    Yeah sure you do.

    Private schools choose who their clientele is and tell the rest to f### off derpy.

    Gee all of a sudden you want your tax dollars to subsidise businesses but not poor kids.

    What a hypocrite.

  • Robert Browning

    Every religion has a hook or some other benefit to draw people to the religion. For Christians it is the promise of ever lasting life. What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? Do you agree with me or not? If you do not explain to me then what is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people. A highly educated person such as yourself should not have any trouble answering such a simple question.

  • Bones

    Maybe some companies need to start paying tax…..

    The 35 Percent Corporate Tax Myth

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    Profitable corporations are subject to a 35 percent federal income tax rate on their U.S. profits. But many corporations pay far less, or nothing at all, because of the many tax loopholes and special breaks they enjoy. This report documents just how successful many Fortune 500 corporations have been at using loopholes and special breaks over the past eight years. As lawmakers look to reform the corporate tax code, this report shows that the focus of any overhaul should be on closing loopholes rather than on cutting tax rates.

    It’s important to note a key piece of this report’s methodology. The report only includes corporations that were consistently profitable over the eight-year period from 2008 to 2015. In other words, if a firm had a loss in even one year, it is excluded from this report. By leaving out corporations that had losses (which means they wouldn’t pay any tax), this report provides a straightforward picture of average effective tax rates paid by our nation’s biggest and consistently profitable companies. Two hundred and fifty-eight Fortune 500 companies were consistently profitable in each of the eight years between 2008 and 2015. Most of these companies were included in our February 2014 report, The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes, which looked at the years 2008 through 2012. There are new companies in the report, including Netflix, which entered the Fortune 500 after 2013. In addition, some companies were excluded from the study because they lost money in 2013, 2014 or 2015.

    Some Key Findings:

    *As a group, the 258 corporations paid an effective federal income tax rate of 21.2 percent over the eight-year period, slightly over half the statutory 35 percent tax rate.
    Eighteen of the corporations, including General Electric, International Paper, Priceline.com and PG&E, paid no federal income tax at all over the eight-year period. A fifth of the corporations (48) paid an effective tax rate of less than 10 percent over that period.
    *Of those corporations in our sample with significant offshore profits, more than half paid higher corporate tax rates to foreign governments where they operate than they paid in the United States on their U.S. profits.
    *These findings refute the prevailing view inside the Beltway that America’s corporate income tax is more burdensome than the corporate income taxes levied by other countries, and that this purported (but false) excess burden somehow makes the U.S. “uncompetitive.”

    Other Findings:

    *One hundred of the 258 companies (39 percent of them) paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2008 to 2015.
    *The sectors with the lowest effective corporate tax rates over the eight-year period were Utilities, Gas and Electric (3.1 percent), Industrial Machinery (11.4 percent), Telecommunications (11.5 percent), Oil, Gas, and Pipelines (11.6 percent), and Internet Services and Retailing (15.6 percent). Each of these industries paid, as a group, less than half the statutory 35 percent tax rate over this eight-year period.
    *The tax breaks claimed by these companies are highly concentrated in the hands of a few very large corporations. Just 25 companies claimed $286 billion in tax breaks over the eight years between 2008 and 2015. That’s more than half the $527 billion in tax subsidies claimed by all of the 258 companies in our sample.
    *Five companies — AT&T, Wells Fargo, J.P. Morgan Chase, Verizon, and IBM — enjoyed more than $130 billion in tax breaks during the eight-year period.

    Recommendations for Reform:

    *Congress should repeal the rule allowing American multinational corporations to indefinitely “defer” U.S. taxes on their offshore profits. This reform would effectively remove the tax incentive to shift profits and jobs overseas.
    *Limit the ability of tech and other companies to use executive stock options to reduce their taxes by generating phantom “costs” these companies never incur.
    *Having set “bonus depreciation” on a path toward expiration at the end of 2019, Congress should take the next step and repeal the rest of accelerated depreciation, too. At a minimum, lawmakers should resist calls to expand these tax breaks by allowing for the immediate expensing of capital investments.
    *Reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax that does the job it was originally designed to do.
    *Increase transparency by requiring country-by-country public disclosure of company financial information, including corporate income and tax payments, through filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    https://itep.org/the-35-percent-corporate-tax-myth/

  • Bones

    Lol, now blames the Great Criminal Hilary Clinton for crucifying Jesus and hiding the evidence.

  • Robert Browning

    Every religion has a hook or some other benefit to draw people to the religion. For Christians it is the promise of ever lasting life. What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? Do you agree with me or not? If you do not explain to me then what is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people. A highly educated person such as yourself should not have any trouble answering such a simple question. David Cohen, a Jew, did not dispute my outrageous accusation. Why do you suppose that is?? You need to reason with me, can you do that?

  • Bones

    Pot. Kettle…Black…..

  • Bones

    Except it all originates from Mark who definitely was writing in the 70sCE

  • Bones

    It’s far more possible that Mark wrote that in after 70CE.

    Once again you people see prophecy as fortune telling. It isn’t.

    And there isn’t a chance in hell that John is a historical gospel.

  • Robert Browning

    Every religion has a hook or some other benefit to draw people to the religion. For Christians it is the promise of ever lasting life. What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? Do you agree with me or not? If you do not explain to me then what is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people. A highly educated person such as yourself should not have any trouble answering such a simple question. David Cohen, a Jew, did not dispute my outrageous accusation. Why do you suppose that is?? You need to reason with me, can you do that?

  • Robert Browning

    Every religion has a hook or some other benefit to draw people to the religion. For Christians it is the promise of ever lasting life. What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? Do you agree with me or not? If you do not explain to me then what is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people. A highly educated person such as yourself should not have any trouble answering such a simple question. David Cohen, a Jew, did not dispute my outrageous accusation. Why do you suppose that is?? You need to reason with me, can you do that?

  • Zero evidence – one year plus of searching. Manafort, Gates and Flynn are in trouble but not because of anything related to Trump as you know. Trump Jr.s meeting was a setup and amounts to nothing. Mueller team are all hand picked Trump haters but they will not be successful – even Peter Strzok said he initially did not want to be on the team because it would not come to anything. But then his texts were made available by the IG and Mueller had to remove him – what an embarrassment. Also Mueller was the FBI Director when their informant infiltrated the Uranium One deal. He did not tell Congress what the FBI had learned before they approved the deal. He will be called to account for that decision.

    How does all of the above compare to the fact that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign: first to try and defeat him and second t try and get him impeached? The crimes associated with the spying are felonies and one by one top FBI and DOJ officials have been implicated. And this investigation has finally started in earnest as the DOJ just announced.

    You need to understand that impeachment is never going to happen because there is no basis for it and Trump deserves to be President because he was elected by the people. This spectacle is blowing wide open as Hillary lost and her protection evaporated. You should bet a few bucks against Trump. You will be just one of many to learn the hard way.

  • Bones

    Well we could be here for a while going over all those indicted in Trump’s campaign.

    Are you still looking for Obama’s birth certificate you, moron?

  • Bones

    “You are not normal”

    We’ve been saying the same about you for years.

  • Bones

    Number of Jews persecuting Robert Browning = zero.

  • Bones

    Yes you are.

    Most anti-semites have mental issues involving conspiracies.

  • Bones

    Is calling someone a Jew a derogatory term, moron?

  • Bones

    There is no hook to Judaism, idiot.

    You are born into it.

  • Bones

    He did answer it.

    He said you were a mental case.

    Which is highly accurate. And I think he was being nice.

  • Bones

    Ergo, Bob lost.

  • Bones

    Apparently the government has to sort this greedy moron’s profiteering out…..

    Martin Shkreli, ‘Pharma Bro’, cries in court as he is sentenced to seven years for hedge fund fraud

    Unapologetic from the beginning, when he was publicly criticised for increasing the price of the previously-cheap Daraprim to about $956 per pill, Shkreli seemed to drift through his criminal case as if it was one big joke……………………

    Before sentencing him, the judge said it was up to Congress to fix the issue of the HIV drug price-hike.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-10/martin-shkreli-pharma-bro-sentenced-to-seven-years-in-prison/9534776

    $956 for a pill hey?

    There’s capitalism for ya.

  • David Cohen

    Oh I was speaking to any third party who might be reading this thread. I know form copious experience that there is no point talking to the profoundly delusional. One can only pity them.

    And in this case, I do.

  • Robert Browning

    Freud failed his people miserably. He saw the need, but the job was too great.

  • Questioning

    Here is what you need to understand…. Donald Trump is a sleaze bucket, by his own words an admitted sexual predator, unfaithful to his many wives, who pays to silence his antagonists, and declares bankruptcy to keep from having to pay his debts. These are documented facts. He is a racist, a thin skinned narcissist, and a misogynist possessing zero qualifications to be POTUS. This is evident from both his speech and his actions. These things alone should preclude him from having your support, you being a self avowed God fearing, christian conservative. I challenged you to agree that, should it be proven that he or his campaign colluded with the Russians, then he is undeserving of the office of President. You reply by saying he is deserving because the people elected him, once again side stepping the issue. I suspect Hillary and Bill Clinton are sleaze buckets too, despite the fact that not one single charge has ever stuck to her, but apparently, being a sleaze bucket is fine by you as long as one is a conservative sleaze bucket. You are a hypocrite of the highest order Bob. This is the most galling fact that you cannot seem to grasp. You weep and gnash your teeth about the perceived dishonesty and… there’s that word again, sleaziness, of liberals and Democrats, and totally ignore the obvious sleaziness and lack of character in your own elected president. I have no other choice but to conclude that you are just a biased, ignorant jackass. Congratulations….

  • Bones

    Shooting people you dont like seems to be an american thing.

  • Bones

    Freud would have a field day with you.

  • $144948586

    “Gee all of a sudden you want your tax dollars to subsidise businesses but not poor kids.”
    What?

  • $144948586

    You mean lives that are built on getting other peoples earned money through use of force?

  • $144948586

    “Oh and now you’re whinging about colllege fees when it was conservative policy to cut their funding.”
    You mean colleges who priced their education based on taking other people’s earned money by force?

    Yeah, your Australian pharmacy scheme is great:
    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australians-paying-four-times-above-international-prices-for-drugs-grattan-institute-report-20170305-guqx3c.html

    Yeah, your Australian solutions are “great”:
    https://ama.com.au/ausmed/health-system-sustainability-myth

  • $144948586

    “Maybe some companies need to start paying tax…..”
    Why, so we can have the EPA pollute more rivers and the public school system produce more societal failures enslaved to overburdening student debt?

  • $144948586

    “Martin Shkreli”
    The dude who used government for his advantage; by definition, this isn’t capitalism.

  • David Cohen

    Yes, you are giving the public an excellent demonstrations of the failing of the mental health system.

    So very sad.

  • Really. Quite a leap listening to your anti-Trump rant. You don’t seem to understand we felt the same about Obama and should have called him out. The Republicans were afraid of him because of the racist tag but no more. Donald is fearless. He just called out Chuck Todd on national TV and properly put Maxine Waters in her place.

    You, as many others on this site, confuse politics and religion. Where does it say I have to judge before I vote? We voted for Trump to undue all the damage Obama has done and to get the economy growing again to produce jobs. And boy has he done that. Talk about no qualifications to be President; Obama exemplified that in spades.Nothing you listed will make him undeserving; onlt the constitution can do that. Trump was elected to serve not bow down to the Elites.

    Now some requisite rejoinders; You are an illogical hypocrite, blindly biased by Liberal contamination and an ass to boot.

  • Robert Browning

    I am not a Jew. Freud saw the problem among his own kin, like yourself, and tried to help. Mental illness IS Jewish and is a Jewish malady exclusively. The reason?? Jews have been marrying and bearing children with their sisters and cousins for centuries. Mental illness has been bred into Jewish blood. I don’t need your pity psycho.

  • David Cohen

    “David Cohen, a Jew, did not dispute my outrageous accusation. Why do you suppose that is??”

    – Who am I to argue with your delusions?

    You have my pity though.

  • Bones

    You are a full on Nazi sicko.

    Take your bs and f### off.

  • Chari McCauley

    That would be better than herded into an oven that will cook you, ever so slowly…

    Or, the kind of things that were done during The Rape of Nanking.

    “King of the Hill” is not just an american thing.

    I am still trying to figure out how people who promote violence, in His name, could possibly believe The Father would allow them into His home.

  • Questioning

    Comparing Obama and Trump, reputation wise and character wise, is like comparing night and day. Obama is a man of high character, a devoted family man, husband and father. He led us out of the worst recession in modern history, and turned the economy around He did not embroil us in useless war, and took out the most heinous terrorist in modern history. Was he perfect? Well no, no president ever is, but his administration was free from scandal and largely reflected his high character.

    On the other hand Donald Trump’s well earned and well deserved character and reputation are clear for all, with eyes wide open, to see. He is simply not a man to be trusted. This, in large part, is the reason he is being investigated. He attempts to bully people, but falls flat when his lies are called out, or he changes his story, or is totally ignored. I am sure Chuck Todd and Maxine Waters are just cowering…… not. You would probably agree with him if he called out Jesus.

    Confuse politics and religion? The whole conservative ideology is now intertwined with religion. The republican party is the party of the evangelical elite. That conflation is one of the more obvious in our society. The republicans could roll out Pol Pot, Hitler, and Mao all rolled into one and the evangelicals would gush as long as he panders to them. It is actually pretty ridiculous.

    I actually feel sorry for you Bob. You obviously need Trump to succeed so much, to validate what you think you believe, that you are blind.

  • Matthew

    Or convert …

  • There is no comparison possible. Trump is running the country and Obama could not. It is incredibly illogical to believe that a lawyer with little practice experience can out manage a self made billionaire. And that is the situation.

    You like Obama but he was not effective because he lacked experience in running anything and he made poor choices for people to help him. His economy stalled years ago. Bin Laden was simply found on his watch and eliminated. Obama did not embroil us in a war but he is responsible for the rise of ISIS. Remember Obama could not find people to correctly develop a website for health care. That was a red flag. It never get better did it?

    Trump has already succeeded. The economy is on fire and job creation is outpacing the most optimistic projections. Trump will build the wall and stop the Open Borders nonsense spewed by the Progressive Left.

    Obama in his desire to put his mark on foreign policy created the disastrous Iranian agreement. This also has to be corrected by Trump. It is by far his most naive blunder; all the while cheered on by his sycophants in the press.

    And let me predict that the Progressive Left senators are going to be slaughtered in the 2108 midterms and Congress will stay in Republican control. Why? Because the country has had enough of the nonsense and Liberals are far fewer than you have been led to believe. While Conservatives still value religion, Liberals disdain it.

  • Bones

    Judaism does not seek converts unlike Christianity and Islam.

  • Bones

    No one’s herding me into an oven to be cooked. Lol the Chinese army had guns derpy. That didn’t prevent the rape of Nanking.

    Much more likely some nutter will shoot you in the head before you know it.

  • Bones

    The government who put his greedy capitalist arse in jail.

    A blatant example of profiteering.

  • Bones

    Lol…..so they can contribute to the society they profit from.

    The hypocrisy of people like you who defund public education and environmental bodies then point out how ineffective they are is mindboggling.

    Private schools want nothing to do with societal failures. They pass those on to the public schools.

  • Bones

    No, I mean conservatives who seek to strip away funding from public education like your hero, Reagan.

    And yeah our pharmacy scheme is great. Of course the Gratten Institute didn’t factor in the thousands of other medications which are subsidised.

    “The report covers 19 out of the thousands of medications currently subsidized by the PBS. On top of that, it compares it to countries that have gone through multiple cycles of price reduction and most of the 19 Australian medications compared have not undergone any price reductions.”

    Gee, wonder why they chose those 19. But even the report has good news.

    And from the Report itself…

    ”In 2013, we found that Australia was paying on average more than twice the Canadian price for the seven drugs considered. Now, Canada is paying on average almost twice what Australia does. Indeed, for 17 of the 19 drugs considered, Australia now has cheaper prices than either Ontario or Alberta.” So comparing a country with a similar size and population, Australia comes out ahead in this regard. Like, wow!

    Oh and ….

    Medicines Australia hits back at Grattan Institute’s critical report on pharma policy

    “Tim James, chief executive of Medicines Australia, said: “Measures currently before the Parliament will generate as much as A$6.6 billion in savings from a raft of changes to the PBS over the next five years that will significantly reduce medicines prices to government. As well as measures to speed up price disclosure price cuts for off-patent medicines, the government is also introducing additional price cuts for patented, innovative treatments when they have been on the PBS for five years.”

    Mr James said. “The Grattan Institute also continues to cherry pick policies from different countries and to prosecute the argument for a New Zealand style medicines procurement system that focuses solely on cost at the expense of choice and optimal health outcomes.”

    He added: “This report, like many others the Grattan Institute have produced, continues to ignore the fact that since 2000, only around 20% of medicines made available in Australia through the PBS have been added to the New Zealand schedule. It is fundamental to recognize that New Zealanders have much poorer access to medicines and worse health outcomes than Australian patients.””

    https://www.thepharmaletter.com/article/medicines-australia-hits-back-at-grattan-institutes-report-on-pharma-policy

    Maybe you should write about something you know about because you don’t have a f***ing clue about the Australian health system.

    Or anything for that matter.

  • Matthew

    That´s true … but one can convert if he or she bugs the rabbi enough :-) :-)

  • Bones

    School vouchers, dummy.

  • Bones

    Now you show you have no idea how superannuation works.

    But all conservatives think about is their money and what other people are doing in bed.

  • Bones

    Adult circumcision doesn’t strike me as much of a hook.

  • Matthew

    I think you are right …

  • Bones

    What a load of complete pariochal bs and delusion led by the biggest sychophant on here..

    Obama would’ve destroyed Trump if had’ve run again.

    Obama had nothing to do with the rise of ISIS – that’s your friends the saudis – who trump just gave billions of dollars of weapons.

    The economy has to be measured over the president’s term – not just one year. Heck even Bush had a good couple of years with the economy and what happened there?

    The US cannot stop Iran unless it wants to invade it. I bet you can’t even say why the Iranian agreement is disastrous.

    The Wall will fail.

    The Dems have flipped 38 Republican seats since Trump was elected and some of those were in places Trump won with huge majorities.

    It’s the GOP who are worried.

    And yeah we disdain your religion which is a hideous mixture of fundamentalism and right wing conservatism.

    You will die hating this world. Just another paranoid religious extremist who will fade to nothing.

    Can’t wait for this post to bite you in the arse.

  • Bones

    “I will also make you a light for the Gentiles…..” Isaiah 49:6

  • $144948586

    After he engaged in exploiting a problem government created.

  • Bones

    Nope, try again….

    “A jury in August found Shkreli guilty of defrauding investors in two hedge funds he ran, MSMB Capital and MSMB Healthcare, by sending them fake account statements and concealing huge losses. He was also convicted of scheming to prop up the stock price of Retrophin, the drug company he founded in 2011.”

  • $144948586

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/why-wall-street-loves-hillary-112782
    What was that stuff about no one going to jail for the 2008 crisis?
    Hmm, people might try risky things…

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/31/investing/wells-fargo-fake-accounts/index.html

  • $144948586

    It’s actually pretty simple; government employees pay in under the expectation of a guaranteed return. The problem is, they’re promised a 6+% growth (which ultimately implies a GDP growth of 3-4%). But, as it turns out, the more socialist a nation becomes, the more likely that GDP growth appraoches “the new normal” (a leftist, Keynsian/Krugman term) of 2%).

    Er go, tax revenues go down and municipalities run in to budget/debt crises. This, ultimately, results in even heavier taxation until they run all the middle-class jobs out of town (so it looks like Seattle and California), then they borrow from these pension funds to afford certain other things they promised but can’t afford (like roads, and their own overpaid salaries), and then to pay the promised returns to retirees they issue more debt or raise taxes (of course, they’ve already raised all the debts so they raise taxes) and then when that doesn’t work out they go to the government who pressures the “independent” fed to lower interest rates but then kills the economy and drives it to a “new normal”.

    And you’ll find that out when your country’s debt bubble screws you over:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-03/australia-s-economic-luck-is-running-out

  • ElRay

    And the true hypocrisy is that none of the claims, quotes, etc. used to blindly support Trump applied during the Obama era.

  • $144948586

    “But all conservatives think about is their money”
    Do they not have that right?

  • Questioning

    LOL! Do you really believe the stuff you write? Self made millionaire? Hardly… bankrolled and rescued from debt by his family. If he runs the country like he runs his businesses we will soon be bankrupt or closed.

    I have used the healthcare website multiple times. It works fine. The rest is pretty much just standard right wing spew and not worth a response.

    And yes, I do disdain “religion” as defined by the conservative evangelical elite.

  • $144948586

    I never said I want school vouchers, besides the primary recipients of school vouchers are those who are also receiving welfare benefits. Thus, it creates a poor incentive problem for voucher schools to do much better than public schools.
    If you choose to spend more money, you demand better quality naturally..that’s why the Razor gave way to Iphone which gave way to Samsung Galaxy and Iphone 6S or whatever the latest one is that isn’t a scam like the X.

  • Realist1234

    ‘”The earliest and best copies of the four Gospels are unanimously attributed to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.”
    – Actually, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Gospels are mere fragments, the earliest being a scrap of John the size of a credit card. ‘

    – I wasnt referring to manuscript fragments as by definition small fragments containing only parts of the main body of the text would have no bearing on authorship.

    Re the Passover, the Gospels do not contradict if you understand the Jewish understanding of the Passover week and the audiences of the Gospels. But I suspect you wont be convinced.

    Re ‘forgeries’ – I still think my understanding of the original poster’s meaning is correct – he was referring to NT writings which he believes are ‘forgeries’. But regardless, yes there were clearly forgeries claimed as written my an apostle outside of the NT canon, and these were rejected precisely because apostolic authority was lacking.

    As for the pastoral epistles, as well as Luke T Johnson many evangelical and and some non-evangelical scholars uphold Pauline authorship, including Otto Meinardus, Jerome M O’Connor, Joachin Jeremias, Ceslaus Spicq, CF Moule (Luke as Paul’s amanuensis), Raymond Brown (for 2 Tim) etc.

    There are numerous reasons why non-Pauline authorship is unlikely, for example if someone was trying to pretend he was Paul, why would he write to a particular individual (ie Timothy, Jude) rather than to a church, as Paul did in all his other letters? Pretending to write to a church would have been more Paul-like and therefore more likely to have been accepted as authentic. I could give numerous other reasons.

    Re Hebrews, as I said it is genuinely anonymous, though it appears it certainly was traditionally attributed to Paul. I dont see how you can call Hebrews a ‘forgery’ when no name is attached to it, unlike the Gospels.

    ‘So, basically, what you have shown is that Christian mythology is just as important to the Christian identity as theology is’

    – I havent written about any ‘mythology’, only in your mind!

    ‘That is where we get nonsense like young-Earth creationism and the belief that the USA was established as a Christian nation.’

    – just for info, I am not a young-earth creationist. And non-American!

  • $144948586

    “No, I mean conservatives who seek to strip away funding from public education like your hero, Reagan.”
    What?
    https://www.johnlocke.org/app/uploads/2016/11/Total-Inflation-Adjusted-and-Unadjusted-Per-Pupil-Expenditures-1970-2016.jpg

    Here’s a basic google for you to prove that costs have only gone up:
    http://bfy.tw/H40S
    Just visit images.

    I mean how pathetic must it get before you consider it a problem?

    “Of course the Gratten Institute didn’t factor in the thousands of other medications which are subsidised.”
    Again, this means free money is flowing for these medications–er go, prices are unnecessarily inflated. Econ 101.
    https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/government-subsidies-fuel-overhead-costs-in-health-care-and-education-data-show/

    “Maybe you should write about something you know about because you don’t have a f***ing clue about the Australian health system.”
    I know that it will either issue debt or raise taxes to keep it alive:
    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/06/australias-healthcare-spending-rises-above-10-of-gdp-for-first-time

  • $144948586

    “so they can contribute to the society they profit from.”
    Why would they profit if they are not already contributing?
    Do you no understand what profit is?

    Bookoos are made on cell phones, Coca-Cola and McD fries, but no one needs them. They nonetheless contribute to society and profit from it.

    “Private schools want nothing to do with societal failures.”
    I just told you of a school which is successfully doing so in my neighborhood.

    The sad fact is that these schools do exist and yet generally government forces them in to a school with professionals and infrastructure not built to accommodate them.

    “The hypocrisy of people like you who defund public education and environmental bodies then point out how ineffective they are is mindboggling.”
    Except that these things were heavily funded during the Obama admin and still, not ironically, demand higher funding needs.

    The ridiculousness is also believing you retain the right to demand that others pay their earning toward it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Why do you always have to drag the bible into these bible discussions heehee?

  • Ron McPherson

    I was CFO of a 58,000 student K-12 public school system (heavy republican county) in one of the most under-taxed areas in America. It’s been 18 years since there has been a county tax increase (dead serious). School system each year has to squeeze every last cent out of its budget fighting to keep over 4500 teaching positions intact, buses running, paying utility bills, cafeteria workers, custodians, administrative positions, and keeping roofs on school facilities from leaking. The district is more than $100 million annually under-funded every year in comparison to the average US school system, with no relief in sight. It is almost certain political suicide though if an elected official even whispers of a tax increase (remember heavily republican county), yet much of the citizenry demands high educational outcomes and thinks school system is wasting their tax dollars. It was exhausting lol.

  • Ron McPherson

    Josh,
    Much of the PPE increase goes toward special education needs to serve disadvantaged students. Fortunately, the US public school system educates all students, unlike many private schools in the US (and unlike many other nations). The special needs costs can be enormous and crippling. Federal mandates require services and positions to align with the student’s individual education plan (and should), but the feds do not adequately fund it (unfunded mandates passed down to local school systems). In turn, they must find the dollars from the state or county in which they’re located. When the citizenry is unwilling to pay sufficient taxes, then dollars otherwise going for regular instruction must be re-directed toward special needs. Meanwhile, the citizenry can’t understand why test scores won’t go up lol.

  • Matthew

    I bet it was exhausting,

  • Absolutely I do. Many sons get money and help from their family and many ultimately fail; Trump succeed beyond expectations. Your appraisal of his ability to run the country is contrary to the demonstrated facts already in place. Do you really believe that because you hate Trump your assessment of his performance to date is valid; it’s not.

    The webiste failed and had to rebuilt by a firm that could handle it. It was a big deal at the time. Then the exchanges started to fail. Now the Act itself is a failure. Who wrote it: Democrats. Who implemented it: Democrats. Who is to blame for it’s present state: Democrats. Whining about Republican interference is all about making excuses for Obama and his failures. He never learned that he is not infallible. He sees it daily now that a real President is in place.

    Remember what the Apostle James said about religion: James 1:27 New International Version (NIV)
    Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. I don’ see his invective in that statement.

  • David Cohen

    “I wasnt referring to manuscript fragments as by definition small
    fragments containing only parts of the main body of the text would have
    no bearing on authorship.”
    – So we are in agreement then: we have no full texts of any of the Gospels until centuries after they were originally written. Centuries is plenty of time for legend to replace fact with regards to authorship.

    “Re the Passover, the Gospels do not contradict if you understand the
    Jewish understanding of the Passover week and the audiences of the
    Gospels. But I suspect you wont be convinced.”
    – Ad hoc reasoning is rarely convincing.

    “But regardless, yes there were clearly forgeries claimed as written my
    an apostle outside of the NT canon, and these were rejected precisely
    because apostolic authority was lacking.”
    – You are ducking the issue: how can one know that no forgeries were admitted into the canon? Because ancient hearsay agrees with what you want to believe?

    “Otto Meinardus, Jerome M O’Connor, Joachin Jeremias, Ceslaus Spicq, CF
    Moule (Luke as Paul’s amanuensis), Raymond Brown (for 2 Tim) etc.”
    – Never heard of them. Do they rely on ad hoc reasoning the way Johnson does?

    “…if someone was trying to pretend he was Paul, why would he write to a
    particular individual (ie Timothy, Jude) rather than to a church, as
    Paul did in all his other letters?”
    – It is likely that some of the Pauline forgeries were (II Thessalonians, Ephesians and Collossians are among the disputed letters.) In the early days of Christianity, churches did not have central authorities, so epistles had to be written to the whole company. By the time the Pastoral Epistles were written, churches did have central authority figures to write to. This turn of events would most likely have come about well after Paul died.

    “I dont see how you can call Hebrews a ‘forgery’ when no name is attached to it, unlike the Gospels.”
    – It was admitted to he canon on the assumption that it had been written by Paul. But you are right, “forgery” is not an apt descriptor. We’ll just say that the men who assembled the canon were taken in.

    “I havent written about any ‘mythology’, only in your mind!”
    – You have relied on ad hoc reasoning and appeals to authority for all your arguments. What else should we call it?

    “just for info, I am not a young-earth creationist. And non-American!”
    – So the fundamentalist tendency to twist facts and appeal to logical fallacies is universal then.

  • Questioning

    Again, Trump inherited an already strong, growing economy. Time will tell whether or not the small sampling of his performance holds. For the sake of the country I hope it does, but something tells me that the folks who already have plenty will benefit most, while the least will see a somewhat different outcome. Do you really believe that because you love Trump your assessment of his performance to date is valid: it’s not.

    The Act is not a failure, it has been working fine for many folks, myself included. It needs update, improvement, and change, but a failure it is not.

    “He never learned that he is not infallible. He sees it daily now that a real President is in place.”
    You should have left these two gems out. Pure ignorance and vitriol.

    Unclear what you are talking about with your last paragraph; however taking a stab at it, in recent history the Democrats have done a much better job of looking after orphans and widows. Don’t think that is what you were after, but you gave me the opening.

    Meanwhile I will continue waiting on that “biggest political scandal in US history.”

  • James Connelly

    I tried to post to you on Raw Story, but it is a Leftist site and intolerant. I was banned. I wrote to tell you that you did not even read your own links nor what I wrote. But one has to be a Left-winger to post there. The left is intolerant.

  • David Cohen

    Oh, so you didn’t get to read the link I gave you which explains how Christianity was invoked to support the Jim Crow laws? Here you go.

    https://archive.org/details/godsgardenofsegr00mcgo

    And yes, I did read your response. As I said before, I am feeling generous, so I will assume that you are being naive rather than dishonest in your efforts to minimize the insidious efforts of right wing dominionists.

  • Your disdain for religion is based in part on your ignorance of what religion means. James is not often quoted but he laid it out. When you say Democrats have done a much better job of looking after orphans is that because after they abort so many children there are less orphans to worry about?

    “Donald Trump is a sleaze bucket, by his own words an admitted sexual predator, unfaithful to his many wives, who pays to silence his antagonists, and declares bankruptcy to keep from having to pay his debts. These are documented facts. He is a racist, a thin skinned narcissist, and a misogynist possessing zero qualifications to be POTUS.” Pure ignorance and vitriol” wouldn’t you say.

    Finally, you won’t have to wait much longer…

  • David Cohen

    Read what your fellow right winger, Robert Browning, has been saying to me on this post on account of my name, then tell me who is intolerant.

  • Realist1234

    Ok it seems you’re not going to consider my arguments as reasonable, so Ill post one final response to you:

    ‘we have no full texts of any of the Gospels until centuries after they were originally written. Centuries is plenty of time for legend to replace fact with regards to authorship.’

    – well within 2/3 centuries, but we have part of Luke’s Gospel, for example, going back to to the late 2nd century, ie about 100 years or so after the original and a near complete text of John’s Gospel, dating from around 150 years after the original. Even skeptics such as Bart Ehrman accept that we basically have today what was written in the originals, as he said “If he (Bruce Metzger) and I were put in a room and asked to hammer out a consensus statement on what we think the original text of the New Testament probably looked like, there would be very few points of disagreement – maybe one or two dozen places out of many thousands. The position I argue for in ‘Misquoting Jesus’ does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.”

    – as for authorship, to argue for ‘legend’ to have led to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John being viewed as the Gospel authors, using the same argument you would have to come to the same conclusion, and even more so, regarding the likes of Homer’s Iliad – the earliest extant fragments date to around the 1st century, ie around 800 years after the original and the earliest extant full text copy dates to the 10th century, a full 1800 years after the original! Or Roman historian Tacitus, a near contemporary of the Gospel writers – earliest extant manuscript around 900 years after the original. Or Suetonius – similar timescale to Tacitus. Or Josephus, a Jewish contemporary of the Gospel writers – earliest extant manuscript about 1000 years after the original. I could give you numerous other examples. Do you believe those writers did not in fact write those works, but are merely ‘legendary’ authors? Who is being unreasonable in their argument?!

    ‘ad hoc reasoning’ re the Passover – well, no, it’s called understanding the text within the time it was written, that is, the 1st century.

    ‘forgeries’ – Im not sure what you mean by ‘ancient hearsay’. The point I was making, and Ill repeat it, yet again, was that the early church was careful in what it accepted as writings with apostolic authority and those that did not have such authority. You would have to have good reasons to ignore their view, 2000 years after the fact. I have yet to see any strong arguments – arguments yes but no strong ones.

    You havent heard of CF Moule or Raymond E Brown? Enough said..

    ‘In the early days of Christianity, churches did not have central authorities, so epistles had to be written to the whole company. By the time the Pastoral Epistles were written, churches did have central authority figures to write to. This turn of events would most likely have come about well after Paul died.’

    – really? So even though it is clear even from Paul’s letters dated to the 50s/60s AD that, for example, Peter and James were recognised, named leaders within the early church, Paul could not have written to individuals? Right lol.

    I have relied on reasoning based on historical reality.

    I havent twisted any facts nor appealed to logical fallacies.

  • David Cohen

    – And what are the ‘original texts’ of the Gospels which you seem to think exist? Bart Ehrman has also said that, among our ancient manuscripts there are more variations than there are words of the Gospels. We have NO IDEA what the original text of the Gospels were, let alone who wrote them.

    -Once again, you are missing the point. No one claims that The Iliad, the works of Plato or any of the other texts you tried to compare the gospel to are divinely inspired or written by eye-witnesses or companions of eye-witnesses to divine revelation. The entire authority of the Gospels rests on this myth, and yes, without evidence to support it, the authorship of the gospels and their contents are mythological, like The Iliad.

    – You are not drawing on ancient understanding of Passover. You are drawing on the desperate efforts of apologists to give the impression that the Gospels are consistent. If the actual words of the Bible are not enough to convince you of the discrepancy, I don’t suppose there is anything I can do.

    – You DO NOT know that the ancient church was careful in which writings it accepted as having apostolic authority. Their agenda appears to be presenting one view as orthodox and other views as heresy. As of yet, you have presented no arguments to take the alleged authorship of the books of the New Testament seriously than “that’s what they said a long time ago” – hardly a strong argument on your part.

    – Okay, I admit it, I do not know the originators of your favorite propaganda. That apparently, assures you that their propaganda is valid. Feel free to applaud your taste in propaganda.

    – “So even though it is clear even from Paul’s letters dated to the 50s/60s AD that, for example, Peter and James were recognised, named leaders
    within the early church, Paul could not have written to individuals? Right lol.”
    And that supports your argument…how exactly? How do you know where these two individuals were when Paul wrote his letters or what positions they held? Your desperation is really starting to show here.

    “I have relied on reasoning based on historical reality.
    I havent twisted any facts nor appealed to logical fallacies”
    – Actually, just like fundamentalists here in the USA, you have shown no appreciation for historical reality and nothing but logical fallacies. Fundamentalism was created as a reaction to source criticism, and if you are any indication it gained became no less anti-intellectual for having been exported to other countries.

  • Bones

    “Raymond Brown (for 2 Tim)”

    Huh? Raymond E Brown maintained that 2 Timothy wasn’t written by Paul but by a follower of Paul who knew his last days.

  • Ron McPherson

    Priceless

  • Questioning

    “This is evident from both his speech and his actions.” You left that sentence out. For the first part, all those things are part of the public record of his behavior. As to the 2nd list, as I said, all those things can be easily observed in his record, his speech and what he writes. Ignorance? Ignorance is ignoring all those things about him. Vitriol begets vitriol and his personality is vitriolic to say the very least.

  • Realist1234

    One final, final response because you keep changing the basis of your argument when I negate one of your assertions:

    ‘Bart Ehrman has also said that, among our ancient manuscripts there are more variations than there are words of the Gospels. We have NO IDEA what the original text of the Gospels were, let alone who wrote them.’

    – Ehrman has made various claims about the NT variants, leading the average reader like yourself to come to the conclusions you have made. It’s a pity Ehrman was not more forthcoming in his popular books as he is in his more academic writings. Yes there are numerous variants in the text, but as NT scholar Daniel Wallace has summarised, ‘but by itself it is misleading. Anyone who teaches NT textual criticism knows that this fact (number of variants) is only part of the picture and that, if left dangling in front of the reader without explanation is a DISTORTED VIEW. Once it is revealed that the great majority of these variants are inconsequential—involving spelling differences that cannot even be translated, articles with proper nouns, word order changes, and the like—and that only a very small minority of the variants alter the meaning of the text, the whole picture begins to come into focus. Indeed, only about 1% of the textual variants are both meaningful and viable.’ Numerous other scholars have commented on Ehrman’s false impression.

    – if Ehrman was more honest about the implications of the variants in his popular books as he is in his academic work, his readers would not come to your incorrect conclusion. That is why he and his old professor Bruce Metzger would basically agree as to the original wording of the text, as he has admitted. And Metzger was one of the leading NT scholars who believed that the texts we have today are basically the same as the originals.

    ‘Once again, you are missing the point. No one claims that The Iliad, the works of Plato or any of the other texts you tried to compare the gospel to are divinely inspired or written by eye-witnesses or companions of eye-witnesses to divine revelation.’

    – I see you changed the subject. Your original assertion was that due to the interval between the original Gospel writings and the earliest extant copies we therefore cannot know who the authors were and you claimed the traditional authorship was mere ‘legend’. It has nothing to do with divine inspiration. I then gave examples of other writings with much longer intervals between the originals and the earliest extant copies, and yet historians have not cast serious doubt on their authorship, ie Tacitus, Josephus etc. Clearly your bias is showing against the Gospels.

    – Youre still wrong on the Passover.

    ‘You DO NOT know that the ancient church was careful in which writings it accepted as having apostolic authority. ‘

    – actually we do. The early church did quickly reject purported writings of the apostles. For example, Tertullian (c. A.D. 160–225) wrote that when it was discovered that a church elder had composed a pseudonymous work, ‘The Acts of Paul’ (which included a purported Pauline letter, 3 Corinthians), the elder was removed from his office.

    – it seems in your mind ‘NT & historical scholarly work that negates your views’ = ‘propaganda’. Hard to argue against such a mindset.

    ‘How do you know where these two individuals were when Paul wrote his letters or what positions they held? Your desperation is really starting to show here.’

    – You originally argued that ‘In the early days of Christianity, churches did not have central authorities, so epistles had to be written to the whole company. By the time the Pastoral Epistles were written, churches did have central authority figures to write to. This turn of events would most likely have come about well after Paul died.’ If Peter, James and other early church leaders were not considered to be ‘central authority figures’, then I give up! It is plain nonsense to suggest that during Paul’s lifetime, he did not have any individuals to write to.

    ‘you have shown no appreciation for historical reality and nothing but logical fallacies.’

    – Im afraid I would have to ask you to look in a mirror some time. My arguments have been perfectly reasonable, based on historical reality and scholarship.

  • James Connelly

    Yes, some people have abused Christianity.

  • David Cohen

    The fact that there are multiple arguments against your claims is your problem, not mine.

    – And once again you miss the point. You acknowledge that there are variations among manuscripts of the Gospels. The question remains unanswered: how do you know that what you have in your hands bears a significant resemblance to what was first written? In spite of this or that appeal to authority, the question will forever remain unanswered because the original manuscripts of the Gospels do not exist. You assumption, therefore, that the Gospel you have in hand is original and authoritative is entirely mythological.

    “It has nothing to do with divine inspiration.”
    – So you dismiss the basis for the authority of the Gospels as well then?

    “I then gave examples of
    other writings with much longer intervals between the originals and the
    earliest extant copies, and yet historians have not cast serious doubt
    on their authorship, ie Tacitus, Josephus etc.”
    – And again I have to point out that it does not matter of those texts were written pseudonymously. It is different with the Gospels because the basis for their authority is that they were written by eye-witnesses and/or inspired by the Christian deity. So far you have acknowledged that divine inspiration has nothing to do with the Gospels, and that the attribution of their authorship is merely hearsay by theologians with a very particular axe to grind. When this is pointed out you fall back into “whataboutism” as if even you do not want to examine the orgins of the Gospels too closely and so feel compelled to change the subject.

    “Youre still wrong on the Passover.”
    – How many Passovers have you celebrated?

    “The early church did quickly reject purported writings of the apostles.”
    – That’s nice, but it does not prove that the ones they retained were genuine.

    “It is plain nonsense to suggest that during Paul’s lifetime, he did not have any individuals to write to.”
    – You have obviously forgotten I Corinthians chapter 3, in which Paul openly discourages making certain individuals the focus of the church, including himself. Apparently he got over that by the time it was necessary to write the pastoral epistles. Either that, or the trend to designate leaders of churches came about after he died. You are free to decide which one seems more likely.

    “My arguments have been perfectly reasonable, based on historical reality and scholarship.”
    – Your arguments are based on appeals to authority and ad hoc reasoning in a desperate effort to preserve the mythology on which you base the authority of your theology. The fact that your fellow fundamentalists agree with you is only convincing to those inside your particular bubble.

  • David Cohen

    Way to miss the point. The Christians who used religion to support Jim Crow were convinced that those who argued for civil rights in the name of Christ were abusing Christianity. They labeled the civil rights leaders communist dupes who were out to destroy the nation (gosh, where have I heard that recently?) In time, society settled the issue and Christianity (mostly) conformed to society’s demands.

    The simple fact is the religious fervor proves nothing. Citing Bible passages accomplishes little more, because for every Bible passage there is an equal and opposite Bible passage. If an individual wishes to live their life by a particular interpretation of this or that scripture, they are free to do so. When they start to impose their interpretation on society with no better argument than “but my deity says…” THEN we have a problem.

  • Ron McPherson

    A look at his other posts on other threads reveal what appear to be an obsessive disdain for Jews. He apparently thinks he is honoring God by hating on other people. He exalts Christ in one breath and hates on Jews with the next one. Rants like his make me almost wish the internet had never become a reality. That would have at least kept his hate limited within his own sphere rather than for the world to see.

  • Brad Denham

    Good on you sir for defending the veracity of the NT and how we can be sure they are the very words of God. (Just wish you would be the same with all the OT). Those who start with unbelief and buy the lies of the liberals will swallow them hook, line and sinker. There are many on this site, from atheists to mystics to nominal “christians” with names like “Paganheart” etc.. (that about says it all)
    They don’t get the fact that the bible itself claims to be the Word of God and God Himself does not give a hoot about their nonsense. And because the bible can stand the test of the most ardent skeptic, it stands strong in spite of their attacks. At best, with their view, one becomes a neo-orthodox seeker who tries to find a “word from God” within the myths. At worst, pure atheism results and the mystic is somewhere in between.

    Keep up the good work!

  • James Connelly

    Wrong. Most of the abolutionists were Christian. Almost everyone in America was Christian, and they were the ones who wanted to see the slaves free.

    In addition, it was Christendom that finally abolished slavery, not the Native Americans, Arabs, Chinese or Africans.

  • David Cohen

    The slaveholders were Christian too, and they invoked the Bible just like the abolitionists did. And, yes, Christianity was invoked to defend Jim Crow. If the link I provided was not convincing, might I recommend tracking down a copy of “Jesus: Master Segregationist” by Lawrence Neff. It was popular reading what I was younger.

    The simple fact is that Christianity, in and of itself, is NOT a force for civil rights. Christians who respect civil rights will say that the Bible supports their view. Christians who do not respect civil rights will say the Bible supports their view. And then both sides will accuse the other of twisting the Bible to support their views.

  • James Connelly

    It was Christians who made the movement. It changes nothing if some did not, of course. There was no movement in China. Show me the movement – from the 19th century – from Africa to end slavery or among Arabs. In Japan. In India.

    I eagerly await your response.

  • David Cohen

    The problem is your entire premise is rooted in special pleading. You want to bask in the glow of Christian civil rights advocates, and forget that their opponents were Christians too. You insist that “it changes nothing,” and I would agree with you, but not in the way you think. The achievements of the Christian civil rights advocates were truly noble, even if their motivations were rooted in the same religion as the one invoked by their opponents.

    As a side note, you also seem to be pushing the supposed nobility of Western society. Do you have any idea what Western society did to the nations of Asia and Africa? And you are aware that the people who enslaved the American Aborigines and the Africans were Christians too, right? Again, you seem to want to bask in the glow of history that makes you feel good and overlook the bad parts. Doesn’t that strike you as rather self-deceiving?

  • Donald Trump is not a racist but many in the DNC are”
    Tom Perez and Keith Ellison are both racists and lead the DNC.
    Maxine Waters and seven other black democrats support Louis Farrakhan and refuse to denounce him.
    Progressive democrats lead the DNC. Will you follow them over the cliff?

  • James Connelly

    Straw man created by you. “bask in the glow…”

    Imperialism helped to develop those nations. It was good for them, of course. I know that there were abuses, but I am speaking in general terms: Life expectancy, human rights, education, government, and on and on.

    Western people did not enslave: They bought slaves from those who captured and enslaved others.

  • David Cohen

    You obviously do not know what the term “straw man” means. I suggest you look it up. You might also want to look up the term “special pleading” since that is what your argument consists of entirely.

    Did you just say that imperialism was good. I guess you are determined to be the guy who asks “why does the rest of the world hate us?” You’ll probably also believe the preacher man when he says “they hate us for our freedoms!” I suppose its an easier alternative than actually talking with the people whom you imagine should be grateful for imperialism.

    Oh yes, Westerners did enslave American natives. Have you ever heard of the Arawak? And it seems that you somehow imagine that creating a market for slaves somehow makes us less culpable for the evils of slavery than those who captured people for slavery. Do you honestly not realize how ridiculous that is for you to do?

  • Sophotroph

    He doesn’t need to reason with you, though.

    Your kind are dying out. He can just point and laugh with the rest of us.

  • Robert Browning

    Christians are dying out?? Is Moshiach on his way, Jew?? Ever been to a church at 7am on a Wednesday morning Jew?? It is packed.

  • Robert Browning

    The promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation the
    enslavement of human kind for the benefit of the Jews. Did God intent for you to be free or did God intent for you to be a slave to the Jews. I want an answer from you. Give me answer to my simple question Ron McPherson. Are you a man Ron McPherson or are you a mouse?

  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!

  • Robert Browning

    Pull the feather out of your rear end, funny boy.

  • Ron McPherson

    Hey, just because you’ve chosen to hate entire groups of people doesn’t mean the rest of us want to be bigots too. Believing that Jewish extremists speak for all Jews is like believing that Westboro nutters speak for all Christians or that Jihadist terrorists speak for all Muslims

  • Robert Browning

    Did God intent for you to be free or did God intent for you to be a slave to the Jews. I want an answer from you. Give me answer. How hard can it be?? Why were you created?? What is Gods plan for you?? And why are you attacking me when all I am trying to do is reason with you??

  • Sophotroph

    Ever been to a supermarket in SoCal? Bottled water all over the place! And they say there’s a shortage! What baloney!

  • Robert Browning

    What are you selling Christ killer?? Is Moshiach still on his way??

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok, I’ll say it this way. God does not intend for me to be a slave, nor do all the Jewish people want to enslave me. So your question has no merit to begin with. You’re starting with a false premise, so how can anyone here “reason” with you when your views on this matter are unreasonable? For what it’s worth, Jesus said the world will know the true disciples for how they love, not by how they hate. Besides, even if you do view all Jews as your enemy (which would be ridiculous anyway), Jesus said we are to love our enemies, not hate them. So if you truly desire to be a Christ follower, then hating on other people is like the antithesis of authentic Christianity.

  • Robert Browning

    The promise of the Jew religion is the subjugation of the non-Jew for the benefit of the Jews. Do you know why the Jews kill Christ?? Do you know why the Jews killed their very own messiah?? Because Christ the Jew messiah refused to enslave the non-Jews and Christ was rejected and killed by the Jews because he refused to enslave you and everyone like you of non-Jewish blood. How do you equate truth and reason with hate?? I am speaking the ugly ugly truth and to your mind it is hatred. Explain how.

  • Ron McPherson

    Because you’re not speaking truth, that’s why. The death of Jesus had nothing to do with him refusing to enslave anybody. Jesus’ message actually appealed to common Jews of that day, because he called out the religious elite who was in league with Rome. Sadducees didn’t like his message because they were getting wealthy off of corrupt temple practices and Jesus called them out on it. Pharisees didn’t like his message because they believed the quickest way to gain God’s favor and get out from under Rome’s thumb and usher in God’s kingdom was thru strict obedience to Torah (Jesus stressed the spirit of the law, not the letter of it, and they rejected him as Messiah). Rome went along with the religious elite because they didn’t want an uprising from common people (Palestine area was good for economic trade, plus they didn’t want anyone usurping the emperor who they viewed as godlike). Jesus’ death had nothing to do with Jewish people wanting to make slaves of all Gentiles. By the way, you speak to Jewish people in pejorative terms. Sure looks like hatred to me.

  • Robert Browning

    What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? And why do suppose it is that in 2,000 years not a single solitary Jew has ever apologized for the cold blood murder of the innocent Christ? Why do you suppose that is?

  • Ron McPherson

    So you believe every Jew alive today is responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion two millennia ago and should apologize to you for it?

  • Robert Browning

    What does this text mean to you?—–

    When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but that instead a riot was breaking out, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “You shall bear the responsibility.” All the people answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!” So Pilate released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged and handed Him over to be crucified.…

  • TS (unami)

    What a stupid, racist, ignorant and even unchristian thing to say!
    SMH

  • TS (unami)

    The dry cleaners called…
    They said your brown shirt is beyond repair. Tough!
    {shrug}

  • Ron McPherson

    A reference noted by the author of Matthew’s gospel linking God’s judgment to the Jewish-Roman war, specifically the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 CE.

  • Robert Browning

    Titus ordered the Temple was not to be destroyed.

  • Ron McPherson

    Well that’s debatable. Josephus at times made Titus look almost heroic. He was living under a dictatorship, not exactly the best venue for free speech. But that’s irrelevant anyway. Titus’ army destroyed the temple regardless, plus Matthew’s reference is linked to God’s judgement. The temple and its religious practices was destroyed, which served as a judgment against Jerusalem. By the way, how does that correlate to you wanting Jews, living two thousand years after those events, to apologize to you?

  • Robert Browning

    I don’t want Jews to apologize to me. The Jews did not kill my son. I want the Jews to apologize to God and ask God for forgiveness, but they won’t or they haven’t for a very very long time. Maybe one day they will see the light.

  • Ron McPherson

    So how can you presume to know what each individual Jewish person has (or has not done) with respect to their own personal walk with God? Are they supposed to send you an email or something letting you know the details? How do you know what they have (or have not done)? How about letting God do his own work with people (Jews and Gentiles) and you just do what Jesus commanded us to do (love God and neighbor). Deal?

  • Robert Browning

    The Jew God murders innocent children in their sleep. And the Jewish people have been worshiping that killer God and celebrating that child killing for 5,000 years. What makes you think God the father is the God of the Jews?? How is that possible? How is it possible for the God of the Jews and the God of Christians to be the same?

    As far as your other questions, I live in this world and I see how the Jews are working to destroy Christ, Christians and Christianity. Do you see the way??The only way for the Jew messiah to enter this world is for Christianity to be destroyed. Jews have a plan to destroy Christianity. The Jew plan is to foment a race war. Resources and food will become scarce. White Christians will come under attack and will be forced to fight and kill to survive. After white Christians successfully fight off blacks and browns, Jews will use guilt to turn Christians away from Christ and towards the Jew messiah, the anti-Christ. It has all been planned.

  • Ron McPherson

    Ah, ok. Now I get it. You’ve written a script for a Netflix original and you’re testing its watchability on the rest of us. Ok, that’s a good one. Makes sense now. Whew, for a minute there I actually thought you were serious.

  • apoxbeonyou

    This guy is certifiably nuts. You know how people sound when they have been stuck in a cabin out in the woods by themselves for years and then you have a conversation? This is that.

    “There are elves that hide in the trees who want to eat my berries, but my berries are magical and I cannot lose them because they make my hair grow faster, and I use my hair to burn a mystical fire to communicate with the nature gods, who give me vitality to outlive the sea dragons that plague this world and the next, and I will reincarnate as a komodo that will increase in size every fourth moon when the wind is blowing from the southeast quadrant and I have a staff made out of bamboo that was harvested with the same knife that was used to slay a space-demon.”

  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah, like how do you even discuss anything with somebody who believes that stuff?

  • Bones

    Lol……

  • Bones

    Oooohhhh Robert Browning is being persecuted by Joooooosssssss..

    Seems Robert has started his own race war ….and a war against reality.

    Tin foil hats must be booming in the US.

    I’d be investing in that if I could.

  • Bones

    You can’t.

    They are living in a world of delusion.

  • Questioning

    What cliff? Unlike you Bob, I do not see boogie men everywhere. I do not watch Faux news and here’s an example of why I do not….

    In 2008, your boy Sean Hannity said that President Barack Obama’s “willingness to meet with North Korea is one of the most disturbing displays of Obama’s lack of foreign policy experience.” But in 2018, Hannity said President Donald Trump’s “willingness to meet with North Korea is a huge foreign policy win.”

    Hannity is FOS and IMO a buffoon.

    Dropping the mic… I am done here.

  • Ok. For now. But I will alert you as the various players in the Great Scandal are indicted….

  • Bones

    Rex tillerson…….GONE…..

    Trump campaign subpoenaed……

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/us/politics/trump-organization-subpoena-mueller-russia.html

    The Great Scandal is being exposed.

  • Bones

    Yeah nah, that would be Trump and his refusal to lease out to black people.

    As usual you are completely dishonest.

  • Bones

    Actually Iceland sentenced its bankers to jail….

    “Just before Christmas, the former CEO of Iceland’s Glitnir bank and two other senior bankers were sentenced to jail terms of up to five years for market manipulation and breach of fiduciary duties. This brings the total number of senior Icelandic bankers so far sentenced for crimes in the run-up to the 2008 banking crash to 29.

    By contrast not a single senior banking executive in the US or the UK has been jailed for their role in the financial crisis. ”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-simanowitz/iceland-has-jailed-29-bankers_b_8908536.html

    Aaaaaannnddd our banks over here have been caught profiteering from terrorists and criminals..

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-14/money-laundering-things-just-got-a-lot-worse-for-cba/9259034

    But that’s capitalism for ya.

  • $144948586

    “But that’s capitalism for ya.”
    Except that all of these have friends at their respective Capitals. George W sent execs to jail in 2000, but the record shows Wall Street owns Washington just like anywhere with a government.

  • Bones

    Maybe in the US but not around the world.

    Why Only One Top Banker Went to Jail for the Financial Crisis
    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/magazine/only-one-top-banker-jail-financial-crisis.html

    Iceland jailed 29 bankers as a result of the GFC.

    Banks are accountable to governments for engaging in corrupt and misleading practices.

    Our main bank is being fined in the billions for breaking laundering laws by hiding transactions going to terrorists and criminals.

    And Wall Street is indicative of the free market running rough shod over every one else.

  • $144948586

    “Maybe in the US but not around the world.”

    Then if you’re not familiar with the politic of the U.S., perhaps you should stop speaking out of turn.

    “Banks are accountable to governments for engaging in corrupt and misleading practices.”
    Banks lobby the government (The Clinton’s were huge benefactors of the largest investment banks); Goldman Sachs underwrites U.S. bonds (hint, they get paid by the government for this), and banks are guaranteed to profit from making governmentally approved loans.

    “And Wall Street is indicative of the free market running rough shod over every one else.”
    Bones, you know this is a lie. For God’s sake, the least you can do is be honest. Wall Street was the number one benefactor of government policy making subprime loans due to low interest rates set by the fed and a safety net policy granted by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    “Our main bank is being fined in the billions for breaking laundering
    laws by hiding transactions going to terrorists and criminals.”
    And your suprised?

  • You have an interesting spin on Jewish-Christian relations. Quite wrong, however. Other than the sporadic persecution of what was a minority Jewish-Gentile group claiming Jesus as Messiah in the first century by Jews, the persecution of early Christians was largely led by the Gentile Romans for the first few centuries. For the following 2000 years whenever we hear about persecution or murder of Christians it is from Christians themselves killing other Christians (with the exception of the Crusades, and more recently Communism). There has never, ever been a systematic, prolonged persecution of Christians led by the Jews. In fact, quite the opposite has occurred historically, with Christians marginalizing and attacking Jews fairly frequently.

    “Christian rhetoric and antipathy towards Jews developed in the early years of Christianity and was reinforced by the belief that Jews had killed Christ and ever increasing anti-Jewish measures over the ensuing centuries. The action taken by Christians against Jews included acts of ostracism, humiliation and violence, and murder culminating in the Holocaust.” (1)

    “…in the century that followed Gregory’s papacy…the expulsion of Jews was beginning in Europe; from France under King Dagobert (626) and under the Spanish monarchy—with church collusion—when in 694 the Jews were required to choose between baptism and slavery. These moves appear to be based on religion, but history has shown that all such expulsions and persecutions are dependent on other factors such as politics, xenophobia, and scapegoating. The unique factor was that the Christians arrived early at the erroneous conclusion that the Jews were being divinely punished for not having come over to their way of belief. Even when religious difference had little or nothing to do with specific Christian antagonisms to Jews, it could always be alleged as the root rationale for Christian behavior.“

    In the 20th century, Antisemitism was still alive and well amongst many Christians in Europe and Hitler found that convincing German Christians, the Jews were largely to blame for the post-war woes of Germany was a fairly simple matter. Soon Nazi flags were on the podiums of many churches in Germany.

    “They were also persuaded by the statement on “positive Christianity” in Article 24 of the 1920 Nazi Party Platform, which read:

    “We demand the freedom of all religious confessions in the state, insofar as they do not jeopardize the state’s existence or conflict with the manners and moral sentiments of the Germanic race. The Party as such upholds the point of view of a positive Christianity without tying itself confessionally to any one confession. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit at home and abroad and is convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only be achieved from within on the basis of the common good before individual good.”

    Despite the open antisemitism of this statement and its linkage between confessional “freedom” and a nationalistic, racialized understanding of morality, many Christians in Germany at the time read this as an affirmation of Christian values.” (3)

    There is a cautionary tale, I believe, for Christians today, in honestly facing the historical role the church has played in its persecution of the Jews, and in the human inclination to scapegoat others. In America today, a large swath of Christianity, has adopted a simplistic, dangerous persecution complex that seeks to blame others for imaginary slights and their loss of power and influence. This xenophobic sense of White privilege, has put a man in power that panders to their fears and attempts to set the progressive gains of America back a 100 years.

    1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_antisemitism

    2 https://www.ushmm.org/research/the-center-for-advanced-holocaust-studies/programs-ethics-religion-the-holocaust/articles-and-resources/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the-centuries/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the-centuries

    3 https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005206

  • Matthew

    Thanks so much Kirk Leavens. I especially liked the last paragraph. So true.

    Have you studied mimetic theory at all?

  • Not in depth, but I am aware of it. I have read some articles on “The Raven Foundation” and from the blogs of Matthew Distefano here on Patheos. There does seem to be developement within societies to put blame on others, effecting atonement through violence towards others.

  • Robert Browning

    What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people if it is not the subjugation of the non-Jews then what is it?

  • Willful ignorance of history is not a virtue Robert. Nor is cutting and pasting the same tired rant an honest attempt at critical dialogue.

  • Robert Browning

    What rant?? I asked you a simple question. I am not cutting and pasting. I am typing a very simple question over and over again and you and everyone else will not answer. Why won’t you answer? If you don’t know just say I don’t know. Want to try again? What is the promise to the Jew religion to the Jew people?? If it is not subjugation of the non-Jew then what is it? I am trying to reason with you and you insult me, call me stupid. I am being honest and sincere with you and you call me names. Why??

  • Robert Browning

    I never spoke of violence. I want people to know the truth. Is Christ the light? What is the light? Does the light need protection from the truth? Does the light fear the truth?

  • Bones

    Sophotroph is a christ killer for calling out your bs?

    Christ was a Jew, moron.

  • Bones

    I answered it before and I’ll answer it again.

    To be a light to the nations……

    And yeah you’re pretty stupid and disgusting and a liar to boot.

  • Bones

    Except your bs isn’t truth so it has nothing at all to do with Christ.

    It’s not a secret message you know. Anti-semitism and Jew hate has been all the rage in Christianity until the Holocaust.

    And actually go and learn about the different schools (nationalistic, liberal and conservative, fundamentalist) in first century Judaism instead of reading Mein Kampf.

  • Bones

    Yeah they accidentally raped and slaughtered their way into Jerusalem before accidentally burning the Temple to the ground and then accidentally took thousands of Jews in slavery.

    Good ol Titus….a man after Robert’s own heart.

  • Bones

    Yeah it’s not like it was a couple of off line missile strikes.

    The Temple was burned to the ground.

    I wonder if Titus noticed, “holy f***, what’s that burning…..hey you guys……”

  • Ron McPherson

    LOLOL!!!

  • Robert, your question implies that ALL Jews think the same way, have the same aspirations, have the same theological views. In other words, you have dehumanized a large group of humanity by painting them with a broad brush. How many different groups of people are there that call Jesus “Lord?” That claim to be followers of Jesus? There are tens of thousands of different groups that call themselves Christian, some of whom differ theologically substantially from other groups calling themselves Christian. Some of these groups feel they are the only “true” Christians and the others are “false” Christians. Christianity started splintering into subsets almost immediately and the New Testament bears witness to that fact in the letters of Paul.

    What you need to realize is that Jewish people are not some homogenous group of people that are easily dismissed by talk of their wish to dominate Gentiles. Just like trying to say all White Protestants feel Blacks are inferior you are attempting sociological analysis by ignoring most of the facts. While you are not alone in doing so, most of us resort to oversimplified views and implicit racism from time to time (I have too), it is no excuse for continued bigotry.

    I recommend that, instead of looking for articles that promote confirmation bias of views you now hold about Jews, look for articles that challenge your prejudices about them. Look for things that challenge your worldview. Find out how many different hopes Jews have for themselves and society. You will be surprised. For starters, Google “Jewish hope.” Good luck.

  • On the other hand, the internet makes it harder to hide bigotry. It exposes the cancer so that no one is surprised when it pops up here and there. Politicians are finding it very hard to hide their dishonesty, for example, in this age of digital recall. It makes the world much smaller and fact checking much more immediate.

  • OMG, you have the same dream I have been having?

  • Ron McPherson

    Great point

  • Sigh, I wish I could just tweet out statements like The Donald, or make simplistic statements like Brett did. First of all, there is an over simplification of the canonization process shared by most evangelicals that glosses over the centuries long process of haggling over which books were authentic (agreed with dominant Western Roman Orthodoxy) and pseudo-inspirational/inerrant assumptions attached to the process. As for your comment on eye-witness accounts not effected by length of time, details of things that happened 30 years ago in my own life are now hazy to me. Yes a generation or two passing before something is committed to holy writ does make a difference. (Which is why orthodox biblical historians try to push the dates for the canonical texts as early as possible).

    Zondervan (not exactly a liberal publisher) has a thoughtful and even-handed overview OT the historical critical issues in assigning biblical authorship here: https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/who-wrote-gospels/

    I think the following quote from the author, Dr. Mark Strauss, taking about the oldest Gospel, Mark, rather humorously depicts the problems associated with biblical authorship:

    Eusebius (fourth century) tells us that…
    Papias (first–second century) said that…
    John the Elder told Papias that…
    John Mark wrote this gospel based on…
    The Apostle Peter’s reminiscences (ibid.)

    I stand on my comment that what we know of the life of Jesus is based on third hand and greater knowledge.

    As for the early church not having an established “orthodox” theology…well, without having a 
cohesive, universally recognized canon (which was argued about into the 1500s), it is very hard to argue they did have an established orthodoxy. The authentic letters of Paul indicate that there was quite a bit of wrangling and things were not settled.

    Actually, orthodoxy within Christianity has never been unanimously settled. Why do you think we have Catholicism and Protestantism? Why did Baptists split over slavery? I mentioned the groups precisely because they show there was no established “orthodoxy” in the first 300 years. Today we have tens of thousands of different Christian groups, who differ in many details, which begs the question: why, if the Bible is so clear about doctrine, are there so many different interpretations of it?

    Out of curiosity, who’s views of “Biblical doctrine” do you espouse? Calvin, Luther, Arminius? Was Origen’s views on universal reconciliation correct or Augustine’s views on eternal punishment correct? Who’s version of the crucifixion do you except as accurate? Mark’s account of Jesus dying at 9am on the day of Passover, or John’s later account of him being crucified the day before, the day of preparation, sometime after noon? Did Jesus perform miracles as “signs,” as in John, or did he refuse to give “signs,” as in Matthew? Orthodoxy, in large part, is an attempt to impose an artificial homogeneity on what is often contradictory accounts given by the NT authors. It is also an attempt to enforce the adherence to that artificiality as a litmus to determine who the “faithful” are.

    Systematic theology, especially following the Age of Enlightenment (18th century) repeatedly has attempted to establish “objective truth” in regards to, what is largely a subjective field, namely the religion of Christianity. It is the entire reason behind the evangelical insistence of the inerrancy of Scripture and evangelical epistemology. As a result, evangelicalism rarely looks honestly at scripture, as that would challenge their presuppositionalism, instead ignoring the separate accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus in favor of a blended account of their own device. The writer of Mark had a very different view of the coming kingdom than the writer of John, who was forced to reinterpret events as the coming kingdom promised in Mark, had not come in the lifetime of the hearers of Jesus’ words. Was Mark wrong and John right? Was Jesus mistaken? No, separate accounts and explanations are not acceptable, so a third, blended account is created.

    IMO, much of what we deem orthodox is more than just a search for accurate biblical doctrine, but an aversion to agnosticism and an over dependency on false certitude. But I’ve rambled on enough for now. Glad you enjoyed the comment on VP Pence.

  • David, I recommended Robert Google “Jewish hope” so that he could see for himself that Jews have a broad range of views on the meaning of life and hopes (or not) for the hereafter. But I think he’s only interested in confirmation bias. It was worth a shot though.

  • Subjugation IS violence. You have declared that is the hope of Judaism, I have countered with the historical truth that it has been Christians who have resorted most often to violence. But that apparently, is not what you wish to accept.

  • Robert Browning

    …and the Jews are seeking the enslavement of the peace loving christian world. Like I said the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation of all non-Jews. And by failing to offer an alternative, you have confirmed everything I say. There is no argument. And what I find most sinful in you is that you do believe that white Christians are incapable of knowing the truth about Jew hatred for Christ and Christians and that you automatically assume white Christians will use violence once they know the truth. You regard white Christians as inferiors to Jews just like a Jew would. And you want to play deceit games to hide the truth from people who are fully capable of knowing the truth, accepting it as fact, and dealing with their adversary in a civil Christian way. Are Jews racially superior to white Christians, Kirk? Seems you think they are.

  • Robert Browning

    Christ named the Jews, the Jews. Jews means those that reject the teaching of Christ. Jew means those that reject the Gospel. If there were any Jews who accepted the teachings of Christ they would not be Jews. The rejection of Christs’ teachings is what makes a Jew a Jew. Why are you trying to tell me this outrageous lie?? Are you Jewish, Kirk?? That would explain a lot.

  • Actually, the Jews were called Jews long before Jesus came to the earth. Here are just a few verses in the Old Testament that affirm this fact. Ezr 5:1 When the prophets, Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied to the Jews who were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, who was over them,

    Ezr 5:5 But the eye of their God was on the elders of the Jews, and they did not stop them until a report could come to Darius, and then a written reply be returned concerning it.

    Ezr 6:7 “Leave this work on the house of God alone; let the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews rebuild this house of God on its site.

  • Robert, not that my ethnic heritage is any of your business, but I will tell you anyway. I am. Like most people, a “mutt.” English, French, Scottish, Irish and Swedish. Jesus was thoroughly Jewish and his message fit perfectly within the apocalyptic Jewish message of his day. He identified himself with the cosmic “son of man” rather than the more popular military messiah, but still fit within the boundaries of Jewish Orthodoxy for the most part. You need to review Matthew 5:17-20 and 22:40. No, Jesus was, without doubt, a Jew. Sorry to disappoint you. As Gentiles converted, subtle antisemitism began to creep into the church. When Paul converted, he inherited a growing division between Jewish Christians, who, like Jesus, wanted to keep the Law, and Gentiles who had never kept the Law. Paul sided with the growing antisemitism and the die was cast.

    Theologically I grew up Pentecostal Evangelical, influenced like many by dispensationalism and Christian fundamentalism. Did you Google “Jewish hope?” I think not. But I think we’re done here. I have attempted to bring greater insight and a broader context for you to consider, but I don’t believe you’re interested in honest dialogue.

  • Matthew

    The Triple Hope:

    “There is hope for thy latter end,” said the prophet. A hope threefold is in its reference.

    The hope we have already described for the Jewish people: the expectation of its ultimate deliverance and vindication.

    A hope also for the individual soul: the trust that it will not be swallowed up in death but, surviving the body, will in some fashion attain the fulfillment of which it falls short in the flesh.

    A hope for society: the assurance that it will in the end be regenerated into something fairer, its evils purged away, its good perfected and made permanent.

    Together these three make one mighty, joyous confidence: the confidence that for man, for Israel and for mankind a better time lies ahead than has ever yet been.”

    Robert couldn´t be more wrong about the Jewish people.

    I´m sorry … I cannot properly reference what I quoted above. I have forgotten what source I read it in.

  • Robert Browning

    Why should I follow you?? Why should I follow a blind person?? To be led off of a cliff?? You lead yourself. You did not answer my questions or even come close. Save your breath. I am deaf to your words.

  • Robert Browning

    If I am wrong then answer my questions. What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people?? If not enslavement of the non-Jew then what??

  • Ron McPherson

    “Does the light fear the truth?”

    No, but apparently you do. Instead of educating yourself on historical facts and utilizing basic reasoning you just robotically keep repeating the same baseless claims. When Kirk invites you to seek out information outside of your own confirmation biased sources you tell him that you’re “deaf (to his) words.”

  • Ron McPherson

    “…and the Jews are seeking the enslavement of the peace loving christian world.”

    You need not fear enslavement from others, Robert, because you are already enslaved. Enslaved to your own mind, in obvious bondage to a fear of masses of people you don’t even know. That’s unhealthy. It’s unhealthy for you and I’m guessing for any of those potentially subjected to your influence. Following Jesus is not about living under a threat that does not exist. Jesus came to give abundant life to his people. There is a better way than paranoia.

  • Matthew

    I see nothing in what I quoted as referring to enslavement. In fact, if one reads until nearly the end, one notices that the hope is also for all of mankind.

    [Edited]

  • Robert Browning

    I am not the topic of discussion, now am I Ron? Why are you resorting to character assassination and why can’t you make your case without attacking me?? Tell me how sweet them sour grapes are, why don’t you? Or how delicious and delectable that crow tastes? Yummy?

  • Ron McPherson

    Character assassination lol? This coming from a guy who, and I quote, wrote the following directly to other posters:

    “God damned you Jew. God damned you for the cold blooded murder his only son. God damned you Jew.”

    “Ever been to a church at 7am on a Wednesday morning Jew??”

    “What are you selling Christ killer??”

    “Mental illness IS Jewish and is a Jewish malady exclusively. The reason?? Jews have been marrying and bearing children with their sisters and cousins for centuries. Mental illness has been bred into Jewish blood. I don’t need your pity psycho.”

    “After white Christians successfully fight off blacks and browns…”

    You come on here attacking people you don’t even know for the mere crime of being Jewish, ramble on about Jews wanting to enslave the world, that they’re going to start some kind of a race war to eliminate white Christians, get called on the absurdity of it all, encouraged to leave that kind of toxic brainwashing in the hopes you also don’t infect others because it’s not representative of authentic Christianity, but somehow you’re the one here being victimized.

  • Robert Browning

    Address my points. What did Christ do to deserve to be killed?? Are you a defender of Christ or a defender of the anti-Christ?? Are you a defender of Christ or a defender of the Jews? I stand with Christ. You want to stand with Israel, Satan and the Jews that is your business. Eternal damnation isn’t so bad Ron, it is not like it will last forever. BAHA

  • Ron McPherson

    “Address my points.”

    Your ‘points’ have been addressed throughout this thread. Either you haven’t read them, or you just don’t like the answers.

    “What did Christ do to deserve to be killed?”

    I answered this already but will do it again. The death of Jesus had nothing to do with him refusing to enslave Gentiles. He called out the religious elite who had essentially formed an alliance with Rome. The Sadducees controlled the temple and got wealthy off the backs of common Jews. The Romans were ok with that because the Sadducees had power and influence since they largely controlled the Jewish courts (i.e. the Sandedrin), and could thus, control common Jews to a point. Jesus called out their corrupted temple practices. They didn’t like it.

    The Pharisees believed God’s kingdom could be ushered in through rigid obedience to Torah. Jesus showed that mercy to others was more important than religious sacrifices and superficial law-keeping. The Pharisees rejected him because they felt he was trying to usurp OT law. As such, the Pharisees and Sadducees formed an unlikely coalition with one another in appealing to Rome to have Jesus executed because both factions feared losing influence with common Jews. Pilate caved in to their demands because he didn’t want to be bothered with a potential uprising in the area (Judea was an important region for Rome due to economic and agricultural trade). The gospel writers hearkened back to the destruction of Jerusalem and it’s temple in 70 CE to show that the religious power structure had been judged by God. Jewish people living today in the 21st century had nothing to do with screaming ‘crucify him.’ Move on.

    “Are you a defender of Christ or a defender of the anti-Christ?? Are you a defender of Christ or a defender of the Jews? I stand with Christ. You want to stand with Israel, Satan and the Jews that is your business.”

    I prefer to stand with truth. Jesus is quoted in John 8:32, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” I suggest you seek truth rather than latching on to a paranoid hate-filled agenda, one that is not reflecting the authentic message of Jesus, which should be a message of forgiveness, peace, mercy, compassion, humility, love for God and love for neighbor.

    “Eternal damnation isn’t so bad Ron, it is not like it will last forever. BAHA”

    Odd that an individual claiming to defend Christ somehow revels in the thought of someone being eternally damned. Oh well.

  • apoxbeonyou

    LMAO!

  • apoxbeonyou

    Dude you are INSANE. Seek help, immediately.

  • apoxbeonyou

    Just in case anyone new is reading the comments, Robert Browning is a certifiably insane TROLL. Be careful if you feed it; it grows and gets more insane by the post.

  • otrotierra

    The Evangelical trolling that is now well-documented at the comment sections of Dr. Corey, Sojourners, and RedLetterChristians will certainly offer rich data for future sociologists and religious historians interested in learning how quickly U.S. Evangelicals worked to deny Jesus through deception, derailment, obfuscation, and blatant false witness.

  • apoxbeonyou

    Amen to that. And these Paulians, or Biblians, use reasoning that doesn’t include logic.

  • Ron McPherson

    Some of the comments on the UK Premier site rival any others when it comes to the level of cruelty. I understand that some people are just going to be haters. I get that. What I don’t get, however, is how people are doing it in the name of Christianity and calling it love. Westboro has nothing on this bunch. One particularly vitriolic poster said there was no such thing as gay people, but instead all (yes, ALL) are just immoral perverts. Gay people are classified as pedophiles to them. I’m literally not making this stuff up. Another said that Jesus will slaughter gay people upon his return. Like said it multiple times just for effect. Gay Christians who post on there are verbally spit on. The hateful posters are oblivious to the fact that there are other valid interpretations to the clobber passages. They’re blind and deaf to it. I seriously have never seen anything like it. I cringe that others read that stuff and think those people are representative of authentic Christianity. They feed off one another. Their cruelty knows no bounds, but what makes it even worse is that they actually believe they are speaking for God. I mean, they really believe it! One guy who is a street preacher repeatedly solicits for donations. I’ve never seen anything like it lol. I got drawn in to several discussions and finally could stomach no more. Lesson learned for me, but I hate seeing the marginalized condemned in the name of Christianity.

  • Robert Browning

    I don’t need you to quote me Ron. I need you and all your high browed compatriots to answer a few simple questions. Get off your high horse stoop down to my level. Way down here with the insects and the snails and the slugs and answer me. The problem is Ron, me, this insect, this vermin can see and you are blind. And you, you poor dear fellow can not defend yourself or your belief in Christ with reason but must repeatedly attack. Your attacks are meaningless Ron, I am with God.

  • Ron McPherson

    How many different times and ways do we have to answer your questions before you realize they’ve been answered.

  • Robert Browning

    What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? It has been posted by me more than ten times. Take your time.

  • Ron McPherson

    Robert, your questions have been answered on multiple occasions, including this one. But for some reason, you still keep asking particular ones over and over as if they’ve been avoided. They haven’t, as can be seen on this very thread. It’s perplexing to say the least. Bones answered one of them at least twice. I answered the other one at least twice. By the way, Kirk even went to great lengths to explain why your broad-brushed questions are problematic in the first place, but aside from that, to make it easier for you, below are the responses. This will make the THIRD TIME they’ve been answered.

    Robert: “What is the promise to the Jew religion to the Jew people?”

    Bones: “To be a light to the nations” (Isaiah 49:6).

    Robert: “What did Christ do to deserve to be killed?”

    Ron: “The death of Jesus had nothing to do with him refusing to enslave Gentiles. He called out the religious elite who had essentially formed an alliance with Rome. The Sadducees controlled the temple and got wealthy off the backs of common Jews. The Romans were ok with that because the Sadducees had power and influence since they largely controlled the Jewish courts (i.e. the Sandedrin), and could thus, control common Jews to a point. Jesus called out their corrupted temple practices. They didn’t like it. The Pharisees believed God’s kingdom could be ushered in through rigid obedience to Torah. Jesus showed that mercy to others was more important than religious sacrifices and superficial law-keeping. The Pharisees rejected him because they felt he was trying to usurp OT law. As such, the Pharisees and Sadducees formed an unlikely coalition with one another in appealing to Rome to have Jesus executed because both factions feared losing influence with common Jews. Pilate caved in to their demands because he didn’t want to be bothered with a potential uprising in the area (Judea was an important region for Rome due to economic and agricultural trade). The gospel writers hearkened back to the destruction of Jerusalem and it’s temple in 70 CE to show that the religious power structure had been judged by God.”

  • Robert Browning

    That is non-sense. How is being the light upon nations a benefit ?? Why should Jews be Jews? What self interests does being the light unto nations serve?? Are you saying Jews are an altruistic people? Defend their treatment of the Palestinians then.

  • Ron McPherson

    “That is non-sense. How is being the light upon nations a benefit ?? Why should Jews be Jews? What self interests does being the light unto nations serve??”

    Since when must a promise provide a benefit? At any rate, now it’s went from, nobody is answering my questions to instead now be, nobody is answering my questions the way I want. From what source other than the bible would you like for me to craft an answer from? Better still. Why don’t you just supply us all with the answer you’re looking for?

  • Robert Browning

    All religions have a benefit. It is a way for the religion to draw people to it. For Christians it is the after life. All religions have a benefit, all. How does being the light benefit the Jews?? In what way does being the light benefit Jews?? I am asking you to think. I don’t need you to recite text or repeat things you have heard else where.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I am asking you to think.”

    Yeah, I have been. Sorry, but I don’t think like you.

    “I don’t need you to recite text or repeat things you have heard else where.”

    So does this mean you concocted on your own the notion that Jews want to enslave the rest of us?

  • Robert Browning

    Here are the words of the great Jew rabbi Schneerson and his interpretation of the Torah, the old Testament. I remind you Ron, this is a very high Jew religious leader.——————————

    “The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: “Let us differentiate.” Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of “let us differentiate” between totally different species.”

    “This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world … The difference in the inner quality between Jews and non-Jews is “so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species.”

    “An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.”

    “As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood.”

    “…the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews.”

    “The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim.”

    “The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews.”

  • Ron McPherson

    Schneerson’s ideas were not universally accepted by all Jews, and not without controversy from his peers. He died over two decades ago. I could post quotes from influential Christian leaders both past and present reflecting bigotry as well. Luther took every opportunity to hate on Jews. Doesn’t mean that all Christians want to make all Jews their slaves.

  • Robert Browning

    Luther was friends with Jews until he realized he was tricked by the Jews. The Reformation was a Jewish theft of Church property.

  • Dang, I was hoping you’d join my commune!

  • Unfortunately, this is nothing new. Racism, antisemitism, intolerance goes back to the late first century. Christianity, for the most part refuses to look at the skeletons in her closet. Until the church is willing to do so, and corporately repent, we will be stuck in the Middle Ages. For example, what did American Christianity in the South learn from the American Civil War? Next to nothing.

  • Ron McPherson

    Exactly. The wall perhaps too high to overcome is that many of the people ostracizing the LGBT community think they are upholding the Bible in doing it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Lol

  • Robert Browning

    Where did the church property go?? In to whose hands? That feather stuck up there?

  • Ron McPherson

    Am I on Candid Camera?

  • Matthew

    If yes … then SMILE :-)

  • Matthew

    Thanks Kirk. Very informative.

    This may be an extremely over-simplified question (or one that is simply too personal), but I´m wondering:

    If the gospel accounts are so problematic, and if the Gospel of John is merely a theological reinterpretation rather than an accurate account of the way many things are doctrinally, and if the church basically imposed it´s “orthodoxy” because of such contradictory accounts, reinterpretations, etc. — what reasons can you offer, personally, for believing in and following Jesus Christ?

    I suppose over the years I have invested way too much into biblical literalism and certitude, hiding behind the shield of conservative Christian apologetics all along the way. That said, I still have reason to believe that at least as far as the Gospels are concerned, we can get a pretty solid idea about who Jesus was, what he did, and how he lived. I don´t think the synoptic problem(s) (for example), or the problems many people have with John´s Gospel, should preclude us from installing some kind of hook upon which we can hang some theology, doctrine, dogma (whatever one wants to call it all) regarding the faith we have in Jesus.

    Without such, I´m afraid we might simply fall into the realm of myth and fantasy or simply everyone running amok with what constitutes the very heart of the faith once handed down to us all.

    [Edited]

  • apoxbeonyou

    I have this strange feeling that Robert Browning is actually Phil Ledgerwood trolling and laughing at us :)

  • Al Cruise

    He is a white supremist.

  • Matthew

    I miss Phil … :-(

  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!!

  • Ron McPherson

    I bet Phil converted to IFB KJV pretrib pre-rapturism. If so, then we’ll know it’s a sign of the apocalypse

  • Ron McPherson

    I still say he’s just trying out on us a new Netflix idea. If the rest of us fall for it, he’ll then take it to the Netflix brass to sell them the plot. “It will work I tell ya!”

  • What reasons did the disciples have for following Christ? Why were the disciples willing to die rather than denounce their faith that Jesus was chosen of God to show us a better Way? They didn’t have a detailed, well developed doctrinal system. They didn’t have the New Testament writings. It is unlikely they viewed Jesus as God, but simply as God’s chosen, the Son of Man whom God raised from the dead. I think my own thinking follows the same basic trajectory. The Gospel of John reflects a “high Christology” that goes beyond the simple statement of Peter in Acts 2 that has God making Jesus Lord and Messiah AFTER his death.

    Your questions are absolutely relevant. I believe Jesus still asks us to decide “Whom do you say that I am?” I am currently working through the implications of historical criticism and the Bible. Somehow, over the years, orthodoxy has shifted from understanding that God has revealed himself to us through the life, death and teachings of Jesus Christ, to a God that reveals himself primarily through a Bible that he somehow “wrote.” What has now become clear to me is that, by the time of the council of Nicaea, Jesus had come to be understood in terms far different than what the disciples and first generation followers thought.

    So this is my journey, to follow Christ to the best of my ability, knowing that some things may never be known with absolute certainty, but that it’s ok to harbor some doubts and admit I don’t have all the answers.

    God bless.

  • Luther suffered from extreme attacks of anxiety and fell in to deep depressions from time to time. In other words, he was a chronically depressed person. His treatise against the Jews (which Hitler drew upon), came during one of those dark, depressed times. Do more research!

  • Matthew

    Thanks ever so much Kirk.

  • Matthew

    How do you understand the difference (if there is one) between the English words Lord and God? I did a quick Google search, but nothing really informative came up. Thanks Kirk.

  • Matthew, in the original languages the differences are much clearer than in an English translation. LORD means YHWH, Lord means master and God usually means Elohim, a more generic term for God. So, depending on context and the original words being used, lord can mean Yahweh or it can simply mean master. To proclaim Jesus is Lord, simply means he is our master, the one we obey and follow.

    cf. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/64284/are-lord-and-god-interchangeable

    http://reknew.org/2014/07/christ-is-lord-what-does-it-mean/

    https://www.compellingtruth.org/LORD-GOD-Lord-God.html

  • Matthew

    Thanks again Kirk.

  • I’ve dealt with Emma before. She is particularly nasty. The kicker is that she has no interest in educating herself. She doesn’t allow herself any kind of cognitive dissonance as she rejects anything that doesn’t fit her biases and presumptions outright. Pretty much sums up the Premier site.

  • Ron McPherson

    Yes, it’s maddening

  • Ron McPherson

    Views or doctrine at variance with many of the posters’ own zealous fundamentalism at Premier, especially with respect to soteriology and even the ‘culture’ itself, are dismissed because those positions threaten them. Fear of a wrathful God and an unending torturous hell essentially hold in place much of their belief system and message. They’re afraid to deviate thought, or to allow themselves to question, for if so, their own equivocation on such matters may be an indication that their own fate somehow becomes doomed. Their views are driven by fear. It’s obvious because that’s their message to those they deem as unregenerate.

    Individuals not in their fold are viewed, more or less, as objects of conversion rather than as people made in the image of God. Those that dare to question the message are seen as the enemy. It then becomes to them a game of win or lose. Their responses are cruel because they see these ‘enemies’ as enemies of God.

    The gospel they preach, at least in my opinion, bears little (or no) semblance to Jesus’ gospel of the kingdom. For that matter, it doesn’t look like Paul’s either, nor that of the apostles. It does look a lot like a blending of right-wing fundamentalism and conservative evangelicalism, which we see all the time here in the U.S.

    One of the guys on there is a street preacher who talks a lot about God’s hatred and eternal hell. He routinely solicits funds from others as well. I once questioned him on whether he thinks Anne Frank has been suffering a torturous hell for the last 73 years. If so, she had it better in Auschwitz. He has yet to answer either a yes or no. I suspect he can’t, because an answer in the affirmative brings a stark realization of the utter cruelty of such a fate. However, an answer in the negative blows apart his doctrine and the very message he preaches. So he dare not question this scenario in any rational way. Either he portrays a God who allows the endless torture of children, or he has gotten God badly wrong. Instead of dealing with it, he doubles down on his doctrine without allowing himself to confront the problem, under the guise that he’s somehow exhibiting faith.

    If my faith cannot co-exist with truth, then I need to seriously re-examine the integrity of my faith. Just my two cents.

  • Bones

    Lol, I’m banned from that site.

    Apparently it’s ok to abuse gay people and other Christians, but not fundies.

  • Ron McPherson

    I was on it for maybe a couple of weeks. That’s all I could stomach.

  • Tom Hanson

    And I presume he should not be confused with the great poet.

  • Tom Hanson

    hmm. So Hitler refused to love his neighbors in various countries and that makes him a Jew. Is that what you mean?

  • Robert Browning

    There was no extermination of Jews. There was an extermination of lice. Communist subversive Jews who were covered in lice were rounded up to protect the country from harm and to halt a Typhus epidemic. I bet you think the Jews are the chosen people too. Chosen to lie and deceive you till the end of time.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    What a groveling, depraved, TЯ☭itor-TЯ卐mp-TOAD you are.

  • Robert Browning

    Every religion has a benefit it offers its adherents as away to attract people to the religion. It is the nature of all religions.What is the promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people? The promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation, the enslavement of the non-Jew for the benefit of the Jew. That can’t happen with Christ in this world. Christianity must be destroyed in order for Jew goals to be reached. Jews are fomenting a race war in all Christian lands as a means to destroy Christianity. But you know all this don’t you kyke? Wanna tell me you are not Jewish scumbag?

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    So you’ve finally outed yourself as just another TЯ☭itor-TЯ卐mp-TOAD who hates Christ and the Jewish people.

    ♫ ♪
    Roll, roll, roll the Troll
    Quickly to the bowl
    Flush, flush, flush, flush
    Turd just gotta go. ♫ ♪

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    You ‘presume’ correctly. He is definitely a hate-filled TOAD (and Troll).

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    It’s all been foretold in the Scriptures.

  • Robert Browning

    I am a Christian. You know why the Jews killed Christ? The Jews have certain expectations of their messiah. The Jews expected their messiah to enslave their enemies. The Jews expect their messiah to enslave the non-Jew. Christ preached forgiveness towards ones enemies. This was blasphemy for the Jews so they killed him. Christ was killed by the Jews because he refused to enslave humankind for the Jews and for no other reason. You Jews are the enemies of humankind and the death of Gods only son if all the proof the world needs. You need to learn to shut up you obnoxious kyke.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    You’re NO ‘christian’ when you hate the Jewish people and spread scapegoating, false rumors about them.
    That’s exactly what Hitler did.

    Next you’re gonna start defending and condoning Hitler’s pogrom (the Holocaust) against the Jewish people and millions of others.
    Oh wait … bet you’re gonna drag out that old, worn-out, anti-Semitic, “Holocaust Denial” lie.

    You are really beyond redemption when you falsely claim the ‘Jews’ were solely responsible for Christ’s sacrifice.
    Every sinner is responsible … that means ALL of us … even you, vile TOAD!

    Calling me a “kike” shows your vile, contemptible hatred for God, His Most Holy Son, and all of His Children …
    … who are bought with the precious (Jewish) Blood of Christ!

    By your own depraved blasphemy and heresy, you are responsible for your own DAMNATION!

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    News Flash TOAD … there are many millions of Jewish people around the world who accept Jesus Christ as their
    Messiah and Savior.

    Once again, your depraved and deceitful scapegoating has been shown to be the vicious lie it is.

  • Robert Browning

    Yeah, Tell me how a good Christian should be, Christ killer. You are somefuckingkyke, you know that jerkoff?

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Well said. Thank you.

  • Robert Browning

    Is Moshiach a tranny? With a big rack?? You love your Moshiach don’t you, kyke?? You are down with your Moshiach right kyke?

  • Robert Browning

    How? The promise of the Jew religion to the Jew people is the subjugation of the non-Jew. Christians are non-Jews. Christ was killed by the Jews because he refused to enslave human kind for the Jews. How can you be a slave and a slave master at the same time?? You can’t be. The two are opposites. Jews who say they worship Christ are full of shit, like you kyke.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Blocked for being a treacherous, vicious, nazi-swìne!