Quote of the day

posted at 10:30 pm on January 31, 2007 by Allahpundit

It’s true, isn’t it?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I am totally not getting this! What ever happened to evil? It’s as if we are in total denial about the existence of satan. If there is no satan, then why do so many people do evil?

bloggless on February 1, 2007 at 11:19 AM

If there is no satan, then why do so many people do evil?

It’s our nature. Satan does not cause us to sin.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 11:21 AM

Jesus hated evil, Osama is evil, Jesus hates Osama. Sometime academics get in the way of logic.

That may be logical, but it’s not theological.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 11:22 AM

It’s true, isn’t it?

Absolutely true.

We are guided by God to love everybody, including the worst sinners. If it were easy, well then, what’s the point?

honora on February 1, 2007 at 11:25 AM

I realize that people have a free choice to sin or not to sin, but I am not so sure that satan does not have a hand a hand in it.

bloggless on February 1, 2007 at 11:33 AM

It’s our nature. Satan does not cause us to sin.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 11:21 AM

True. Satan simply tempts us to sin. We haven’t talked about Satan much here, but your right that we should forget about him.

If there is no satan, then why do so many people do evil?

There is Satan. And everyone does evil. Some are seemingly more evil than others.

Some of us follow Christ and are protected from temptation and evil. Christ has a way of only allowing temptations that we can handle, thereby strengthening our ability to resist temptations.

Those of us who do not follow Christ, you’re on your own when dealing with temptation.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 11:36 AM

BTW
A sign like that screams “Leftie manipulation of Christ’s message for political gain.”
Don’t it? How about all the cloaks of righteousness that the Left is wrapping itself in regarding illegal immigrants? They use the language of CHrist to people who don’t know the scriptures – so it SOUNDS right, then twist it to undermine everything. An illegal alian wearing a t-shirt that says, “What would Jesus do?” Jesus would say, “Obey the law.”
AS for OBL, any deathbed conversion opportunity is long past. He’s getting his just rewards for his reign of terror. Nothing will change that. He had numerous chances to repent, and change his ways, but he didn’t. It’s done. To forgive him now for what malice he did in his life is really to let go of the anger and hate in one’s own heart, so one doesn’t become bitter and hateful as OBL was.

naliaka on February 1, 2007 at 11:36 AM

To forgive him now for what malice he did in his life is really to let go of the anger and hate in one’s own heart, so one doesn’t become bitter and hateful as OBL was.

naliaka on February 1, 2007 at 11:36 AM

Well that’s true. But really ultimate forgiveness is way above our pay grade, is it not?

honora on February 1, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Well that’s true. But really ultimate forgiveness is way above our pay grade, is it not?

Forgiveness between us and our neighbor, No.

Ultimate Forgiveness between us and God, Yes.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 11:57 AM

Allah,

Why aren’t you called upon to forgive him?

You’ve brought this identical thing up once before and I think I answered in the identical way I’m about to now…

First of all, it’s not ours to forgive sin. Not our purview. If you mean that we should wish Osama would turn from his life of evil and become someone talking about Jesus and his love for all men, yeah I think that would be great.

God may extend grace to such a person and God may wish that those whom he has harmed (9/11 families) would forgive him as well (remember the Amish families who attended the killer’s funeral, or the victims of church arson who invited the arsonist to participate in rebuilding rather than go to prison). However the Bible nowhere suggests that our personal forgiveness is controlling of society’s response to murder and mayhem. On the contrary:

Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

Personally, I think it would be great if Osama converted, gave himself up and spent his last weeks apologizing to his victims…from death row. But that’s something no force on earth can accomplish.

John on February 1, 2007 at 12:03 PM

“What would Jesus do?”

Jesus would say, “Set aside your worldly idols and follow Me.”

Just like the parable of the world-rich young man asking Jesus, what must I do to be saved? Jesus told him to give away his worldly riches and “follow Me”. The young man walked away unsaved because he couldn’t put Christ ahead of his worldly idols.

This is exactly what happens in our current worldly rich nation of the U.S.A. We are so tempted to follow our idols of worldly wealth that we are unable to subordinate to Christ.

It’s kind of ironic. God grants us the richest nation on the planet, and our temptation to worship our wealth instead of God becomes our spiritual and eternal down fall.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 12:06 PM

I fail to understand your point GT. Sorry. Layman and all.
Did I fail to understand that we all bear sin?

Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 11:12 AM

I should have been more clear. I was responding to the following….

What those consequences are I have no idea but I will not be allowed to enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless I suffer them willingly as my just desserts.

Some, who’s souls were less soiled by sin, will suffer little if any. Others, who’s souls are filty, will suffer much. Like Jesus suffered on the cross, I will suffer. How much I suffer is up to me.

This is contrary to Romans 3:20-25.

I’m not always the best at explaining things. What is clear in my heart and mind does not alway translate into words. So please bear with me.

To God, sin is sin. There is no such thing as one being soiled by less sin than another. We are all guilty and deserve the same fate.

Romans 3:24 tells us that we are justified by His Grace through Christ. All we have to do is ask for forgiveness and accept Christ into our heart as Savior. Doing so justifies us before God and allows us to enter Heaven.

How good one lives has no bearing on his final outcome. I would point out Romans 3:28.

You may believe that you are going to have to do some suffering before you can enter, but that is contrary to what Christ says.

Thats all I’m trying to say.

.

GT on February 1, 2007 at 12:08 PM

John on February 1, 2007 at 12:03 PM

Ditto.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 12:09 PM

Well that’s true. But really ultimate forgiveness is way above our pay grade, is it not?

honora on February 1, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Not at all. In fact, its expected of us. Matthew 6:14-15

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

.

GT on February 1, 2007 at 12:15 PM

You’re right EFG. I was drunk when I wrote that last night. It just struck me as a sort of inane gesture to put on a billboard. It doesn’t strike me as very likely that Osama Bin Laden will repent but I suppose its possible.

aengus on February 1, 2007 at 12:17 PM

GT

Thank you for the response. I muddled my reasoning (as usual).

I will reread Romans to try to clear up my thoughts. It is the passage in Romans 3:31 that may be my undoing….
Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Gives me something to think about. Thanks GT.

Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 12:29 PM

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 9:30 AM

I’m not so sure. “Jacob I loved, Esau I hated.” Scripture teaches the idea of repbrobation, and most are reprobates. Of course, we don’t know who beforehand, which is why we preach the Gospel. Maybe Christ has loved Osama before the foundation of the world. We won’t know until we see some repentence and other things that make his salvation evident.

PRCalDude on February 1, 2007 at 12:30 PM

I don’t know whether Jesus loves Osama or not, but I don’t have any reason to believe that He does. In my reading of scriptures, God does not love all human beings equally. Jesus didn’t love the Pharisees about whom He said, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?”

The point is, it is not for me to judge OBL’s relationship with the Almighty. As the phrase goes in my church, “Betwixt the stirrup and the ground, Mercy I ask’d; mercy I found,” so it is impossible for me to know. I will not, however, categorically speak for God regarding the condition of OBL’s soul. I should, however, though I do not (my error, my problem), pray for him. Again, I’m not the kind of Christian I should be.

spmat on February 1, 2007 at 12:45 PM

I should say, it is impossible for me to know in the negative the condition of OBL’s soul. One can only have hope (earnest expectation) in the positive.

spmat on February 1, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Enrique, on the other hand…

Hey! I didn’t even say anything yet! :)

(Well, they can, but their beliefs at least deserve a respectful hearing.)

We grow up in a society that says we’re supposed to respect Christian beliefs, so we really don’t know any other way. If we grew up in a Muslim country, we’d be conditioned to grant respect to Islamic beliefs. It wouldn’t mean that Islamic beliefs deserved respect, especially since they’re frequently totalitarian and fascistic.

We Americans respect Christianity because it’s domesticated and harmless, and most people without practicing faith aren’t threatened by your average American evangelical Christians, simply because the vast majority of American evangelical Chistians aren’t violent or dangerous. In fact, all the practicing religious people that I know personally are to a man and woman decent and upstanding citizens.

My issue (well, one of my issues) is that we grant this weirdly priveledged respect to Christianity (and religion in general) because it’s been culturally hardwired into us. We’ve been taught to believe that we need Judeo-Christian values to have a moral center and as a foundation for being decent citizens. I used to think that. And now I don’t.

We don’t need Jesus to tell us how to be decent people, we can do it without him. And we sure don’t need Jesus to tell us to love Osama bin Laden. That’s a ridiculous standard.

If Jesus were alive today, wouldn’t he be a total leftist? This is a guy who said it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven. Somehow I imagine Jesus keeping company with the likes of Hugo Chavez and Jimmy Carter and Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore. He would rail against America for our oppulence and materialism. He would be talking about “peace not apartheid” in Palestine, he probably would have been standing next to Edward Said throwing rocks at IDF checkpoints, and he would have opposed any attempt by Israel to defend itself against Hezbollah. He would be at every anti-war protest waving a placard that reads “Impeach Bush for War Crimes.” He would have a “A Job is a Human Right” bumper sticker on his Prius, he would be opposed to globalization and free trade, he would be in favor of income redistribution, and he would loathe capitalism.

And somehow I doubt he’d be interested in gay people getting married. Call it a hunch.

Enrique on February 1, 2007 at 1:01 PM

Enrique on February 1, 2007 at 1:01 PM

Please don’t dignify this with a response.

PRCalDude on February 1, 2007 at 1:03 PM

My only response, Enrique, is to say that I suspect Jesus would be a lot less interested in politics than either side might wish Him to be.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 1:05 PM

most people without practicing faith aren’t threatened by your average American evangelical Christians, simply because the vast majority of American evangelical Chistians aren’t violent or dangerous. Enrique

\

I get the distinct impression the freaked-out left begs to differ with you. To them the problem is not with people who’ll cut your head off with pleasure, it’s with people who might cut off your pleasure (whatever twisted form it might take.)

The Ritz on February 1, 2007 at 1:08 PM

My only response, Enrique, is to say that I suspect Jesus would be a lot less interested in politics than either side might wish Him to be.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 1:05 PM

Amen.

GT on February 1, 2007 at 1:17 PM

My only response, Enrique, is to say that I suspect Jesus would be a lot less interested in politics than either side might wish Him to be.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 1:05 PM

I don’t know about that. God the Father sure would get upset when corrupt leaders got into power in Israel….

Tim Burton on February 1, 2007 at 1:26 PM

Enrique
Uh. Chavez is a thug, who’s coveting and stealing other people’s properties, ripping up democracy in Venezeula in order to make himself a god. Noam Chomsky has been caught in fabrications and Jimmy Carter is winding down his dismal career by smearing and libelling God’s chosen people.
Why would Jesus loathe capitalism? Making honest money by the fruits of your production, is bad? Since when? You don’t know that a number of rich people got that way not by capitalism, but by confiscation and you’ve said you’re Cuban? You really think Jesus can be suckered into the Leftie double-talk that the State needs your property more than you do? Wouldn’t he just say, “Thief.”
There’s a phony Jesus cooked up by the Left. The real one isn’t so easily boxed in. In fact, ya can’t. And if you don’t think you need a solid, time-tested, universal (as in everyone worldwide who hears it, understands the truth of it) moral code, what other code are you replacing it with? No reply, just think about it. Look, there’s this weird and nasty little Cuban ritual where they dig up skulls out of graveyards and use them in incantations, usually to conjure up riches, power or to curse someone. Would you like to live in a community that practices that routinely or in a community that believes that sort of thing is wrong, and points to the Bible as backup? You’re right, the American experience is a bit like running on old habits, Christianity seems boring and dull, but there are very disturbing and spooky things out there beyond our shores – and it’s making inroads everywhere.

naliaka on February 1, 2007 at 1:31 PM

I get the distinct impression the freaked-out left begs to differ with you. To them the problem is not with people who’ll cut your head off with pleasure, it’s with people who might cut off your pleasure (whatever twisted form it might take.)

You mean people like Lawrence, who would like to treat the sale of even the mildest forms of pornography as a federal crime? Does disagreeing with people like him automatically make someone a freaked-out leftist?

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 1:42 PM

Don’t you people sleep? Sleep is good.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 10:04 AM

Sleep is for pussies.

Seriously though, I work from home and occassionally I stay up a little later, and a little later, until I’m on a messed up schedule and getting up and going to bed really late (got up at 1:30 pm today). I’m also in Vermont wher “global warming” has caused us to have an unseasonably cold few weeks, and unusually cold weather for the foreseeable future (25 with windchill of 12 right now, and it’s about the warmest it’s been in a couple weeks, and it’s going to be highs in the teens again in a couple days). So I really have no reason to get up and get out. Screw that. There’s nothing out there for me.

Basically I just type all of that so I had an excuse to tell everyone how cold it’s been up here, contrary to the popular belief that this has been a “mild” winter, after it began a little late and everyone had that ONE WARM WEEKEND.

RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 2:07 PM

You mean people like Lawrence, who would like to treat the sale of even the mildest forms of pornography as a federal crime? Does disagreeing with people like him automatically make someone a freaked-out leftist?

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 1:42 PM

No.

I know that soft porn will always have some type of legal standing in our society. But the fact that it is legal doesn’t automatically make it moral nor right.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 2:25 PM

And the personal is what we’re talking about here, not the state.

Anwyn on February 1, 2007 at 2:09 AM

Respectfully, it is very personal for me. Can’t speak/explain for others, but for me it was and remains personal, for the rest of my life. I’m not tortured, very sure, and very serene about this.

hillbillyjim, to your Entelechy-Universe question – the short answer is this – it is 180 degrees opposite from that of Enrique. For that I thank God and Darwin. A few min. ago I couldn’t have said it this concisely, and had intended to write you in more detail. However, his post would demand at least a 500-page reply, thus this short version.

Just a short additon, this E-Universe is also never boring, very simple and complex, at once, inquisitive, and yes, philosophycal at times. Much struggle, suffering, work, challenge, and yet, so much to be thankful for. One item for sure is the opportunity to communicate with my HA friends. I sincerely include honora in this category. Her comments on this thread confirmed again why.

It’s hard to type your pen-name btw – better to cut/paste. Also, you live way up, not to but from, it. You can’t fool E :) Love that you chose it.

right2bright, thank you for defining ObL as a “murderous evil man”. It needed to be a strong reminder.

Those who said that it’s not for us to forgive him, thank you.

Those who think that not forgiving him is bitterness – I’m not bitter at him – just hand him over to me. Though, I believe he’s dead since several years ago. For good reasons, from both sides, we’ll never know for sure when he went wherever.

Again, on all the philosophical and religious debating of these past few days, and on other threads, all I know is that I don’t know. However, I respect everyone’s belief and view, and fanatics on all sides make me very nervous. Most of all I despise people like Howard Dean, who pander to religious people, just for votes. We will see this repeated in 2008, intensely and just as hypocritically, probably from both sides.

Entelechy on February 1, 2007 at 2:26 PM

Well that’s true. But really ultimate forgiveness is way above our pay grade, is it not?

honora on February 1, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Not at all. In fact, its expected of us. Matthew 6:14-15

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

.

GT on February 1, 2007 at 12:15 PM

Clearly I am referring to God forgiving OBL, or whomever. Not our call.

honora on February 1, 2007 at 2:32 PM

Maybe Christ has loved Osama before the foundation of the world. We won’t know until we see some repentence and other things that make his salvation evident.

PRCalDude on February 1, 2007 at 12:30 PM

Christ has, yes.

The idea that the God-hood aspect of Jesus existed before the foundation of the world is key to understanding Jesus as God, and understanding Jesus Christ as fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecy.

It is God’s love that grants us the ability to repent in the first place. Whether we repent or not is an individual thing, but God’s love for us doesn’t change.

Osama may repent. If he does, we may never know it until we enter the next life. I’m not betting any money on Osama rejecting Allah and accepting Chist, but that is between him and Christ.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 2:36 PM

No. I know that soft porn will always have some type of legal standing in our society. But the fact that it is legal doesn’t automatically make it moral nor right.

Lawrence, I’m having trouble squaring your rebuttal here with what you said the other day:

I think all pornography should be illegal. From my perspective this is no different that saying thats child molesters have a right to choose to molest children as long as the children are okay with it.

It’s one thing to tell me that you are realistic about not being able to get the level of regulation you want, but don’t try to deny that you want pornography completely outlawed in all its forms after you just came right out and told me that you did.

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 2:42 PM

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 2:36 PM

I thought you were a Calvinist?

We would argue that regeneration by the Holy Spirit precedes the sinner’s response to the Gospel. We believe that regeneration and repentence unto life are entirely an act of God. Also, it is not up to man to accept or reject the Gospel (irresistable grace).

PRCalDude on February 1, 2007 at 2:45 PM

Just a short additon, this E-Universe is also never boring, very simple and complex, at once, inquisitive, and yes, philosophycal at times. Much struggle, suffering, work, challenge, and yet, so much to be thankful for. One item for sure is the opportunity to communicate with my HA friends. I sincerely include honora in this category.

Blessed are the *real* peacemakers. Mega dittos, Entelechy!

{{{E}}}

RushBaby on February 1, 2007 at 2:45 PM

Basically I just type all of that so I had an excuse to tell everyone how cold it’s been up here, contrary to the popular belief that this has been a “mild” winter, after it began a little late and everyone had that ONE WARM WEEKEND.

Second that. Cold hurts, people. It’s been negative something or another for about a week here.

Cold hurts.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 2:56 PM

Just a short additon, this E-Universe is also never boring, very simple and complex, at once, inquisitive, and yes, philosophycal at times. Much struggle, suffering, work, challenge, and yet, so much to be thankful for. One item for sure is the opportunity to communicate with my HA friends. I sincerely include honora in this category. Her comments on this thread confirmed again why.

We could all do well to be more open, less judgmental, like my friend Entelechy. You go girl!!!

honora on February 1, 2007 at 2:58 PM

Second that. Cold hurts, people. It’s been negative something or another for about a week here.

Cold hurts.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 2:56 PM

My furnace has not been off for days. I’m afraid to look at my gas bill……

honora on February 1, 2007 at 3:01 PM

Ok joke to lighten up all this theology talk: did you hear about the dyslexic agnostic? He’s pretty sure there isn’t a dog…..

honora on February 1, 2007 at 3:10 PM

It’s one thing to tell me that you are realistic about not being able to get the level of regulation you want, but don’t try to deny that you want pornography completely outlawed in all its forms after you just came right out and told me that you did.

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 2:42 PM

You aske a question yesterday, that begged my answer. Nothing has changed about that.

Today, I’m simply recognizing that regardless of my personal desires, pornography in some forms will remain legal in this country for the forseeable future.

You asked if you disagreed with me made on this it would make you a looney leftist… I answered, no. Lots of secular conservatives support legalized pornography, just as any number of religious liberals do.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 3:29 PM

My furnace has not been off for days. I’m afraid to look at my gas bill……

Yeah, I’ve tried to ignore the noise of my frequently-running furnace. Fortunately, my house has giant radiators, so they keep throwing off heat even after the furnace goes off. If it weren’t for those, I’d be in big(er) trouble on the bill.

Slublog on February 1, 2007 at 3:32 PM

To Watcher/Larence’s topic…two interesting items:

- heard this morning, on the news/radio, about a church having bought a former adult book store, having cleaned and prayed over every single tile and moving on with the conversion…don’t recall where, and

- a while ago a church had neglected to renew its domain and then lost it to a porn shop.

Unrelated, RushBaby – smiles to you too!, and,

honora – made me tear up a little. Sent you a long note on the MM/O’Reilly thread, 2 days ago.

Entelechy on February 1, 2007 at 3:55 PM

Sorry – s/b Lawrence, of course :(

Entelechy on February 1, 2007 at 3:56 PM

I thought you were a Calvinist?

PRCalDude on February 1, 2007 at 2:45 PM

I apologize for the confusion because I never suggest otherwise. I’m more in line with Augsburg than with Westminster. However, I chose not to belabor the point because this doesn’t place us that far apart on the general topics of our discussions the last couple days.

As to your description of regeneration, consider us in agreement.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 4:07 PM

Jesus loves you.

Everyone else pretty much thinks you’re an asshole.

The Monster on February 1, 2007 at 5:20 PM

So Watcher, help me understand. The greatest crisis we face today is someone might take your porn away? (Like that’ll ever happen.)

You’re makin’ my point, bra’

The Ritz on February 1, 2007 at 5:42 PM

Ok joke to lighten up all this theology talk: did you hear about the dyslexic agnostic? He’s pretty sure there isn’t a dog…..
honora on February 1, 2007 at 3:10 PM

That made me laugh out loud.

thedecider on February 1, 2007 at 6:18 PM

Ritz, I never said it was the greatest crisis, I was just using that issue to illustrate a point… there are a number of people who claim to be in favor of limited government who suddenly start spouting all sorts of statist nonsense whenever the subject turns to one of their pet social issues. It’s the same kind of thinking that leftists use to come up with all sorts of nutty federal regulations and wealth redistribution schemes… it’s amazing the level of government intrusion in our lives can be rationalized as being for the “greater good”.

I’m not the one who compared looking at porn with being a child molester, that was Lawrence… but sure, I’m the nut here, right bra’? It isn’t Christianity that has Allah looking for alternatives to the GOP, it is people like Lawrence and those who would acquiesce or pander to his statist impulses.

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 6:34 PM

I’m not the one who compared looking at porn with being a child molester, that was Lawrence… but sure, I’m the nut here, right bra’? It isn’t Christianity that has Allah looking for alternatives to the GOP, it is people like Lawrence and those who would acquiesce or pander to his statist impulses.

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 6:34 PM

Okay… your taking about three different conversations and lumping them together. AllahP’s religious convictions was not part of our original exchange, and I’ve never said whether I was for big government or against it, but I did answer your porn question with a text book answer.

I will state now, that I am generally against big government. But that has nothing to do with making a law against pornography. Small governments can make wise laws just like big governments.

I’m just saying that pornography as a choice is not a wise choice, and pointing out how it is destructive thing for those who get trapped as “actors” in that life style.

If you want to embrace a activity that is destructive to others, that is perfectly legal. But you have no right to mock me because I disagree with you.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 7:00 PM

I’ve read a fair amount of the Bible. I’ve yet to see someone with UBL’s credentials treated by God or the Son in a loving way.

To the contrary, it generally doesn’t work out so well for murderous thugs…and those who attempt to wrap themselves in the “mantel of righteousness” (e.g. as an issuer of fatwas, UBL claims he does all of this in the name of his god), are described as hypocrits and dogs to their face (wow…not the man made Jesus but the real deal). Those that polluted the Temple with their presence and made it into a flea market were physically removed with a whip (sounds more like Jet Li than Ghandi to me).

I think the pay grade comment is the most applicable. It isn’t up to us to determine UBL’s eternal fate, but I don’t love him, don’t forgive him, and I have no qualms about risking anything permanent by not doing so.

To those that seek to deliver him to the justice he so desperately deserves…good hunting!

CZ52GUY on February 1, 2007 at 7:03 PM

You really think Jesus can be suckered into the Leftie double-talk that the State needs your property more than you do? Wouldn’t he just say, “Thief.”

I think Jesus was a human being. In fact, that’s his whole appeal – he was one of us. A decent guy by all accounts, and a passionate, charismatic type to boot. The life of the party. (insert obvious water/wine joke here)

And as a human, he had flaws. Because to be human is to be imperfect. I believe that Jesus existed and was a human being, and if he were alive today he would have been just as likely as any of us to champion an ignoble cause with the best of intentions.

I may even be guilty of that myself. On occasion. Very rarely. Ahem.

Enrique on February 1, 2007 at 7:23 PM

“I think Jesus was a human being. In fact, that’s his whole appeal – he was one of us. A decent guy by all accounts, and a passionate, charismatic type to boot. The life of the party.”

But this is not what Jesus claimed himself to be. He claims to be human yes, but he also claims to be God.

Either He is right and is God, or he was wrong and was really just insane.

If Jesus was alive today indentifying himself as God incarnate, like he did then, telling off the government leaders and chasing priests out of their temples, you would probably have him arrested and committed.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 7:36 PM

think Jesus was a human being. In fact, that’s his whole appeal – he was one of us. A decent guy by all accounts, and a passionate, charismatic type to boot. The life of the party. (insert obvious water/wine joke here)

And as a human, he had flaws. Because to be human is to be imperfect. I believe that Jesus existed and was a human being, and if he were alive today he would have been just as likely as any of us to champion an ignoble cause with the best of intentions.

I find it amusing that the creation never tires of trying to define the Creator. The whole “every tongue will confess” comes to mind…and then “cast not pearls before swine”.

On what basis does the creation arrive at these conclusions? Certainly Jesus had much to say about Himself, didn’t his contrary claims to His being “only human” result in His crucifixion?

CZ52GUY on February 1, 2007 at 7:37 PM

I hear your libertarian vibes, but you’re still missing my point about the libertine left.

Let’s amplify your concerns and hypothesize that legislation handwritten by James Dobson himself has just been approved by the U.S. Congress and all porn, per Dr. Dobson’s definition, has been henceforth and forever banned. (I assume this is what you meant by “statist nonsense”.) How would that rank on a scale of national disasters?

If you feel this scenario is approximately as grave as we’ve-got-blood-enemies-doing-everything-in-their-power-to-take-as-many-of us-out-as-they-can, then you and the freaked-out left are kindred spirits on this one.

Which returns me to my disagreement with the other poster who felt that most people aren’t threatened by average evangelicals:

To [the Left] the problem is not with people who’ll cut your head off with pleasure, it’s with people who might cut off your pleasure

Progressives are so impassioned about protecting their porn rights, gay rights, pleasure-however-you-want-it rights that they regard the James Dobson’s of the world as a greater danger than people who actually would kill them for their pleasure choices. (Namely fundamentalist Jihadis). Alot of good their preferred method of gratification will do them when they’re dead!

My big point is: if they’d focus their rage on the real enemy in concert with the Righties, we’d all live to have the porn argument another day.

The Ritz on February 1, 2007 at 7:54 PM

On what basis does the creation arrive at these conclusions? Certainly Jesus had much to say about Himself, didn’t his contrary claims to His being “only human” result in His crucifixion?

Jesus was crucified because he claimed to be the creator, not the creation.

You are claiming Jesus is the creation. Jesus is claiming that he is the creator. If Jesus is the Creator as he claims, then he can very well define himself.

Lawrence on February 1, 2007 at 7:58 PM

You are claiming Jesus is the creation. Jesus is claiming that he is the creator. If Jesus is the Creator as he claims, then he can very well define himself.

I’d suggest that you read the quoted comment again.

I’ll rephrase, Jesus contradicted the notion of being merely a human being. He said clearly, “I and my Father are one”. It was introduced into evidence against Him. The Roman Governor found no fault with Him. He was unjustly crucified because of that claim. A fate He foretold and embraced, rebuking Peter to put away his sword.

I concur that He claimed Creator status.

I’m amused when His creations seek to define Him as merely a human being, a “good guy”, and latch onto the water into wine account as endorsing abuse of alchohol.

When His ministry is examined in it’s entirety and when His essence it’s examined in light of the entirety of scripture, you end up with a picture very different than the “pacifist Jesus”.

He claimed co-existence as God. God cannot tolerate sin, but seeks reconciliation with sinners. He offered Himself as the ultimate sacrifice for sin, to build the bridge between His creation and the Creator.

Consistently over time, the created reject the simple gift, claim a pay grade status in excess of the Creator, and reject His existence, or His status.

It’s the ultimate in arrogance, and the zeal with which some seek to blow up the bridge and the airs of “intellectual superiority” are laughable.

I make no claims that Christ was merely a creation. I dispute any assertions that He was anything less that what He claimed to be.

CZ52GUY on February 1, 2007 at 9:04 PM

Arma Virumque
By Ambrose Bierce

“Ours is a Christian army”; so he said
A regiment of bangomen who led.
“And ours a Christian navy,” added he
Who sailed a thunder-junk upon the sea.
Better they know than men unwarlike do
What is an army, and a navy too.
Pray God there may be sent them by-and-by
The knowledge what a Christian is, and why.
For somewhat lamely the conception runs
Of a brass-buttoned Jesus firing guns.

Nonfactor on February 1, 2007 at 9:28 PM

My big point is: if they’d focus their rage on the real enemy in concert with the Righties, we’d all live to have the porn argument another day.

Ritz… I agree with you that there is a tendency on the left to be overly-obsessed with attacking the religious beliefs of Republicans. About the best you can hope for with the far left is that they will only go so far as playing the moral relativism game, but all too often they go even further and outright apologize for (or deny the existence of) militant Islamists while attempting to make Christians (and Jews) out to be the greater threat.

That being said, I reject the false choice between a scenario where we are winning the war on terror but have James Dobson running every aspect of our personal lives, and a scenario where we are capitulating to our enemies while also having our economy destroyed by taxes and regulation.

I’m with you on this whole killing the terrorists thing, but could you please keep Dobson the hell away from me and my porn?

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 9:53 PM

I’d suggest that you read the quoted comment again.

CZ52GUY on February 1, 2007 at 9:04 PM

I did. I am in agreement with you. My previous response was a reflection of me mixing up two different conversation. My apologies.

Lawrence on February 2, 2007 at 11:56 AM

I’m with you on this whole killing the terrorists thing, but could you please keep Dobson the hell away from me and my porn?

Watcher on February 1, 2007 at 9:53 PM

I’m with you and Ritz, on getting together on this terrorist thing. I’ll leave you to thumb-wrestle the porn with Dobson later.

Lawrence on February 2, 2007 at 11:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 2