Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Obama Rips Bible, Praises Koran
Source:
Breitbart
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/national-s ... bama-rips-bible-praises-koran/
Published: Feb 7, 2015
Author: Ben Shapiro
Post Date: 2015-02-07 06:32:22 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 205785
Comments: 433
Unless we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. So it is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a simple tendency that can pervert and distort our faith. This is historically and philosophically illiterate. Historically speaking, the Crusades were a response to Islamic aggression in Europe and the Middle East; the Inquisition, as Jonah Goldberg points out while quoting historian Thomas Madden, director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University, was designed to regularize executions rather than leaving them to the will of the masses. Christians undoubtedly pursued horrible brutalities against people, including innocent Jews. However, as Goldberg points out, “Christianity, even in its most terrible days, even under the most corrupt popes, even during the most unjustifiable wars, was indisputably a force for the improvement of man.” Nowhere is that clearer than in Obama’s second example, slavery. Virtually all of the most ardent abolitionists were deeply religious Christians. Hundreds of thousands of American men marched to their deaths singing “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”: “In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea / With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me / As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free / While God is marching on.” That was 150 years ago. It’s not exactly the modern Islamic slogan, “Death to the Jews.” Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was, as his name suggests, a reverend. He quoted old black Christian spirituals and the Biblical story of the exodus from Egypt. Christians obliterated slavery. Christians obliterated Jim Crow. Modern slavery is largely perpetrated by Muslims. Modern Jim Crow is certainly perpetrated by Muslims under shariah law. There is a larger point, here, too: President Obama’s foolish argument suggests that because Christians were brutal a millennium ago, they should shut up about brutalities today. This is somewhat like saying that because someone’s great-great-grandfather held slaves in rural Alabama, that person should shut up about human trafficking in 2015. It’s asinine. But Obama has a history of insulting Christianity and Judaism while upholding Islam. In 2006, Obama bashed the Bible and religious Christians and Jews in particular: Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount – a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let’s read our bibles. Folks haven’t been reading their bibles. He then concluded that religious leaders should not speak out against publicly-funded contraception or gay marriage. We can get into President Obama’s pathetic Biblical commentary here – his interpretation of Leviticus on slavery is incorrect, Jews still avoid shellfish, the Talmud explains that no child has ever been stoned for rebelliousness, and the Sermon on the Mount is not a pacifist document. Obama’s not Biblically literate – he’s the same fellow who says, “I think the good book says don’t throw stones in glass houses.” He said in The Audacity of Hope that he would define Biblical values however he chose, stating that he is not willing “to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.” Both are, in fact, parts of the Bible. Citing the Sermon on the Mount to justify civil unions for homosexuals, as Obama has done, is not in fact Biblical. But more importantly, Obama’s scorn for the old-fashioned Bible is obvious. That became more obvious in 2008, when Obama told some of his buddies in San Francisco that unemployed idiots “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” The Obama administration has routinely attacked religious organizations and people who violate Obama’s personal political predilections. They’ve attacked all trappings of Christianity as well. Whether they’re using Obamacare to force religious individuals to pay for others’ contraception or toning down the National Day of Prayer instead of holding a public ceremony, whether they’re covering a monogram of Jesus at Georgetown University during a presidential speech or objecting to adding FDR’s D-Day prayer to the WWII memorial, the Obama administration clearly isn’t fond of Christianity. This contrasts strongly with President Obama’s romantic vision of Islam. He famously called the Muslim call to prayer “the sweetest sound I know.” He said in his first presidential interview, with Al-Arabiya, that his job was “to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.” Weeks later, he said in Turkey, “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.” A few months later, in a speech in Cairo to which he invited the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama said: I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. He added that Islam has a “proud tradition of tolerance,” explained, ‘Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace,” and said, “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” He said in his Ramadan message in 2009 that Islam has played a key “role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.” ISIS, Obama has said over and over again, is not Islamic. His administration maintains that America is not at war with radical Islam. He stated before the United Nations in 2012, just weeks after the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya at the hands of Muslim terrorists, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Hillary Clinton allegedly promised Charles Woods, father of one of the slain in Benghazi, that the administration would achieve the arrest of the YouTube filmmaker behind The Innocence of Muslims. The State Department issued taxpayer-funded commercials denouncing that YouTube video. President Obama variously called the video “crude and disgusting” and stated that “its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.” At the UN in 2014, Obama lauded a Muslim cleric who backs Hamas. And, of course, Obama uses Islamic theology to promote his vision of world peace: All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of the three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, peace be upon them, joined in prayer. All three religions do have access to holy sites now, in Jewish-run Jerusalem. They did not when Muslims ruled Jerusalem. But facts have no bearing in the fantasy world of the president. Perhaps one final contrast tells the tale. In 2012, according to the Washington Post. “U.S. troops tried to burn about 500 copies of the Koran as part of a badly bungled security sweep at an Afghan prison in February.” Two American soldiers were shot in the aftermath. This prompted President Obama to apologize profusely to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, writing him a letter stating, “We will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, including holding accountable those responsible.” Three years earlier, members of the military burned Bibles printed in Pashto and Dari. CNN reported that they had been discarded “amid concern they would be used to try to convert Afghans.” The Bibles were burned rather than sent back to their source organization because the military worried they might be re-sent to another outlet in Afghanistan. There was no apology to the church that printed the Bibles, or to Christians more broadly. Sure, radical Muslims around the world, supported by millions of their compatriots and friendly governments, are murdering innocents. But it’s Christian aggression that forces Muslims to burn other Muslims alive in Muslim countries.
On Thursday, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., President Obama blithely informed his audience that Christians ought not get on their “high horse” about the problem of radical Islam:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-204) not displayed.
.
.
.
#205. To: redleghunter (#195)
Where in the world did you find that piece of garbage?
So you're trying to say Carter never crawled in bed with the Muslims in Afghanistan? Maybe this was his way of making up for abandoning the Shah.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Man, that was one HELL of a windy post! I use the term "animism" because in real life, a number of more primative peoples around the world (and yes, some still exist) describe a "god" as imbued in the world around themselves. There is no real diametric opposing force of "good vs. "evil" other than what promotes one's life. There is no "god" as "god" is everything around us; however, there are great gods and those great gods are meaningful as they helped in some way promote the survival of someone. The boy rises up, confident that the "tree god" has saved his life. Of course, the boy reports the story to his family and the story is magnified as many times as the story is repeated and as often as the story is repeated, the story becomes reality. There is no correlation of an "intent" by any god to save the boy's life. Yet, there is a belief that the tree god (or simply "tree") has saved the boy's life. The idea of "luck" is all there is to say about belief systems. That is the reason for asking the questions earlier up the thread. People are prone to move towards a belief system they trust that will promote their own survival; if an earlier belief system is not supporting their survival they will change towards something else; it happens all throughout human history whether you want to agree or not. Belief systems are entirely based on "luck" to include modern religions.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Kinda hard to tell that was George from the back, anyway it was the same result covering up for the phony.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Oh, I guess that is just oky doky fine to some of the "True Believers". After all it is just some necessary steps towards "Fundamentally Transforming The United States".
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Linking cultists to Christians that's low even for you but not surprising, and Kony is a Muslim.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Pericles: "Absolutely!!! If Obama used the more accurate "Lord's Resistance Army" example to show how Christian terror groups fighting for religious reasons in the modern world are also doing ISIS level depravities (as are Buddhist and Hindu terror groups until recently in Sri Lanka - the Hindu Tamils invented suicide bombers and there were cases where Sikhs blew up airplanes as well) most Americans would have scratched their heads having never heard of them. So he has to reach back to the Crusades and the Jim Crow era. That Americans kind of remember he figures". Lusifer (Satan), was the most beautiful angel in heaven, God loved him very much, maybe you Obama lackies can explain away, make excuses for the evils he has spread all over the world too, since our Father cast him out of heaven. OOPS! My bad. You already are, and doing a bang up job of it too, shoveling and spreading Obama's piles of sugar coated shite. But in the end, all you're going to be holding onto is a 'pile of Obama's/satan's Shite!~ jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
I don't hardly know what to make of it, but I am rather surprised and puzzled at Gatlins sudden defense of Obama, and Muslims.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Why is that?
Just to be controversial, he likes the attention. (Along with a few others).
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
When I was a boy I dove headlong into a shallow lake and broke my neck and was paralyzed. God healed me and saved my life. Luck? No. Miracle. A belief system predicated on luck cannot explain true miracles.
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
Just did not figure him that way. For one thing, he has been so adamant about supporting the Republican nominee. Just seems strange to me. But then he is strange, LOL.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
LOL ! Yeah I think you are right. Most people that are big attention hogs do have mental issues, LOL!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I'm curious as to how long his list is? BTA his shrink is probably just as bad so he gets told "There's nothing wrong with you sir, have a nice day" "Please pay the lady at the counter on your way out".
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
What Republican nominee? I didn't know there was one as of yet.
Luck? No. Miracle. " I agree! Over the years, I have witnessed many events that some would say was just luck, or coincidence. I have seen events that the only possible explanation was that they were miracles. Non believers can think what they want. I believe you experienced a miracle.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
It is. Vicomte13's personal experiences are nothing more than some good "luck." There was no intervention by a "god" to suggest that such a magnificient and spectacular event like that happened is pure bull shit.
There is not one, yet. But in case you did not see it, and apparently you did not, Gatlin stated on another thread that he would support whom ever was the Republican nominee.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I don't give a shit about Gatlin's beloved political party or any of his choices for a President. He has only one projected image: more bull shit.
Believe what you want tater.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
By all rights, I should not be here today, but by the Will of God, and my will to live, I am! The same goes for our son, who should have died in 1997, or sitting as a human vegetable for the rest of his life, but he is not, he is whole again, and his doctors do no understand, nor did they believe in 'miracles' either. They are witnesses to miracles everyday, yet some still believe there is no God...go figure~ jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
The problem with your belief is that others have same or similar experiences and subscribe the nature of their recovery or later well-being with a "GOD." This belief system fosters incredable ramifications for soscieties as people tend to cling onto the right "belief." Within and without various societies, enmity occurs and ultimately war. War seems to be a method of describing all these miracles, doesn't it?
Explain yourself.
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Sure. Different societies have varying cultures for ensuring survival skills for the benefit of all within that same society. Just as social-economics, language, customs and traditions make up a culture so do local customs for various belief and systems of belief. Using religious models for Christianity is an interesting approach to social migration of belief systems. Also using Muslim models for belief systems are interesting to study. Both models have different cultures and beliefs but both cultures have statification about their respective belief systems. It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
Was not our Founding Father.
The only people who claim this are Fundie revisionists trying to grasp at straws. Even if true (I Don't read Arabic) it matters not at all because the Senate ratified the English language treaty. As for ideals - Jefferson flat out stated the ideal were not connected with Christianity when it came to English common law.
Carter started it but Reagan expanded it.
Kony is not a Muslim.
Pericles: Was not our Founding Father. Gary is a little daffy at times.
God healed me and saved my life. Luck? No. Miracle. A belief system predicated on luck cannot explain true miracles. I went to the grave of a saint and prayed for my back to heal - minor slipped disk kind of injury. Nothing happened. It was injured on t he trip to Europe. I endured for a month in pain. Went back to the States a doctor said it was pretty bad might need surgery and physical therapy. I was given some anti inflammatories and made an appointment for the following month. Within days of that my pain and injury went away. I went to the doctor he did an X-Ray and said in a paraphrase of his own words "It was miraculous and he had never seen similar injury heal up so fast on its own". So despite my doubts I was granted mercy and healed.
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt. Not buying the demented right wing paranoid stupidity on Obama does not mean we are defending Obama or like Obama in any way. I think Obama is a war criminal for example.
No problem at all. The issue is the rapid rise of Muslim populations in America within a short amount of time:
There is one variable: as I was on my back, paralyzed, my nose filling up with water, I asked: "Please". And then I was healed. I stood up. I told nobody. Then there were two separate occasions: little animals that were quite dead held in my hands. And I said "Father, you can do anything. Please." And he did. Both times. The animals came back to life. Luck? No miracle. Then there is the Shroud of Turin. The image on it is on both faces. It is formed by Maillard Reactions. It is not painted on. It is not of human artifice. We cannot control Maillard Reactions with precision today, let alone back then. It is a chaotic process. The image cannot exist, not with that exquisite level of detail, even of inorganic matters (the lettering of the coins is transmitted also). It can't exist, but it does. A tangible, physical miracle that has been scrutinized by forensic scientists. Luck cannot paint the Mona Lisa. Random processes cannot sculpt the Statue of Liberty. But human hands cannot today make the image on the Shroud, and never could: it exceeds our capacity to control nature. But there it is. A true miracle. And look at WHO it is. There is the face of the God who controls your "luck". Res ipsa loquitur.
Even within your belief system, there is a real god. Your god is the laws of nature themselves, including the law of entropy, of randomness, which gives rise to luck. That is your god. You believe that the laws of nature apply everywhere: they are omnipresent. You believe that the laws of physics apply to every speck of matter and energy: they are omnipotent. You believe that these laws of nature have always applied: they are eternal. So, you have an omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal god. The only difference between you and the Christians or Muslims or Jews is that you do not think that nature is omniscient. Your god is natural law, which is all powerful but mindless. And that may be so…except that it's obviously not COMPLETELY mindless: you and I are speaking intelligently, and we are in no way external to nature. Nature is thinking about itself in our very conversation, and in all other exchanges of information. So, you must admit the existence of intelligence, of "science" within this omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal nature governed by its laws. You simply doubt that there is ultimately an intelligence driving it and making natural law BE law. You would have to allow that intelligence - science, currently limited - could EVOLVE within your system to be omniscient, given enough time. There's nothing in the natural law that prohibits that. And if there is enough dark matter to close the circle and cause a gravitational Big Crunch to succeed the Big Bang, it is possible that sufficient time will have run for the evolved intelligence to imprint its opinions, its laws, upon the matter and energy such that they follow its directives in the Big Bang that succeeds the Big Crunch. And VOILA! Natural law, following a Hindu cycle of cycles. Now it's just a matter of finding enough gravity to close the system, and you not only know WHAT, but you know WHY and WHO.
They see miracles, but they refuse to accept them as miracles. Reminds me of the people who opposed Galileo on the thought that the world revolves about the Sun. One can look at Jupiter and see the moons and see how it happens, but still refuse to accept the obvious out of stubbornness and cant of mind. Likewise one can look at obvious miracles again and again, and simply refuse to accept that they are miracles, because if one accepts that, one will have to change one's mind about something on which one has closed it. The good news is that the doctors and everybody else eventually do get the answer.
Man, not only are you windy but also revealing in your lack of capability to discern relevent questioning: Yup, just as I suspected: Begging for a little "luck" directed towards a higher power because of your own lack of self-responsibility. Nice belief system, there. Of course. You were embarrassed about your own shenanigans towards your own self. Are you a vetenarian to determine with absolute accuracy your whimsical observations? From being a medical doctor, you are now a professional physicist with certifications to make your opinions worthy of merit. Very cool. As I said earlier, you have a belief system. Nothing more or less. There are no miracles unless you believe in them. Since you are no young lad, your beliefs are like the tooth-fairy, the Great Pumpkin, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Sometimes you win the luck of the draw, sometimes you don't.
We had best define the word miracle. A miracle is not luck. A miracle is something that cannot happen because it breaks the known laws of physics. Winning the lottery is really good luck. Spreading ones arms and flying, or walking on water, or rising from the dead - these things are not luck, because the probability of such things happening is zero: the laws of physics prevent them from happening at all. If they happen anyway, and people see it, there is one of two possible explanations: (1) fraud. Magicians apparently do impossible things all the time, but it's all mirrors and sleight of hand, or (2) True Miracle: the laws of physics have been nullified by an act of will. When bodies die, they rot. They might dry and mummify, but that, too is decay. So, if somebody dies, and does NOT rot or mummify or otherwise decay, does not enter rigor mortis - this would mean that the bacteria within the body and in the air also simply cease to function in contact with that body. And that is not possible by natural law. And yet there ARE people who died centuries ago but did not decay, or rot, or mummify. They are the Incorrupt, and they're all Catholic saints. If this were a RANDOM process, a matter of LUCK, they would not all be Catholic saints. Indeed, when the opened the graves of Paris and moved 16 million bodies into the Paris catacombs during the Revolutionary period, they would have found incorrupt bodies in some of those graves. Nope. All decayed. But there are the Incorrupt, undecided, dozens of them, all saints. To claim "luck" for that would be absurd. That's pretty selective, and persistent suspension of the laws of physics just for the most holy of ONE religion. The other claim would then be FRAUD. The problem with a fraud claim is that mankind doesn't have any means of making bodies not rot. We can embalm using modern techniques: the bodies still rot. We can mummify. The bodies then are mummies. The Incorrupt aren't frauds, because we can't MAKE frauds like that even if we want to. It vastly exceeds our technology. But there they are, accumulating in number over the ages. Dead people who look like they're sleeping. Some eventually decay. Eventually. Others don't. How? Miracle, obviously. No other explanation works. Luck doesn't. Fraud doesn't. What does that leave? Miracle. And look who the miracles all center around. Once again, we see the hand of God being exclusive in this form of "luck".
Served to you while it's still steaming for your instantaneous gratification...since it is obvious from your stalking that you cannot get enough. Bon Appetit!!!
Comments (245 - 433) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe only myth is the leftist, atheist secular myth that the founders were deists.
#206. To: Pericles (#94)
(Edited)
#207. To: Vicomte13 (#169)
An example is a young boy about to cross a stream and is sighted by an approaching bear. The bear exhibits aggressive behavior towards the boy and the boy cowers in fear not knowing how to handle his panic. Simultaneously, but nevertheless apparent, the weather has turned very nasty and ligthening has struck a nearby tree, shearing off a heavy limb scaring the bear away.
#208. To: Spin Meisters And Moderates (#0)
#209. To: Liberator (#126)
#210. To: Liberator (#137)
" Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration "
#211. To: Pericles (#89)
(Edited)
#212. To: Pericles, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete, all (#191)
gatlin: "Well Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons. But Obama has to dumb stuff down for Americans to get a point across and that is Obama's weakness because while Clinton was good at dumbing down his points so the yokels could get his message, Obama never understood Joe Blow Americans and how to talk to them".
#213. To: Murron (#212)
#214. To: Stoner (#213)
#215. To: Stoner (#213)
#216. To: Pridie.Nones (#207)
The idea of "luck" is all there is to say about belief systems.
#217. To: Vicomte13 (#216)
#218. To: Pridie.Nones (#214)
" Why is that? "
#219. To: CZ82 (#215)
" Just to be controversial, he likes the attention. (Along with a few others). "
#220. To: Stoner (#219)
#221. To: Stoner (#218)
Just did not figure him that way. For one thing, he has been so adamant about supporting the Republican nominee. Just seems strange to me. But then he is strange, LOL.
#222. To: Vicomte13, Pridie.Nones (#216)
" God healed me and saved my life.
#223. To: Stoner, Vicomte13 (#222)
I have witnessed many events that some would say was just luck, or coincidence.
#224. To: Pridie.Nones (#221)
" What Republican nominee? I didn't know there was one as of yet. "
#225. To: Stoner, Gatlin (#224)
#226. To: Pridie.Nones (#223)
" event like that happened is pure bull shit. "
#227. To: Pridie.Nones, Vicomte13 (#217)
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
#228. To: Murron (#227)
#229. To: Pridie.Nones (#228)
War seems to be a method of describing all these miracles, doesn't it?
#230. To: Murron (#229)
#231. To: GarySpFC (#201)
Sir William Blackstone
#232. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator (#202)
That would be article 11 of the treaty. Which some scholars note did not appear in the Arabic version of the treaty. Which is interesting.
#233. To: CZ82 (#206)
(Edited)
So you're trying to say Carter never crawled in bed with the Muslims in Afghanistan? Maybe this was his way of making up for abandoning the Shah.
#234. To: CZ82 (#211)
#235. To: Pericles, GarySpFC (#231)
GarySpFC: Sir William Blackstone
#236. To: Vicomte13, Pridie.Nones (#216)
When I was a boy I dove headlong into a shallow lake and broke my neck and was paralyzed.
#237. To: Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#212)
(Edited)
#238. To: Pericles (#237)
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt.
#239. To: Pridie.Nones (#217)
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
#240. To: Pridie.Nones (#230)
It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
#241. To: Murron (#227)
They are witnesses to miracles everyday, yet some still believe there is no God...go figure~ jmho
#242. To: Vicomte13 (#239)
There is one variable: as I was on my back, paralyzed, my nose filling up with water, I asked: "Please".
And then I was healed. I stood up. I told nobody.
Then there were two separate occasions: little animals that were quite dead held in my hands. And I said "Father, you can do anything. Please." And he did. Both times. The animals came back to life. Luck? No miracle.
Then there is the Shroud of Turin. The image on it is on both faces. It is formed by Maillard Reactions. It is not painted on. It is not of human artifice. We cannot control Maillard Reactions with precision today, let alone back then. It is a chaotic process.
The image cannot exist, not with that exquisite level of detail, even of inorganic matters (the lettering of the coins is transmitted also). It can't exist, but it does. A tangible, physical miracle that has been scrutinized by forensic scientists.
Luck cannot paint the Mona Lisa. Random processes cannot sculpt the Statue of Liberty. But human hands cannot today make the image on the Shroud, and never could: it exceeds our capacity to control nature. But there it is. A true miracle. And look at WHO it is. There is the face of the God who controls your "luck". Res ipsa loquitur.
#243. To: Pridie.Nones (#223)
Vicomte13's personal experiences are nothing more than some good "luck." There was no intervention by a "god" to suggest that such a magnificient and spectacular event like that happened is pure bull shit.
#244. To: Pridie.Nones (#225)
He has only one projected image: more bull shit.
.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]