PDA

View Full Version : Democrats, the Godless Party, Who'da Thunk?



llotter
09-05-2012, 06:19 PM
The story about the Democrat Platform missing 'God' is practically old news but today it was put back in. I have little doubt that it was The Moron who wanted God removed in the first place, along with the statement that the Party accepts Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. A little backlash and the Party caved and restores those positions as in previous platforms in a voice vote where the Nays were louder than the Yeas but the Yeas were declared the winner by the necessary two-thirds.

cushioncrawler
09-05-2012, 07:11 PM
Jerusalem ( /dʒəˈruːsələm/; Hebrew: יְרוּשָׁלַיִם‎‎ Yerushaláyim ; Arabic: القُدس‎ al-Quds and/or أورشليم Ûrshalîm)[i] is the capital of Israel, though not internationally recognized as such,[ii] and one of the oldest cities in the world.[1] It is located in the Judean Mountains, between the Mediterranean Sea and the northern edge of the Dead Sea. If the area and population of East Jerusalem is included, it is Israel's largest city in both population and area,[2][3] with a population of 801,000 residents[4] over an area of 125.1 km2 (48.3 sq mi).[5][6][iii] Jerusalem is also a holy city to the three major Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

During its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times.[7] The oldest part of the city was settled in the 4th millennium BCE.[1] In 1538, walls were built around Jerusalem under Suleiman the Magnificent. Today those walls define the Old City, which has been traditionally divided into four quarters—known since the early 19th century as the Armenian, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim Quarters.[8] The Old City became a World Heritage site in 1981, and is on the List of World Heritage in Danger.[9] Modern Jerusalem has grown far beyond its boundaries.

Jerusalem has been the holiest city in Jewish tradition since, according to the Hebrew Bible, King David of Israel first established it as the capital of the united Kingdom of Israel in c. 1000 BCE, and his son, King Solomon, commissioned the building of the First Temple in the city.[10] In Christian tradition, Jerusalem has been a holy city since, according to the New Testament, Jesus was crucified there, possibly in c. 33 CE,[11][12][13] and 300 years later Saint Helena identified the pilgrimage sites of Jesus' life. In Sunni Islam, Jerusalem is the third-holiest city.[14][15] In Islamic tradition in 610 CE it became the first Qibla, the focal point for Muslim prayer (Salah),[16] and Muhammad made his Night Journey there ten years later.[17][18] As a result, despite having an area of only 0.9 square kilometres (0.35 sq mi),[19] the Old City is home to many sites of tremendous religious importance, among them the Temple Mount, the Western Wall, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque.

Today, the status of Jerusalem remains one of the core issues in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, West Jerusalem was among the areas captured and later annexed by Israel while East Jerusalem, including the Old City, was captured by Jordan. Israel captured East Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequently annexed it. Currently, Israel's Basic Law refers to Jerusalem as the country's "undivided capital". The international community has rejected the latter annexation as illegal and treats East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory held by Israel under military occupation.[20][21][22][23] The international community does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and the city hosts no foreign embassies.

According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 208,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem, which is sought by the Palestinian Authority as a future capital of a future Palestinian state.[24][25][26]

All branches of the Israeli government are located in Jerusalem, including the Knesset (Israel's parliament), the residences of the Prime Minister and President, and the Supreme Court. Jerusalem is home to the Hebrew University and to the Israel Museum with its Shrine of the Book. The Jerusalem Biblical Zoo has ranked consistently as Israel's top tourist attraction for Israelis.[27][28]

cushioncrawler
09-05-2012, 07:27 PM
On the subjekt of religion.
Jesus never set foot in jerusalem. Nor did muhammad. Nor moses. And david might hav existed, mightbe not.
The only prophet that for sure lived and breathed and preached in jerusalem woz of course william irvine, who died in jerusalem in 1947.
mac.

hondo
09-05-2012, 07:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The story about the Democrat Platform missing 'God' is practically old news but today it was put back in. I have little doubt that it was The Moron who wanted God removed in the first place, along with the statement that the Party accepts Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. A little backlash and the Party caved and restores those positions as in previous platforms in a voice vote where the Nays were louder than the Yeas but the Yeas were declared the winner by the necessary two-thirds. </div></div>

WADR, lotter, it is ironic that the "Godless" Dems on here find your praise of a murderer abhorrent.

( Sorry for the big word, Ed) /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

hondo
09-05-2012, 07:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On the subjekt of religion.
Jesus never set foot in jerusalem. Nor did muhammad. Nor moses. And david might hav existed, mightbe not.
The only prophet that for sure lived and breathed and preached in jerusalem woz of course william irvine, who died in jerusalem in 1947.
mac. </div></div>


Mark 11:

Now when they drew near Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives, He sent two of His disciples; and He said to them, “Go into the village opposite you; and as soon as you have entered it you will find a colt tied, on which no one has sat. Loose it and bring it. And if anyone says to you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord has need of it,’ and immediately he will send it here.” So they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door outside on the street, and they loosed it. But some of those who stood there said to them, “What are you doing, loosing the colt?” And they spoke to them just as Jesus had commanded. So they let them go.



a. Now when they drew near to Jerusalem: If all we had were the gospel of Mark, we might think this is Jesus’ first journey to Jerusalem. But the gospel of John tells us of many previous trips. Jesus, like any devout Jewish man, went to Jerusalem for as many of the major feasts as He possibly could.

cushioncrawler
09-05-2012, 08:12 PM
Yes, but Jesus Christ never existed.
There were lots of Jesus' and lots of Christs -- ie lots of messiahs and lots of crucifixions -- and some of the bible stuff would hav its roots in thems, and some iz based on older lore.

I of course allways knew that some experts beleeved that Jesus Christ woz a myth, but i thort that that woz a bit extreme, but now that i hav read the arguements i agree that Jesus Christ woz a myth.

Muhammad iz the only prophet that existed, but he never vizited jerusalem. But william irvine did, and did.
mac.

cushioncrawler
09-05-2012, 08:19 PM
Did i ever mention the Ozzy expert that reckoned that Jesus Christ woz a myth, but reckoned that the disciples were not a myth. Just joking.

The jesus christ bits of the bible mention nazareth (ie the nazarene) -- never existed. Mention cana -- never existed. But dont mention the capital of galilee -- ever existed.
mac.

eg8r
09-05-2012, 09:10 PM
From what I read he is the one that asked for it to be added back in. This however a great example of the left back pedaling. However if we use the lefties logic the removal of God is Obama's fault. They tried to tell us that anything in the RNC platform that was added or removed was 100% Romney's call so I am sure they have the balls to admit the removal of God was also Obama's call.

eg8r

eg8r
09-05-2012, 09:12 PM
No problem. I am patient while you look them up and then type them in. So tell us, how long did it take you to look it up in the dictionary?

eg8r

DiabloViejo
09-06-2012, 12:27 AM
More GOP Teabilly bullsh*t. (You are such a gullible fool!)

You guys must be running scared and are desperately grasping at straws to have to stoop to such a low level. But hey, what else could be expected from a party that is firmly in the grip of the Teatard's uneducated, gullible, hypocritical, scared, narrow minded, bigoted minions?

You might as well face it..you are a hypocrite of the very first order. How do you reconcile your supposed Christian beliefs with your hero worship of a domestic terrorist and murderer? Yeah you're a real 'Christian' alright, aren't you?

From the Democrat platform's section on faith:

Faith has always been a central part of the American story, and it has been a driving force of progress and justice throughout our history. We know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. Faithbased organizations will always be critical allies in meeting the challenges that face our nation and our world – from domestic and global poverty, to climate change and human trafficking. People of faith and religious organizations do amazing work in communities across this country and the world, and we believe in lifting up and valuing that good work, and finding ways to support it where possible. We believe in constitutionally sound, evidence-based partnerships with faith-based and other non-profit organizations to serve those in need and advance our shared interests. There is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution, and a full commitment to both principles is essential for the continued flourishing of both faith and country.

The first day of the Convention started and ended with a prayer. Nate Davis gave a speech that began “I’m not here tonight as a Democrat or a Republican, but as a man of Christian faith,”. Major speakers (Julián Castro, Lily Ledbetter, and Deval Patrick) referenced God in their speeches. It’s simply obvious to anyone that there is no hostility to God at the DNC.

llotter
09-06-2012, 05:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From what I read he is the one that asked for it to be added back in. This however a great example of the left back pedaling. However if we use the lefties logic the removal of God is Obama's fault. They tried to tell us that anything in the RNC platform that was added or removed was 100% Romney's call so I am sure they have the balls to admit the removal of God was also Obama's call.

eg8r </div></div>

I was just recalling the speech The Moron made at Georgetown University early in his occupation of the WH where he requested that that the Christian symbols be covered during his appearance. What a strange request for a 'devout Christian' to make. That the word came from him to change the platform back, was mere recognition of a significant backlash.

Gayle in MD
09-06-2012, 06:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We believe in constitutionally sound, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>evidence-based </span>partnerships with faith-based and other <span style='font-size: 14pt'>non-profit </span>organizations </div></div>

That sentence makes the whole thing irrelevant. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

hondo
09-06-2012, 06:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, but Jesus Christ never existed.
There were lots of Jesus' and lots of Christs -- ie lots of messiahs and lots of crucifixions -- and some of the bible stuff would hav its roots in thems, and some iz based on older lore.

I of course allways knew that some experts beleeved that Jesus Christ woz a myth, but i thort that that woz a bit extreme, but now that i hav read the arguements i agree that Jesus Christ woz a myth.

Muhammad iz the only prophet that existed, but he never vizited jerusalem. But william irvine did, and did.
mac. </div></div>

I have read the arguments also and I disagree.

Qtec
09-06-2012, 06:30 AM
Yep, Obama wanted it back in. The problem was it was linked with the 'Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel' pledge, which a lot of Dems don't agree with, as was shown in the video.

Q

llotter
09-06-2012, 06:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DiabloViejo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More GOP Teabilly bullsh*t. (You are such a gullible fool!)

You guys must be running scared and are desperately grasping at straws to have to stoop to such a low level. But hey, what else could be expected from a party that is firmly in the grip of the Teatard's uneducated, gullible, hypocritical, scared, narrow minded, bigoted minions?

You might as well face it..you are a hypocrite of the very first order. How do you reconcile your supposed Christian beliefs with your hero worship of a domestic terrorist and murderer? Yeah you're a real 'Christian' alright, aren't you?

From the Democrat platform's section on faith:

Faith has always been a central part of the American story, and it has been a driving force of progress and justice throughout our history. We know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. Faithbased organizations will always be critical allies in meeting the challenges that face our nation and our world – from domestic and global poverty, to climate change and human trafficking. People of faith and religious organizations do amazing work in communities across this country and the world, and we believe in lifting up and valuing that good work, and finding ways to support it where possible. We believe in constitutionally sound, evidence-based partnerships with faith-based and other non-profit organizations to serve those in need and advance our shared interests. There is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution, and a full commitment to both principles is essential for the continued flourishing of both faith and country.

The first day of the Convention started and ended with a prayer. Nate Davis gave a speech that began “I’m not here tonight as a Democrat or a Republican, but as a man of Christian faith,”. Major speakers (Julián Castro, Lily Ledbetter, and Deval Patrick) referenced God in their speeches. It’s simply obvious to anyone that there is no hostility to God at the DNC. </div></div>

Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do. Just as all regret that someone didn't have a gun in Aurora, CO movie theater recently so they could stop the killer from killing still more, all should feel shame to allow abortion doctors to continue on their murderous way without consequence. Because abortion is 'legal' is not moral justification any more that it was as Germany soldiers led innocents to the gas chambers. The abortion 'laws' are nothing more that politics masquerading as law and that you can't understand that give evidence to the insight that if God is dead, anything is permissible.

'Faith' can just as well mean faith in government. In fact that is exactly what the Democrats intend it to mean. You cannot have doubt that a tactic of the Left is to reinterpret language to better fit there unpopular goals. Replacing 'God' with 'Government' is the goal much like Orwell's 'slavery is freedom'.

Soflasnapper
09-06-2012, 11:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From what I read he is the one that asked for it to be added back in. This however a great example of the left back pedaling. However if we use the lefties logic the removal of God is Obama's fault. They tried to tell us that anything in the RNC platform that was added or removed was 100% Romney's call so I am sure they have the balls to admit the removal of God was also Obama's call.

eg8r </div></div>

What's with you and balls, recently? Less vulgar than your prior harping on describing fellow posters as schmucks, but still unnecessary.

But let's play along. Credit (well, blame) for taking it out, or credit for putting it back in?

I'm guessing you'd go with blame, and refuse the credit. How close am I?

eg8r
09-06-2012, 02:16 PM
What I am going with is for you to use the same logic as you did when blaming Romney. You have already proven to have different rules based the (D) so this is just another example.

eg8r

eg8r
09-06-2012, 02:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yep, Obama wanted it back in.</div></div>And using the logic you guys used on Romney and the RNC Obama also wanted it OUT.

eg8r

hondo
09-06-2012, 04:00 PM
Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder.

LWW
09-06-2012, 06:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him.

eg8r
09-06-2012, 07:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do.</div></div>So you are an advocate of killing James Kopp?

eg8r

hondo
09-06-2012, 07:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him. </div></div>

Why don't you ask him? How often do you pray?

hondo
09-06-2012, 07:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do.</div></div>So you are an advocate of killing James Kopp?

eg8r </div></div>

Excellent post! Cuts right through the BS.

Soflasnapper
09-06-2012, 08:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him. </div></div>

Based on scriptures, he'd make the Democratic Party the rock on which he built his church. Isn't that right?

Soflasnapper
09-06-2012, 08:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do.</div></div>So you are an advocate of killing James Kopp?

eg8r </div></div>

Great question, btw. Kudos to you.

hondo
09-06-2012, 08:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him. </div></div>

Based on scriptures, he'd make the Democratic Party the rock on which he built his church. Isn't that right? </div></div>

Yes. That is correct.

hondo
09-06-2012, 08:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do.</div></div>So you are an advocate of killing James Kopp?

eg8r </div></div>

Great question, btw. Kudos to you. </div></div>

Post of the week, IMO.

llotter
09-06-2012, 09:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killing a killer before he kills again is a moral and right thing to do.</div></div>So you are an advocate of killing James Kopp?

eg8r </div></div>

No, Kopp is a killed of a killer of innocent babies therefore, Kopp is justified. The abortionist in Kansas, George Tiller, that was killed a year or two ago had preformed 60,000 abortions, many late term. He was in fat city till he wasn't.

eg8r
09-06-2012, 09:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, Kopp is a killed of a killer of innocent babies therefore, Kopp is justified.</div></div>So since he is a killer then you are an advocate of killing him. Or you aren't a moral man, at least by the way you define morality.

eg8r

LWW
09-07-2012, 03:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I am going with is for you to use the same logic as you did when blaming Romney. You have already proven to have different rules based the (D) so this is just another example.

eg8r </div></div>

What is this madness of which you speak?

LWW
09-07-2012, 03:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him. </div></div>

Based on scriptures, he'd make the Democratic Party the rock on which he built his church. Isn't that right? </div></div>

Yes. That is correct. </div></div>

That would require a scriptural reference to be correct ... perhaps you would point me to it idolater?

hondo
09-07-2012, 06:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, Kopp is a killed of a killer of innocent babies therefore, Kopp is justified.</div></div>So since he is a killer then you are an advocate of killing him. Or you aren't a moral man, at least by the way you define morality.

eg8r </div></div>

I see it no other way either, Ed.

hondo
09-07-2012, 06:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't help wondering how Orwell would feel about you quoting him as justification for murder. </div></div>Can't help wondering how Jesus would feel about you supporting party which three times denied him. </div></div>

Based on scriptures, he'd make the Democratic Party the rock on which he built his church. Isn't that right? </div></div>

Yes. That is correct. </div></div>

That would require a scriptural reference to be correct ... perhaps you would point me to it idolater? </div></div>

Hmmm. I believe johnny used those exact same words. Well, you are both Christians. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

eg8r
09-07-2012, 08:07 AM
No I don't think you are right. I did not know the answer at first and I won't know the definitive answer until I get to heaven so I decided to look online. I found this page, "Is Peter the rock on which the Church is built?", (http://carm.org/is-peter-the-rock) and it has some pretty interesting information. In English what you say could be interpreted as correct. When you read it in the native language, Greek, what you say is more incorrect than correct. Meaning Jesus did not say Peter was the rock but rather himself or Christ is the rock.

"And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it," (Matt. 16:18).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are problems with the Roman Catholic position. First of all, when we look at the Greek of Matthew 16:18 we see something that is not obvious in the English. "...you are Peter (πέτρος, petros) and upon this rock (πέτρα, petra) I will build My church..." In Greek nouns have gender. It is similar to the English words actor and actress. The first is masculine and the second is feminine. Likewise, the Greek word "petros" is masculine; "petra" is feminine. Peter, the man, is appropriately referred to as Petros. But Jesus said that the rock he would build his church on was not the masculine "petros" but the feminine "petra." Let me illustrate by using the words "actor" and "actress:" "You are the actor and with this actress I will make my movie." Do see that the gender influences how a sentence is understood? Jesus was not saying that the church will be built upon Peter, but upon something else. What, then, does petra, the feminine noun, refer to?

The feminine "petra" occurs four times in the Greek New Testament:
•Matt. 16:18, "And I also say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."
•Matt. 27:60, "and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock (petra); and he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and went away."
•1 Cor. 10:4, "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ."
•1 Pet. 2:8, speaking of Jesus says that he is "A stone of stumbling and a rock (petra) of offense"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed."

We can clearly see that in the three other uses of the Greek word petra (nominative singular; "petras" in 1 Cor. 10:4 is genitive singular) we find it referred to as a large immovable mass of rock in which a tomb is carved out (Matt. 27:60) and in reference to Christ (1 Cor. 10:4; 1 Pet. 2:8). <u> Note that Peter himself in the last verse referred to petra as being Jesus!</u> If Peter uses the word as a reference to Jesus, then shouldn't we?
</div></div>The Bible does lend itself to interpretation and we all find out in the end. What isn't up for interpretation is whether Peter denied Jesus and yes he did that. According the Dem logic put on Romney, this would also mean that Obama at one time accepted Jesus, denied Jesus (the DNC), then changed his mind and once again accepted Jesus. That similarity is undeniable.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3:11).
</div></div>Seems pretty clear to me but again we will have to wait and see.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
09-07-2012, 09:02 AM
That's an interesting, although entirely too literal, take on this.

And of course, the entire exercise is a bit strained when the subject is the DNC's alleged 3-time denial of GOD, not Jesus (which you misstate toward the end). But they did not 'deny' God at all. The original charge is absurd (and not one made by you).

A party platform is not a religious tract. Typically, a political party mentions God or religion in their party platform as a form of pandering only. As you may have read, the Democratic Party platform in past recent election years has mentioned God at about twice the rate as the Republican Party platform, a factoid from which I think nothing can be inferred at all. It's a bogus metric wrongly applied to what is and should be a secular document.

I am not surprised to find religious commentary on scriptures that disagrees with the take of the HRCC, as all Christians who are not Catholic have to explain why they are in schism with the original mother church. I also am not surprised to see Paul writing that Peter is not all that (the Corinthians citation), as he was a power rival of Peter's authority in my view. I am also aware that the Bible contradicts itself, so that if it does so here as well, that hardly shakes my opinion.

What's funny is that I associate the strained and complicated (i.e., possibly untrue) explanations with the Jesuits from the Holy Roman Catholic Church, who even gave rise the term Jesuitical, meaning an elaborate and strained, contrary to common sense, explanation. Here, instead, the opponents of the Catholic Church's interpretation upon which they have founded their claim to sole legitimacy as the church Jesus built are the ones contradicting the plain language (albeit in English, but allegedly of divine inspiration in the translation commissioned by King James), to offer such a lengthy apologetic, explaining why what is clearly said doesn't mean that at all.

All of which is to say a Biblical reference joke has simply been taken way too far.

eg8r
09-07-2012, 11:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As you may have read, the Democratic Party platform in past recent election years has mentioned God at about twice the rate as the Republican Party platform</div></div>I guess this is the pandering you were referring to. Either way seems odd that Obama chooses this time around to completely throw God out only to ask for it to be added again later.

eg8r

hondo
09-07-2012, 03:05 PM
So you are equating Obama to Peter, the Rock of the Christian Church? Yet you speak vilely of Obama, Gayle, Fats and Me.

Eg, the new type of Christian.

Of the self -proclaimed Christians on here, lotter, Larry/johnny,
you, and me, the only one who shows any love for his fellow man is me. Just saying.

DiabloViejo
09-07-2012, 05:25 PM
I think it's not fair that neither party gave any props to The Flying Spaghetti Monster (may his noodley appendages be upon you) or to Raptor Jesus. Heathens, all of them!

http://www.venganza.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/FSM_and_Raptor_Jesus.jpg

http://slices-of-life.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/raptorjesus0.gif
<span style='font-size: 8pt'>The son of Raptor-God. Born from the virgin Raptor-Mary. He got nailed to a wooden stake, he then ate the stake escaping an untimely death. He led the Raptor-Revaluation, Pwnd Hitler, invented Nuclear physics, destroyed the dinosaurs for they would not follow his ways, AND took on: Freddie Kruger, Michael Myers, Jason, Alien, and Predator... He won. Eventually... Raptor-Jesus went extinct for our sins!</span>

Soflasnapper
09-07-2012, 05:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As you may have read, the Democratic Party platform in past recent election years has mentioned God at about twice the rate as the Republican Party platform</div></div>I guess this is the pandering you were referring to. Either way seems odd that Obama chooses this time around to completely throw God out only to ask for it to be added again later.

eg8r </div></div>

So why would stopping the pandering be bad then?

Except that it provides a cheap attack line.

While it's ultimately the responsibility of the candidate what goes in the platform, that doesn't mean they directly did or didn't put something in or take it out on the first go-round.

I doubt Obama took this out, using that analysis. If you know of any reporting showing his interference or direction of the writing of the platform language, please share it. He might very well have thought it would be the same as 2008, when God was mentioned in the platform. This time, he did have it put back in, apparently, so we can only be sure of one of the two things you claim happened.

Given the paragraph on religious faith, which is highlighted, whether or not God as a name was in there, He was in there already before his name was added back in.

cushioncrawler
09-07-2012, 05:40 PM
http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a432/cushioncrawler/graph.jpg

eg8r
09-07-2012, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why would stopping the pandering be bad then?</div></div>Because the voters still want it, so Obama bowed down and gave it to them.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While it's ultimately the responsibility of the candidate what goes in the platform, that doesn't mean they directly did or didn't put something in or take it out on the first go-round.</div></div>Sure is funny how lefty logic changes when we are talking about a (D).

eg8r

DiabloViejo
09-08-2012, 01:35 AM
It's extremely important for political parties to include references to the Christian "god", because everyone should embrace and respect the Christian belief that "a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree." The same "god" who then killed himself on a cross in order to spare his own creation from his own wrath. I mean it just makes so much sense, doesn't it? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

You want god, fine, go to your favorite church, mosque, temple, coven, or whatever.. and worship him, her, it, whatever, in whatever way it pleases you until you turn blue in the face. I don't care! Just keep your god out of politics, government, public schools, and other people's faces. See, it's like this...religion is like a penis, I have one and you have one just don't try and shove it down my throat 'cause then we are going to have a serious problem.

Qtec
09-08-2012, 02:01 AM
That vote should never have been passed, but it was an unfair vote.
You might want the God insertion but also be opposed to the Jerusalem clause...as they should be because its an impediment to peace in the ME.

Q.

cushioncrawler
09-08-2012, 02:05 AM
Luvv it. I copyd that stuff into my jesus file in my atheist folder.
mac.

Qtec
09-08-2012, 02:07 AM
watch it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVA2Tr_GTlk&NR=1&feature=endscreen)

Mitt try s to tell the truth and he fails.

"Don't be argumentative with the candidate, its out a line"

"I don't have lobbyists at my elbow".


Yes he does!


Liar.








Q.............LOL

Gayle in MD
09-08-2012, 06:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DiabloViejo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's extremely important for political parties to include references to the Christian "god", because everyone should embrace and respect the Christian belief that "a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree." The same "god" who then killed himself on a cross in order to spare his own creation from his own wrath. I mean it just makes so much sense, doesn't it? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

You want god, fine, go to your favorite church, mosque, temple, coven, or whatever.. and worship him, her, it, whatever, in whatever way it pleases you until you turn blue in the face. I don't care! Just keep your god out of politics, government, public schools, and other people's faces. See, it's like this...religion is like a penis, I have one and you have one just don't try and shove it down my throat 'cause then we are going to have a serious problem.
</div></div>

I love it!

I am going to memorize that entire post, my friend. A good short spew of reality, that woud be nice to have in ones memorty bank, for those offensive, pesky reformers who "Think" they have a clue, and that they are going to save you from your ignorant self..

LWW
09-08-2012, 07:37 AM
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a247/lww/ONLINE%20ARGUMENTS/394471_181126135345649_2115374719_n-500x333.jpg

eg8r
09-08-2012, 03:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You might want the God insertion but also be opposed to the Jerusalem clause...as they should be because its an impediment to peace in the ME.</div></div>Only an idiot thinks what the DNC says about Jerusalem will drive peace in the ME. Only an idiot with their head in the sand and absolute refusal to look through the past century plus of history to know that there will NEVER be any peace in the ME.

eg8r

Qtec
09-10-2012, 06:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Only an idiot thinks what the DNC says about Jerusalem will drive peace in the ME. </div></div>

I said it was an impediment to peace. The Palestinians also regard Jerusalem as their capital.

Q