(Another) Baptist Preacher Prays For Obama To Die
August 24th, 2009, 8:27 PM EDT
Pastor Steven L. Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona says he hates President Obama and is praying for him to die.
At 6:10 into the below video: “I hate Barack Obama.” God hates him, too, says this “man of God.” It’s reminiscent of pastor and former Southern Baptist Convention official Wiley Drake, who told me he practices imprecatory prayer also asking for the death of the president.
Oh, yeah, and Gays should get the death penalty.
His church should be called Faithless Word Baptist. Jesus taught his followers to love their enemies. When the disciples asked him if certain Jews were slaughtered by Pilate because they were bad people, Jesus told them no and that they should repent or likewise suffer the same fate. When the disciples asked him if a tower fell on certain people because they were sinners, he said no and they should repent or likewise suffer the same fate. Why do these so-called followers act opposite to the teachings of their “Lord?” Another antiChrist teaching the Bible IMO.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
“Another antiChrist teaching the Bible IMO.”
Hmmm. Am not educated enough on Christian philosophy as others, but wasnt the Antichrist meant to be a single Entity like God?Is it OK for Anti-Christ or Anti-God to have multiple forms,personalities but not God?
Hope this doesnt get into a theological discussion. Flap is around, I know I am treading on dangerous ground, but just thought I’ll ask a harmless question without getting into trouble.
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
From my readings of the New Testament, I recall antichrist being a term used exclusively in the epistles of John. He uses it as a way of describing people who are against Christ, whether they be in or out of the Church. To him, a pastor preaching such filth as this guy would qualify as an antichrist because he is preaching opposite to the teachings of Christ. John wrote there would be many antichrists and that they were already around at the time he wrote his epistles to the Church. AntiChrist is not used in Revelation, which adds to the confusion of the word.
Um Cara Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
From my readings of the New Testament, I recall antichrist being a term used exclusively in the epistles of John.
It is also mentioned in the song ‘Anarchy In The UK’ – but it may have been written later than the epistles of John, not sure.
It is definitely more fun to belt out Anarchy in the UK during a karaoke session than to belt out the epistles of John, however.
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
yeah you gotta love the sex pistols.
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
1 John chapter 2 refers to many antichrists present at the time while warning of one Antichrist that is coming. Paul in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 speaks more of the “one Antichrist” although Paul refers to him as the “Man of Sin.” In Revelation, you have the characters of the Dragon, the Beast, the False Prophet, and the Wh*re of Babylon. Some believe the antichrist is all of these characters or is acting in league with them.
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
K: “Is it OK for Anti-Christ or Anti-God to have multiple forms,personalities but not God?”
-I gave you some brief information that may help answer your question. That question is too big for lil ol me to answer for you.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
I have been reading, thanks crh3.
I now understand better the philosophical meaning of the concept of “Anti-Christ” better, thanks again.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Well, there is plenty of hateful stuff in the bible. It isn’t what get’s the press these days, but God did some pretty grim things in the bible, and Christians have done some pretty grim things in their righteousness over the past couple thousand years.
Wouldn’t call this guy mainstream, by any means, but I guess he is as ‘Right’ as any other interpreter of the bible. You can read pretty much anything into it you want (as witnessed by the fiftykazilion different Christian religions & their various interpretations).
Hard for me to work up much outrage against this goober, he is so ridiculous – though I do pity the people he has influence over.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
This pastor says God hates Obama too! I wonder when God shared his feelings for Obama to this clown? There is a funny saying that goes: “If you speak to God, you are spiritual. If God speaks to you, you are nuts.”
August 24th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
“God did some pretty grim things in the bible”
What makes those things “grim” and why is your or anyone’s idea of what is “grim” valid at all? What do you base it on? The “love thy neighbor” argument doesn’t fly…why should a particular person care about a fellow human being? On what absolute basis?
Isn’t nature pretty grim? Shouldn’t we base our actions on nature since religion, in your mind, ultimately has no absolute meaning?
“Jesus taught his followers to love their enemies.”
I agree. This guy is off the deep end. What I don’t get is why this fella means anything at all. Alan, are you trying to make a broad statement about Christian conservatives or imply this nuttery is commonplace or mainstream? It’s a stretch…
Perhaps you’ve had a little too much beach fun! :-P
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
I don’t think Alan is trying to make a broad statement about Christians whether they be conservative or liberal. Alan shares stories about the fringe elements whether they be political fringes or religious fringes. To me stuff like this he finds interesting and he may think we will find it interesting too. If you are a devout, faithful follower of Christ, then you should be offended by this pastor. After all, he is stealing your beliefs to preach hate.
Kregg Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
chr, have you noticed that Alan doesn’t post too much of the liberal fringe element stuff?
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Amazing how you produce stats for stuff other than your assertions, but not to support your assertions.
Kregg Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
huh?
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
I’ve asked you for statistical evidence for 2 topics today on which you made assertions:
1.Ross Perot voters would have voted Republican
2.The SAME people who asked to see Obama’s BC ALSO asked for McCain,Bush’s BC:I offered you a Deal on this, which you havent replied to.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
And not to forget:
The one “statistic” you actually produced today was actually a bunch of conjectures from Insurance Companies. None of which had the honesty to project business volumes,revenues with reduced margin offerings, in the scenario of a Public Insurance Option.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Kar said: I’ve asked you for statistical evidence for 2 topics today on which you made assertions:
Kar: 1.Ross Perot voters would have voted Republican
K: It is my opinion that Perot siphoned more Republican voters than Democrat voters. What ‘evidence’ would you find substantive enough to accept my opinion as valid?
Kar: 2.The SAME people who asked to see Obama’s BC ALSO asked for McCain,Bush’s BC:I offered you a Deal on this, which you havent replied to.
K: I have not said that the same people asked for others’ BCs. If I recall correctly, I said the same people that WOULD ask – meaning those interested in playing by the rules out of princple.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Kar said: The one “statistic” you actually produced today was actually a bunch of conjectures from Insurance Companies.
K: Please show me from your side of the aisle a ’statistic’ that is not also ‘conjecture’ since this whole UHC thing hasn’t yet happened. Come on, Kar, you’re smarter than this…
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:50 am
“I have not said that the same people asked for others’ BCs.”
I did NOT claim you said that. I challenged you to put the Birther’s to the test. I am not at all convinced that the same people WOULD ask. McCain WAS a candidate. Bush WAS a candidate. DID they ask him or not?
“Please show me from your side of the aisle a ’statistic’ that is not also ‘conjecture’ since this whole UHC thing hasn’t yet happened. ”
You presented a conjecture as the future, and I should prove the conjecture WONT be the future? Hmmm. I pass. I dont know the future. Neither do you. So, I also pass on your doomsday prediction.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
“Shouldn’t we base our actions on nature since religion, in your mind, ultimately has no absolute meaning?”
Flap: Where in Um Cara’s message did he talk about “religion having no meaning in HIS mind”? Are you so smart you know what’s in other people’s minds without them saying anything on the subject?
“What makes those things “grim” and why is your or anyone’s idea of what is “grim” valid at all? What do you base it on? The “love thy neighbor” argument doesn’t fly…why should a particular person care about a fellow human being? On what absolute basis?”
Who said anything about an absolute basis there? Is this a free country or what?If Um Cara finds something grim he cant express his feelings on it being grim?
“What I don’t get is why this fella means anything at all.”
Last time this “meaningless stuff” happened in a trend, a good Doctor got murdered in broad daylight.
Get it?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Where in Um Cara’s message did he talk about “religion having no meaning in HIS mind.”
First of all, I was generalizing about many liberals, not Um Cara specifically. Second of all, I specifically phrased it “ultimately” has no “absolute” meaning because if it’s not true, how can a religion ultimately have any meaning? Many if not most libs view religion as a throwback to less-evolved times in humankind’s development. So it has some societal/cultural significance but many libs believe, as Richard Dawkins says, that it’s essentially psychosis and has no place in a modern world.
“If Um Cara finds something grim he cant express his feelings on it being grim?”
He is welcome to express his feeling about it being grim, and I am free to say that “grim” really has no meaning without an absolute moral source. Hitler didn’t do anything wrong, and good deeds aren’t good at all but value-neutral.
“a good Doctor”
Uh, I assume you are talking about Tiller. Murder is wrong, his murder was wrong, which brings me to an important point: how does murdering late-term unborn children in the name of “reproductive rights” make you a good doctor? This wasn’t a physician in a hospital who was caring for peripartum women, it was a baby-murdering clinic.
If you knew anything about biology or human development you’d know that late-term abortion being essentially legal is depraved, anti-human rights, ignorant of science, and not PROGRESSIVE one bit.
OldLefty Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
“Many if not most libs view religion as a throwback to less-evolved times in humankind’s development.”
…………
Many “libs” who fought for civil rights and social justice were religious…many were nuns.
It was three nuns supporting the left who were gunned down by the right wing death squads in el Salvador.
It’s just that the right has given religion a very bad name since the “moral majority”
As for:
“if you knew anything about biology or human development….”
That is silly when so many doctors agree it is sometimes necessary.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
“If you knew anything about biology or human development you’d know that late-term abortion being essentially legal is depraved, anti-human rights, ignorant of science, and not PROGRESSIVE one bit.”
And if you have done any amount of statistical study on late term abortions, you wouldnt spew this nonsense.
Sarah Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Late-term abortions hardly ever happen. Even Fox News says so.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
“Late-term abortions hardly ever happen. Even Fox News says so.”
Its not merely that,Sarah.
Statistics show that most late term abortion seekers are those where the mother’s life is in danger.
Legislating to remove their RIGHT to defense of their own life is crazy. If we are to remove that,I DEMAND the removal of the right to gun ownership. The 2 go hand in hand. If a woman does NOT have a right to protect her own life through an abortion, NOBODY has a natural right to own a gun to protect himself.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
“statistical study”
Uh, I have studied it. So because only a small percentage are murdered that makes it okay? I constantly hear about banishing the death penalty because a few innocents may have been put to death.
If you’d done any statistical study about the death penalty, Karthik, you wouldn’t spew the nonsense of a few innocent people being killed! Geeze!
Furthermore, past the first trimester it’s really hard to make the case biologically that abortion should be legal. 90% of abortions, first trimester. That’s 10%, which is a helluva lot, after that. I’m even for keeping first trimester abortions legal.
“That is silly when so many doctors agree it is sometimes necessary.”
OB/Gyns are largely pro-choice. Why? They care about the mother…they only secondarily care about the baby. If she is uncomfortable, the disease process…the pregnancy…needs to go. Pregnancy is pathological, so eliminate the disease-causing element.
“Many “libs” who fought for civil rights and social justice were religious…many were nuns.”
I wonder if they believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God…sounds pretty much like a right-wing wacko, right? I would hardly call them liberal. Is it your opinion that only conservatives wish to help the homeless or care for people? It is liberals who wish the GOVERNMENT to mandate that.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Flap:
Give up your right to gun ownership.
I will give up the woman’s right to a late term abortion.
You dont give up the right to gun ownership,I see no reason for any woman to cede to your crazy megalomaniacal proposal.
EricG Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Flap – “Many if not most libs view religion as a throwback to less-evolved times in humankind’s development”
You really got to stop listening to a conservative to get your perspective on liberals. It’s just stupid. Would you ask a baseball fan about the latest football scores and stats? Well stop listening to anti-liberal pundits like O’Reilly or Hannity for your info on liberals.
Many feel this way but you neglect that many liberals are in fact very religious and like myself have a very different view on the Bible and reject this orthodoxy of burning witches and stoning our daughters that others cling to so violently.
Furthermore, there are many who subscribe to “New Age” ideology in which the lessons long forgotten of the past (shamanism, trance, naturalist, polytheism, sun-worship, etc.) are more true than the beliefs of Christianity or other major religions of today. They believe that the secrets of past cultures hold the answers to our world today and that defies your whole point completely and utterly.
What is accurate in your statement is that many liberals, myself included, see these fundamentalist views as destructive and bad for society but so did Jesus in his day and many, many others. It’s the natural progression of time and humanity and spirituality to reject the old laws of killing and spite. And if you really read the Bible you’ll see the line in the sand between what is destructive and what is not.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Flap:
I noticed you slunk away when I asked you to give up your right to gun ownership. What’s sauce for the goose literally isnt sauce for the gander eh?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
“I noticed you slunk away”
Wait a second, gun ownership is 1) a Constitutional right and 2) isn’t dismembering a young ‘un.
Two completely different issues, Karthik.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“Wait a second, gun ownership is 1) a Constitutional right and 2) isn’t dismembering a young ‘un.
Two completely different issues, Karthik.
”
I dont CARE what the Constitution says: We are discussing morality here.
If its “OK” for you to shoot yourself in self defense, it IS “OK” for a woman to abort her fetus late term to defend herself.
Only a true COWARD (like you) would apply moral principles to deny a woman that right by making late term abortions illegal, and then claim a right to self defense through gun ownership.
Show your courage, disown your right to gun ownership. Or show the humanity to grant the same right to self defense to a woman.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
“If its “OK” for you to shoot …
someone else….
in self defense….”
is how I meant to type(not shoot yourself).
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 26th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Flap:
Did you do the dodge again?
Its morally OK to be enabled to shoot someone else, to snuff out a life, just because it could be in self defense, but its not morally OK for a woman to be enabled to have a late term abortion,
even in case she’s just trying to defend her own life?
Constitution trumps morality in the issue of gun ownership? If that’s the case, just a FYI, the constitution DOES allow a woman to have a late term abortion.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Many if not most libs view religion as a throwback to less-evolved times in humankind’s development.
Almost every single elected representative in US congress, and almost as high a percentage in state governments are religious – What in the world are you talking about?
Hitler didn’t do anything wrong, and good deeds aren’t good at all but value-neutral.
Well, I disagree with you (as does pretty much every non sociopath on the planet, religious or not).
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
“are religious”
Only in a cultural sense. Do they truly believe what their religion teaches? How literal do they take it? They believe it because they were raised that way and believe it is a part of the culture. Do they believe it has absolute meaning or just throwaway cultural meaning?
“Well, I disagree with you (as does pretty much every non sociopath on the planet, religious or not).”
Again, I don’t know if you intend it but you constantly love to imply I’m a sociopath because I pose honest questions that you can’t answer other than essentially saying “you’re crazy.”
You can’t tell me WHY what he did was wrong. It doesn’t matter what I believe, I’m asking for the BASIS of it being wrong.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
“You can’t tell me WHY what he did was wrong. It doesn’t matter what I believe, I’m asking for the BASIS of it being wrong.”
Flap:
The BASIS is:
I wouldnt bring myself to do it in his shoes.
Therefore, I believe its “wrong”.
This basis is around ME. Each individual has his/her own basis.
If you’re looking to prove existence of moral absolutes, keep drilling away. Wont get you anywhere. I dont believe they exist, but I will concede the theoretical possibility.
Even with that concession, you arent smart enough(on evidence of your display so far) to make that proof.
Try to use your head, and you may make some progress on this proof. Rather than being a sheep.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Only in a cultural sense. Do they truly believe what their religion teaches? How literal do they take it? They believe it because they were raised that way and believe it is a part of the culture. Do they believe it has absolute meaning or just throwaway cultural meaning?
I don’t judge other people’s religious convictions – how could I? Do you hold similar assumptions of conservatives religious convictions?
I don’t really see what politics has to do with religion, personally.
Again, I don’t know if you intend it but you constantly love to imply I’m a sociopath because I pose honest questions that you can’t answer other than essentially saying “you’re crazy.”
I have answered many times why various horrible things are horrible – but you continue to be confused. I’m not ‘implying’ anything, I am genuinely concerned about your mental health.
I don’t mean that as an insult, though I am sure you will take it as one. But at least consider chatting with a psychologist about your confusion as to whether rape/murder/etc… are bad or not (throw Hitler in the mix as well).
You might be surprised to find that most people are not as conflicted on the issue as you.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Um, you misunderstood Flap.
He’s hung up on proving the following:
the definition of “Right/Wrong” is absolute across all human beings,regardless of their composition.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
“genuinely concerned about your mental health.”
At least consider biting me, Um Cara. Or jump up my a$$? It might do you some good.
Your basis for morality is weak to nonexistent…the “golden rule” argument, the “mommy told me” argument, the “society thinks it’s wrong” argument. Without God or a supernatural source there is no true basis for morality.
And who said I thought those horrible things were correct? My constant implication is that without an absolute moral source they are essentially value-neutral. There is an absolute moral source: God. Since you are apparently not smart enough to realize that’s my point, you result in name calling. I think you need to go get that GED. You might be surprised to find out that, with some hard work, you might be able to pull it off.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“Without God or a supernatural source there is no true basis for morality”
You’re wrong. Never mind whether you’re right or wrong, you have no business telling me or anyone homosexuality is wrong. Until you get civilized enough to make that transition,I recommend you please stay in La-La land where you are,currently.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“He’s hung up on proving the following:
the definition of “Right/Wrong” is absolute across all human beings,regardless of their composition.”
No, Karthik, I’m simply saying that morality has no real basis without a supernatural source. It might be Vishnu, Christ, whatever. I’m saying that without it being “out of this world” it has no real meaning or importance.
You said that the basis is YOU, and I agree that if there’s no supernatural source of morality that must be the basis. Existentialism I guess. But why is that valid? Maybe my basis is completely different than yours? That’s my point.
Um Cara just enjoys insulting me because he can’t give me a decent answer. At least you have the guts to say that it’s ONLY the personal super-ego that really defines morality. Of course I kind of “know” intuitively that certain things are wrong, but me thinking they are wrong does not MAKE them wrong.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
“you have no business telling me or anyone homosexuality is wrong.”
It’s a free country. My response is that you have no business telling me that believing it’s wrong is wrong! :)
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
“You said that the basis is YOU, and I agree that if there’s no supernatural source of morality that must be the basis. Existentialism I guess. But why is that valid?”
Why is that invalid?
I apologize for insulting you,by the way.I overstretched the boundaries. I am sensitive to the abortion issue.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
At least consider biting me, Um Cara. Or jump up my a$$? It might do you some good.
I’m not really into either, but I’m flattered by the offer!
Your basis for morality is weak to nonexistent…the “golden rule” argument, the “mommy told me” argument, the “society thinks it’s wrong” argument. Without God or a supernatural source there is no true basis for morality.
Society has always been the arbiter of morality, though it is often expressed through religion. Otherwise moral norms would have been constant without regards to temporal or geographical considerations.
So, yer wrong – dude (but I’m sure you know that).
Since you are apparently not smart enough to realize that’s my point, you result in name calling. I think you need to go get that GED. You might be surprised to find out that, with some hard work, you might be able to pull it off.
LOL – I may be a lot of things, but I ain’t stoopid –not that education has much to do with intelligence, but hey – I’ve got both (plus humility, as an added bonus).
Are you really so foolish as to consider education a sign of intelligence? Heck, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to learn you made it past the eighth grade, but that doesn’t change my opinion of your intelligence.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
“Society has always been the arbiter of morality”
So if the Nazis had taken over the world, their morality would have been okay with you? A society implements morals, and is the arbiter in that regard.
“plus humility, as an added bonus”
Did you just brag about your humility?
If you *honestly* think that I think that rape is okay or Hitler’s actions were okay then you probably need the psychologist! Of course, on message boards it’s not as easy to tell if a person is serious, or making a point, etc., so maybe you deserve a pass. But despite you calling me a sociopath, I do like you and I didn’t mean to insult you, and I did manage to squeak by the 8th grade.
OldLefty Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
“So if the Nazis had taken over the world, their morality would have been okay with you? A society implements morals, and is the arbiter in that regard”
…………..
The would have said it was in the name of religion, like everyone else.
“Imbued with the desire to secure for the German people the great religious, moral, and cultural values rooted in the two Christian Confessions, we have abolished the political organizations but strengthened the religious institutions.”
( Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Reichstag, Berlin, January 30, 1934. )
“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lords work.”
( Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered at Reichstag, Berlin, 1936. )
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
So if the Nazis had taken over the world, their morality would have been okay with you?
I hope not, but who knows what would have happened if I had been subjected to those teachings since birth.
Did you just brag about your humility?
Yep, I was poking fun at myself.
. But despite you calling me a sociopath
But I didn’t, reread the quote:
Well, I disagree with you (as does pretty much every non sociopath on the planet, religious or not).
I left the door open for it not being a sociopathic statement.
I do like you and I didn’t mean to insult you,
I like you too, I’m just funnin you, no offense meant.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
“It’s a free country. My response is that you have no business telling me that believing it’s wrong is wrong! :)”
Fair enough. Its your right to say what you want to say. Same as this pastor.
Then again, why were you calling him a nutter when you do the exact same thing on homosexuality?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
“you do the exact same thing on homosexuality”
No I don’t. I’ve said that I think practicing homosexuality is wrong. I have the right to believe that.
That doesn’t make me a hater, just like disagreeing with affirmative action doesn’t make me a racist.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
This came from Wikipedid
Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
Within Christian circles, the ethic of reciprocity is often called the “Golden Rule”. Christianity adopted the ethic from two edicts, found in Leviticus 19:18 (”Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself.”, see also Great Commandment) and Leviticus 19:34 (”But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God”). Crucially, Leviticus 19:34 universalizes the edict of Leviticus 19:18 from “one of your people” to all of humankind.
The Old Testament Deuterocanonical books of Tobit and Sirach accepted as part of the Scriptural canon by Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and the Non-Chalcedonian Churches also express the Silver Rule.
Tobit 4:15 “Do to no one what you yourself dislike.”
Sirach 31:15 “Recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind your own dislikes.”
Several passages in the New Testament quote Jesus of Nazareth espousing the ethic of reciprocity, including the following:
Matthew 7:12
12Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
Luke 6:31
31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
Luke 10:25-28
25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? 27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. 28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.
Jesus then proceeded to tell the parable of the Good Samaritan, indicating that “your neighbour” means a total stranger, or someone that happens to be nearby. Jesus’ teaching, however, goes beyond the negative formulation of not doing what one would not like done to themselves, to the positive formulation of actively doing good to another that, if the situations were reversed, one would desire that the other would do for them. This formulation, as indicated in the parable of the Good Samaritan, emphasises the needs for positive action that brings benefit to another, not simply restraining oneself from negative activities that hurt another.
vegasman Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
this man is not a man of God
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
a man or woman of God would know better than to perform imprecatory prayer. Seems to me if imprecatory prayer is your thing, you might want to practice black magic too.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Yah,
He may think he is a manm of God, but it sure doesn’t look like it from here.
EricG Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Ah, but you forget that these sick Baptists don’t follow the Bible. They follow the passages that let them pray for death and ignore all the rest. Because all they truly love is murder and death. All they worship is evil and pain. It’s a crying shame that they even dare to call themselves Christians, for they nothing of the sort.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Isn’t nature pretty grim? Shouldn’t we base our actions on nature since religion, in your mind, ultimately has no absolute meaning?
Huh? Take Christianity, as an example, ask fifty different people and you’ll find fifty different ‘absolute meanings’. I’d say ‘religion’ has a few billion absolute meanings, just depends on who you ask. Most religious folks are happy to fill you in on their particular ‘absolute meaning’.
I never said religion has no absolute meaning, don’t put words in my mouth. It has tons of absolute meanings.
What makes those things “grim” and why is your or anyone’s idea of what is “grim” valid at all? What do you base it on?
My mommy told me that killing all but a pair of each air breathing life form on the planet is bad, and I should never, never, never do it. But God killed off all but a pair of each type of air breathing critter – (as one example).
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
“I never said religion has no absolute meaning, don’t put words in my mouth. It has tons of absolute meanings.”
He wasnt putting words in your mouth,he was putting his foot in his own mouth.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
“fifty different ‘absolute meanings’”
Tons of absolute meanings = no meaning. You’re proving my point further. So you believe that there is no absolute meaning, so why don’t we abandon it in favor of “natural” morality. Rape is okay to spread your seed, killing is okay in order to achieve alpha male status, etc.
Just because people interpret something in a thousand different ways does not change that something.
“But God killed off all but a pair of each type of air breathing critter”
And killing is wrong because…? Genocide is wrong because…?
God (or whatever ultimate supernatural being or force you believe in) has to say something is *wrong* before it really is wrong. Otherwise it’s just an action. And God sets the rules, so if he performs an action you don’t have much basis to say that it’s wrong. I don’t know where that basis would come from other than that same supernatural source.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Tons of absolute meanings = no meaning.
I didn’t suggest that each individual held tons of absolute meanings, only that there are tons of religious individuals, each of whom have a slightly (or radically) different absolute meaning.
You’re proving my point further.
Well, I’m sure needed the help. I’m still not sure what your point is, but you’re welcome.
And killing is wrong because…? Genocide is wrong because…?
I already answered that, you’ll have to scroll up. But if you really don’t know the answers to those questions, seek psychological help.
I don’t know where that basis would come from other than that same supernatural source.
Then please don’t ever stop believing in one!
August 24th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Another evangelical “christian” spewing hatred and talking with God. Someone needs to hit him upside the head with a bible. A lot of peoples minds get twisted by following the myths written in the bible by a bunch of uneducated desert dwellers thousands of years ago.
crh3e Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
diddo goes for the quran too.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Give the Gita a try folks. Doesnt have THESE myths :-).
crh3e Reply:
August 26th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
no, the conversation between Krishna and Arjuna is a myth too Karth. I love the Gita though. It’s not like myths can’t teach you anything. I’ve learned a lot of lessons from myths.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
“A lot of peoples minds get twisted by following the myths written in the bible…”
I suspect it’s the reserve, that a lot of people with twisted minds look for something to follow, something “bigger than themselves,” to explain everything, and they obsess on a religion.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
See, RocKKKy believe religion is a delusion of people with twisted minds…as I was saying.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
I WISH I could avow that Arizona doesn’t have a bunch of right-wing crazies like this, but UNFORTUNATELY they are all too common here (outside the liberal strongholds of Tucson, Flagstaff, and Nogales).
August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Pastor Steve Anderson does not know god at all! All human beings who talk to and hear the real energy that is GOD can only connect with this energy by love.
Hate is evil and SATAN, “The Devil”, comes only from lowest energies and cannot hear, reach or speak to the high energy that is our creator, “GOD”.
Everyone reading my post please remember love is the only way to live a good life. This man has a very terrible future coming his way. WHAT GOES AROUND-COMES BACK AROUND. HIS HATRED IS GOING TO GET HIM!
August 24th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
I will say it once and I will say it a thousand times, I was not molested as a child, I did not come from a dysfunctional family,and i was not trying to rebel against society. I WAS NOT RECRUITED TO BE A HOMOSEXUAL.I had the hots for guys at a very early age, It was always there.Always.
ASS-TOR ANDERSON WOULD LOVE TO PUT THAT “LEVITICUS LUNACY” INTO OUR CONSTITUTION. Then those nutcase “Bible Bigots” could justify murdering gays and lesbiand the way the “Shites” are doing in Iraq right now.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Well,am off to bed.Gnight y’all.
Take care.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
If I have to say it once, or a thousand times..I WAS NOT MOLESTED AS A CHILD, I DID NOT COME FROM A DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY, AND I WAS NOT TRYING TO REBEL AGAINST SOCIETY. I WAS NEVER RECRUITED TO BE A HOMOSEXUAL. I WAS ALWAYS THIS WAY. ALWAYS!
Kregg Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Hey Rob, serious question: At what age did you realize you were gay?
Gay Rob Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
THE SAME TIME YOU REALIZED YOU WERE STRAIGHT!
Kregg Reply:
August 26th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Age 6?
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:40 am
‘llo Rob.
Welcome to the forum.
I understand your background, but in future, you can make your point without the Caps: IMHO They dont aid in making the target audience of your message see the point.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
“I WAS ALWAYS THIS WAY”
If Karthik has a drive to kill conservatives, is it okay for him to do that because he was “always that way” or “born that way”?
Outside of religion there’s nothing “wrong” with homosexuality (other than genes are not passed on). In fact, there’s nothing “wrong” with a LOT of actions outside of religion.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
“If Karthik has a drive to kill conservatives, is it okay for him to do that because he was “always that way” or “born that way”?”
I am a fiscal conservative, Flap:I do not have a suicidal drive.
And I might have a drive to kill idiots, and it so happens many idiots calling themselves conservatives try to advertise their idiocy,including you.
Regardless of the qualification of the nature of my hypothetical drive,whether “its okay” is a very very individual decision,NOTHING to do with religion. Someone who’s been stung by these idiots,say the good Dr Tiller’s wife, might find it quite okay.So, you’re wrong again.
Now, back to the topic:
“Outside of religion there’s nothing “wrong” with homosexuality (other than genes are not passed on).”
Do I need to point out again that you are wrong again? There is NOTHING wrong with homosexuality.Period. And if you disagree, Sir, behind the cloak of ANY book or philosophy,I have only a mixture of scorn and pity for you…help me here,people, is the word I am looking for ‘Derision’?
EricG Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Flap – “If Karthik has a drive to kill conservatives, is it okay for him to do that because he was “always that way” or “born that way”?”
I can’t believe you made that argument.
Are you fricken sick in the head or what!?!
Being driven to be sexual with another person of the same gender and being driven to make you eat that keyboard and maybe your teeth too while we are at it are two different things. Of course with the disrespectful and disgusting way how conservatives conduct themselves it’s no shock that people get pissed off enough to entertain such thoughts…
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Fair point,Eric. The mere comparison is pathetic. Dont know why I indulged him with a response on this topic.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
“I can’t believe you made that argument.”
Why? It’s not politically correct, so it’s automatically illogical?
They’re both actions…is an action correct because I have an inborn motivation to perform it?
“disrespectful and disgusting way”
“Are you fricken sick in the head or what!?!”
Very respectful, EricG! I’ve been called a sociopath by Um Cara and sick in the head by you because I make some reasonable points that you apparently cannot answer. So the ad hominem swords come out.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
I will never understand christians. They are never happy unless they are killing, condemning or simply hating other people. Those seem to be the only aims of this sick religion.
Daddio Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:21 am
You will never understand Christians Jake because what you just described are not Christians. Those you described are sick. They use their church to preach false teachings.
We don’t condone killing, condemning or hating other people.
There are many verses in the Bible that warn against such people. They are called false prophets, or false teachers. We must watch out for them and not follow them.
Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.
You can find many examples of this warning throughout the New Testament.
OldLefty Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:32 am
Then the REAL Christians should do what the REAL Muslims should do and denounce those who use their church to preach false teachings.
Both seem to be afraid of the worst among them.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I aint a scardy cat, I tell my peeps.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:35 am
You will never understand Christians Jake because what you just described are not Christians. Those you described are sick. They use their church to preach false teachings.
Depends on which Christians you ask – the Bible is so open ended, one can (and people do) read pretty much anything into it, otherwise why would there be fiftykazilian and one different Christian churches?
I certainly believe you, Willy, don’t hold such ugly beliefs – but I’m equally sure you don’t get to claim who are the ‘real’ Christians.
Daddio Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:46 am
A Christian is a follower of Christ Jesus. Jesus taught his diciples and all those who would listen the importance of love for oneself and for his fellow man. And love first and foremost for Him and His Father who is God in Heaven.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:49 am
Ohhh…and somewhere along the line things become fuzzy because “love for fellow man” is a loaded or unqualified definition?
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:53 am
A Christian is a follower of Christ Jesus. Jesus taught his diciples and all those who would listen the importance of love for oneself and for his fellow man. And love first and foremost for Him and His Father who is God in Heaven.
A reasonably nice part of it to pick out, and not too far from what I was raised with… Mainstream protestant type stuff.
But there certainly isn’t unanimity, you should check out some of this feller’s recordings, for example – he has a wholly different bible based Christian belief system than you.
OldLefty Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Once I read that a group of Quakers were calling themselves “Followers of Christ”, because the felt the word “Christian” had become so tainted.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 9:03 am
“because the felt the word “Christian” had become so tainted.”
Fundamentally because of a diseased message that believing in Christ saves you, never mind what you actually do…karma concept in some form is essential to the moral fulcrum of any religion that seeks to have inbuilt checks to address man’s tendency to maximize utility at the cost of morality as defined by the religion…
Who wouldnt pray for the death of another person, and then pray to Jesus asking for forgiveness, if the teachings that they received said “that’s all it takes”…man’s ability to get delusional with the brain God’s given him is truly mind boggling.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Kar said: Fundamentally because of a diseased message that believing in Christ saves you, never mind what you actually do…
K: Kar, the message can certainly get twisted but the biblical use of the term ‘believe’ means far more than intellectual assent to who Christ is. The concept of ‘believing’ encompasses a life-changing love for Christ that brings the believer into a daily walk where love for Christ is played out in love for man.
K; This pastor is a nut.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:37 am
“Kar, the message can certainly get twisted but the biblical use of the term ‘believe’ means far more than intellectual assent to who Christ is”
Agree: wasnt trying to denigrate the message on account of the fact that the message can, and does get twisted.
“K; This pastor is a nut.”
Agree.
TDro319 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
“A Christian is a follower of Christ Jesus. Jesus taught his diciples and all those who would listen the importance of love for oneself and for his fellow man.”
This coming from a guy who opposes a socialized health care plan that would benefit others less fortunate than himself.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Strange Tdro,
I find this distressing as well.
Most of the conservative ‘Christians’ are anti-UHC, pro-war, pro-torture, pro-death penalty, anti-bailout, anti-stimulus, anti-diplomacy………..geez, all that love and compassion.
What Christ are they following ?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
“The concept of ‘believing’ encompasses a life-changing love for Christ that brings the believer into a daily walk”
See, Kregg, I would possibly debate you on that point to an extent. I would clearly separate justification versus sanctification.
Justification (as a believer) is simple. Sanctification (as a disciple), the “building up treasures” is not so simple.
How can you proselytize to people who are hardcore sinners? That they have to thoroughly cleanse their lives before God accepts them? That is the antithesis of the gospel message in my mind. The whole concept of Christian salvation is absolute and completely unmerited forgiveness. Once we are having to cleanse our lives to “help” save us, it isn’t unmerited but merited.
I might have misinterpreted what you were saying…so apologies if I did…but whatever the case, I strongly adhere to “Christ alone, faith alone, grace alone.” Works should come as a result but since works come in so many different flavors I don’t think it is possible to necessarily tell externally who is regenerate and who is not.
And I am NOT saying Christians should not have a daily walk with Christ…they certainly should…but other than accepting the gift there is nothing else you do. You can even be a liberal and support abortion and all the other lib stuff! :)
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Hey Flap,
I agree with much of your post.
Grace, the unmerited, unearned favor of God. Free to all, no preconditions, just believe by faith.
I cannot know another man’s heart. A person’s relationship to God is between the person and God.
My walk finds me wanting less and less for myself and more for others. Freely give, because I have received so much,….. so much.
Love and concern for others and their well being is coming to the forefront.
The seeking of truth and reconciliation are right there as well.
They will know we are Christians by our love.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Adding to what you said, AJ, believing that YOU are contributing or helping your salvation leads to a “I’m better than you” type of attitude.
No, I’m a Christian because I know I’m imperfect and I want others to know that I haven’t done a damn thing to “merit” my salvation.
But, yes, every Christian SHOULD try to be Christlike.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Agreed,
100 % brother.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
K prv: “The concept of ‘believing’ encompasses a life-changing love for Christ that brings the believer into a daily walk”
FLap said: See, Kregg, I would possibly debate you on that point to an extent. I would clearly separate justification versus sanctification.
K: Flap, if you accept that Christ both the author AND finisher of your faith (heb 12:2) it is easy to see that the gift given you at your deciding to continue in Christ (sanctification) is the exact same gift that is given you when you first decide to follow Christ (justification. Both are gifts. Neither are earned. Both are accessed in the same way – surrender of the will or power of choice to God’s way of doing things.
F: Justification (as a believer) is simple. Sanctification (as a disciple), the “building up treasures” is not so simple.
K: Justification is considered a ‘legal’ term in that it describes a change in status from sinner to believer or from unsaved to saved. Sanctification – or ’saintification’ is a description of the natural changes in life and lifestyle that result from a growing love relationship with the author of our faith – Christ. The ‘finishing’ or ‘perfecting’ of our relationship is just as much a gift as is the offer of the gift of salvation in the first place. AS we choose to CONTINUE to allow Christ to rule or control our lives we WILL become changed (’by beholding we become changed…”).
F: How can you proselytize to people who are hardcore sinners?
K: I would not say you CAN ‘proselytize’ to hardcore sinners. You can only evangelize them, which is to tell your own personal story of Christ’s love for you and what He’s done in your life. (1 John 1:3,4) “We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4We write this to make our[a] joy complete.”
F: That they have to thoroughly cleanse their lives before God accepts them?
K: No. Can’t be done. Neither can one sanctify oneself.
F: That is the antithesis of the gospel message in my mind. The whole concept of Christian salvation is absolute and completely unmerited forgiveness. Once we are having to cleanse our lives to “help” save us, it isn’t unmerited but merited.
K: You are correct, we cannot cleanse ourselves and people who try will fail miserably. But we CAN and MUST choose to allow Christ to cleanse us. We do this by daily submitting ourselves mentally to Christ and His promise to make us reflecters of Him.
F: I might have misinterpreted what you were saying…so apologies if I did…but whatever the case, I strongly adhere to “Christ alone, faith alone, grace alone.” Works should come as a result but since works come in so many different flavors I don’t think it is possible to necessarily tell externally who is regenerate and who is not.
K: “Works should come…” I’d say that ‘works’ can ONLY come from the individual changed by Christ. And, you are correct, salvation is between Christ and the individual and not judgeable by anyone else.
F: And I am NOT saying Christians should not have a daily walk with Christ…they certainly should…but other than accepting the gift there is nothing else you do. You can even be a liberal and support abortion and all the other lib stuff! :)
K: I’d heard liberalism was the unpardonable sin! Seriously, a christian surrenders to become justified. He continues to surrender to become sanctified. AS he surrenders to become sanctified Christ is willing and ready to change the christian’s attitudes toward his fellow man.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
K prv: “The concept of ‘believing’ encompasses a life-changing love for Christ that brings the believer into a daily walk”
Flap said: See, Kregg, I would possibly debate you on that point to an extent. I would clearly separate justification versus sanctification.
K: Flap, the TERM “believing” in the original Greek encompasses much more than simple intellectual assent that Christ is who He says He is…
Kregg Reply:
August 26th, 2009 at 8:45 am
K prv: I would not say you CAN ‘proselytize’ to hardcore sinners. You can only evangelize them, which is to tell your own personal story of Christ’s love for you and what He’s done in your life.
K: I realize ‘proselytize’ and ‘evangelize’ seem very close in meaning but I see in ‘evangelize’ the concept of an exuberant and spontaneous voicing of what Christ has done in the believer’s life whereas I see in ‘proselytize’ a more studied and focused attempt at actually bringing about conversion. Small difference but – according to my interpretation of the two words – we do too much proselytizing and not enough evangelizing.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Jake said: I will never understand christians. They are never happy unless they are killing, condemning or simply hating other people. Those seem to be the only aims of this sick religion.
K: I guess if you ignore all of the hospitals, orphanages, schools, medical outreach missions, foodbanks, etc. built and financed and operated by christians you could delude yourself on their ‘aims’ but only if that is your intent in the first place.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
I really like the term ‘Follower of Christ’.
“Whenever possible, live at peace with all men.”
“Blessed are the peacemakers……”
The good Samaritan, is actually talking about enemies. The Jews and Samaritans hated each other, the Jew that Christ asked “who then was the neighbor?”, would not even say the word ‘Samaritan’.
“If your enemy is thirsty, give him something to drink, if he is hungry give him something to eat.”
“You cannot serve God and money……”
Christ extolled the Jews to pay their taxes and abide by the law of the land, at a time when the Romans were occupying and subjugating the Israelites.
He never advocated revolt.
Which gun do you suppose Christ would have favored, the Glock or the Smith and Wesson ? I say, ‘God and guns’ is an oxymoron.
The ones that He spent time talking about as wrong were those that played the religious act the best, the religious leaders of the day.
“There will be many who say, Lord,Lord, and I’ll say, depart from me, I never knew you.”
It is hard to take such blatant misrepresentations of Christ’s words, his stated intent.
This has and will be done, over and over, ad naseum until time ceases to exist, the hijacking of Christ for selfish / evil purposes.
EricG Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
“Those seem to be the only aims of this sick religion.”
Not true, Jake.
But in this case these people are misguided beyond belief and frankly are practicing demonic worship and calling it holy.
August 25th, 2009 at 8:04 am
I will not debate this topic because it leads into the degradation of Christ Jesus by those who do not know Him or understand Him.
Good day. I must go anyway and get some sleep.
Have a good and blessed day everyone.
Go in peace and in God’s love.
Um Cara Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 9:17 am
I will not debate this topic because it leads into the degradation of Christ Jesus by those who do not know Him or understand Him.
Hey, you are the one running around saying which folks are ‘Christian’ or not, based on your specific interpretation of the bible.
Maybe you are the one ‘degrading’ Christ Jesus. Maybe Jesus really does hate Obama and gay people, who are YOU to say whether He does or does not? This dude’s proof comes from the bible, after all.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
“Maybe Jesus really does hate Obama and gay people”
I think whether it’s this guy, or that idiot “God hates fags” dude, that is another idea that is the exact opposite of what the Bible says. God loves all.
Christians don’t have to agree with (or even tolerate) certain actions, but hating isn’t Christlike.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Agreed Flap,
You and I have much more in common than I previously suspected.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
“I think whether it’s this guy, or that idiot “God hates fags” dude, that is another idea that is the exact opposite of what the Bible says. God loves all.”
Flap, you ought to get treated for foot-in-the-mouth disease. 2nd time in 2 days you expose symptoms.
Being gay is wrong(from your previous post), and yet god loves all…just to complete the loop, does god hate sin? God made people gay(that’s the meaning of ‘being gay’), so did he/she mess up in his/her divine design?And if god messed up in god’s design, why is ‘being gay’ wrong, since it was not in the individual’s control, but god’s?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
God hates sin. A sin is not a person.
Flap’s sins are no better or no worse than Karthik’s or Gay Rob’s.
God loves Flap, God loves Karthik, and God loves Gay Rob, in no particular order.
You’re essentially asking me a question about evil. Why did God create beings that could do stuff that is opposite to the nature of God? I always say “free will,” Karthik. That’s probably not a sufficient answer and the truth is, I don’t completely know. But “free will” allows us to reject God or embrace God. It allows us to do good things and do bad things.
Some people think it’s a misinterpretation of the Bible to say that homosexual behavior is wrong. Fair enough. I tend to believe that practicing it is wrong, but a lot of things that I do are wrong. No better or no worse.
EricG Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Here’s a tip:
If you have nothing to say and won’t engage on an issue then don’t say anything at all.
If you won’t dig into the heart of this matter then just don’t bring it up.
Because it serves no purpose to address the issue like you just did and pretend you can walk away from it before anyone can say anything…
August 25th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Imprecatory:
transitive verb : to invoke evil on : CURSE
intransitive verb : to utter curses
So imprecatory prayer is praying for evil or praying that someone be cursed by evil.
Now that’s christian!
“…you could delude yourself on their ‘aims’ but only if that is your intent in the first place.”
The core value of the repugnican party.
August 25th, 2009 at 10:35 am
I have a question, maybe it is stupid, BUT aren’t Preacher, Pastor, Priest, Rabbi’s and Ministers all suppose to be non-polical?
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:02 am
The books(Bible,Quran,whatever) mandate “preaching the message” and getting people to consensually believe the message, but a little help/pressure for the above from Uncle Sam/Gov is always handy.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:08 am
CW, all are to ‘be about their father’s business’ and quite often that involves politics. As an example, I’m sure there were many clergy involved in denouncing slavery – would you have them remain ‘non-political’?
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:33 am
I have to go back into my Sunday School teachings; Wasn’t it Moses and the Israelites that was held in bondage by the Egyptians. Wasn’t God against his children? I would assume most clergy was against the slavery of the blacks and what they were taught in the Seminaries? I cannot answer whether or not that was non-politcal. This is why I asked this question, are they not suppose to Non-political, which is why the Separation between Church and State. I also know that they are Tax-exempt.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:40 am
CW, you’re talking apples and oranges. There is no restriction against clergy acting politically. There ARE restrictions against non-profit religious institutions acting politically. The restrictions have to do with tax status and are not biblically based at all.
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Thanks, this all I asked thanks Kregg.
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Personally, I”m not much for clergy politicizing. I’d prefer they remain in their pulpit convincing their congregations to go about the Lord’s work and let individual members decide to be – or not be – political.
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I once again thank you for your honesty. I was always taught that the Government stays out of the Church affairs and the Church stays out of Government affairs. That is why we have on a coin “In God We Trust?”
Oh well, this man should be defrocked and arrested. Wanting the President of the United States dead. Whether you like him or not, Barack Obama is the President, that is threatening the President, whether it was or wasn’t. And is defrocked the right term?
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
CW said: Oh well, this man should be defrocked and arrested. Wanting the President of the United States dead. Whether you like him or not, Barack Obama is the President, that is threatening the President, whether it was or wasn’t. And is defrocked the right term?
K: Its not a crime to ‘wish’ the president dead. And, ‘wishing’ is not ‘threatening’.
K: The dictionary defines ‘frock’ as:
Frock |fräk|
noun
1 a woman’s or girl’s dress.
2 a loose outer garment, in particular
• a long gown with flowing sleeves worn by monks, priests, or clergy.
• historical a field laborer’s smock.
• short for frock coat .
3 [in sing. ] archaic priestly office : such words as these cost the preacher his frock.
verb [ trans. ]
provide with or dress in a frock : [as adj., in combination ] a black-frocked Englishman.
• archaic invest (someone) with priestly office. Compare with defrock .
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French froc, of Germanic origin. The sense [priest's or monk's gown] is preserved in defrock.
K: So, yes, it would be a description of taking away a clergyman’s office by ‘defrocking’…
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Kregg, thanks about the defrocking, but what about the man who held a sign at a rally, where the President was and saying “Kill the President.” The man was chased and arrested BY the Secret Sevice. These men and women protecting Obama is earning every penny of taxpayers money.
To be honest, remember when that couple wore an anti-Bush shirts and they were told to turn them inside out, they refused and they were arrested?
Kregg Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Kregg, thanks about the defrocking, but what about the man who held a sign at a rally, where the President was and saying “Kill the President.” The man was chased and arrested BY the Secret Sevice. These men and women protecting Obama is earning every penny of taxpayers money.
K: Don’t you think simply ‘wishing’ a president dead and publicly advocating his killing are two different things? In a free-speaking society there are many nuances we must observe between desire and action. Sometimes the difference seems blurry but its the price we pay for our freedoms.
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Touche’ Kregg.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
“These men and women protecting Obama is earning every penny of taxpayers money.”
Hate to mention it Celtic, but there’s a grammatical error. Shouldnt it be ARE earning rather than IS earning?
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Yeah, sorry. LOL!
August 25th, 2009 at 10:55 am
When will Sean Hannity invite that guy to his tv
show to prove his own sentiment?
August 25th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
What about the W Virginia couple who were arrested at a Bush ralley for wearing anti Bush T shirts with the words;”the words “Love America, Hate Bush” on the back and Jeff Rank’s had “Regime change starts at home” on the back?
I think the preacher can say anything he wants, as these people had the right to wear any shirt they wanted….
What I find very sad is that this intense hatred and suggestions of violence or death for Obama, comes from or is not denounced by what is supposed to be leadership.
Sarah Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
It’s the Age of Rage, where the squeaky, irritating wheel gets the most grease, money and prestige.
How else can Paris Hilton be explained?
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
“How else can Paris Hilton be explained?”
Ha, nice one. She’s one of those people who are “famous for being famous.” Aggravating.
Protesters on both sides go too far, but the anti-war protesters should have done what they did if they felt the need to redress. They probably went too far at times, and some of these town hall people probably go too far at times as well.
But nothing wrong with vehement disagreement and arguing. It really is our political system, and both sides are at “fault” even though I think it’s healthy.
“intense hatred and suggestions of violence or death for Obama”
Intense hatred or dislike is kind of subjective and expressed in different ways. Outright suggestions of violence or death for ANY President should be addressed by the Secret Service and we should double or triple the agents if necessary.
Sarah Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
I pretty much agree with all that you’re saying, Flap.
I can’t figure out whether you’re against both sides “going too far,” or whether you’re in favor of “vehement disagreement and arguing.”
I think I’d be OK with the nasty-toned, mean-spirited complaining (although I’m NEVER OK with purposeful lies and intentional misinformation), as long as they were using equally intense tones to put forward constructive, realistic, practical IDEAS and SOLUTIONS to the problems they’re complaining about.
flap Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Sarah, I guess what I’m saying is that arguing and vehement disagreeing is not necessarily too far. Actually creating a disruption to the point where a meeting cannot take place is too far.
In other words, we hope that ideas and solutions are injected into the debate, but mudslinging is kinda the nature of politics and though it’s inefficient it is what it is.
And I don’t expect the American people as a whole to come up with solutions…I would hope that Republicans will offer modifications and solutions to whatever the Democrats eventually put forth.
I think everyone is for more affordable, more accessible healthcare. I think everyone is for safety nets of some sort. But I guess it’s a matter of degree and at what cost.
Sarah Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
The upshot: All people will eventually die.
I would just rather not spend thousands of dollars every year on insurance that may or may not be there when I need it, on healthcare that may or may not make me wish I was dead after I get the bill.
August 25th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Listening to this clown’s rant above, I’m reminded of Matthew Shepherd, the boy who was beaten, tied to a fence and left to die.
This pastor harbors great hatred for homosexuals, and he has no problem expressing that hatred. I believe in Karma – what goes around, comes around.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Yep,
or, you reap what you sow.
Same deal.
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
and in the wiccan/pagan religion… “What you throw out into the Karma, you get back threefold. I do believe in any religion there’s a belief like this. You reap what you sow, what goes around, comes around. Lets put it this way, I hate to be this man, everything will be coming back on him like a magnet.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Yes Celtic,
I actually pity this guy, and people like him.
How are you ? How is your boy doing ?
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Nevermind Celtic,
I got the update from another post, will continue in my thoughts and prayers.
Celticwitch Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Thanks AJ, Its just the wait. One minute he’s fine, the next his head feels like it will explode. He is sun sensitive. We are hoping no operation, but if the swellen dosn’t goes down, well they will have to operate.
karthiks030977 Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Hate to be pedantic here, but the full definition of the concept of Karma is, you sow what you gotto sow, and you reap what you sow(sooner or later).
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Close enough for me.
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Karma is shorter, and I use the term far more frequently.
August 25th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
“NOT GOD BLESS AMERICA”…NO NO NO NO….”GOD DAMN AMEREICA”!
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Once again, out of context.
Atomaino,
replace the word racism in the rev. Wright’s sermon from which this quote is pulled, with the word abortion.
Sound like any preachers you’ve heard ?
Maybe every sunday ?
August 25th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Some people serve the evil and hatred inside themselves instead of serving God. Not much you can do about it.
atomaino Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
TOO TRUE
average james Reply:
August 25th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Yah Eric,
You’re right.
August 25th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
he said God hates Obama ???? did God send him an E-Mail ?? or a burnning bush ???? and why would God only talk to a Republican…IS GOD telling him anything??
I know God and he is my father-mr.Steven L. Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona your no man of GOD or pastor and God don’t talk to you and you don’t speak for my father God Almighty ;
(says he hates President Obama and is praying for him to die.) better read your bible again !!!!
it may be you who pass away or eaten by worms ;
I say see he gets a public health care option- strong on mental health….
August 25th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Saying goodnight.. see ya..
August 25th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
So the angry, gun-toting protesters turning out for presidential events: One of the most prominent of these, an African-American man named “Chris”, is in fact a member of Pastor Anderson’s congregation.
“Chris” was on Alex Jones’ “Prison Planet” radio show late last week and discussed how “my pastor was beaten up” at a Border Patrol checkpoint.
Jones took note of the Anderson connection:
Jones: Now I’m starting to get a clearer picture. You go to Pastor Anderson’s church, I see.
Chris: Yeah, yes I do. Proudly. I think it’s the best church in the world.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:11 am
[...] sermon entitled “Why I Hate Barack Obama” is delivered by so rabidly that one can imagine the spittle flying from the lips [...]
August 29th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
[...] Pastor Steven Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona is a bible-quoting hellfire and damnation sort of guy. He calls for the execution of gays in numerous sermons … [...]
August 31st, 2009 at 7:51 am