TheologyWeb Campus

Obama snubbed or did he forget the hand sanitizer?

OneFollowingHim — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:03:32 GMT

He criticized President Bush for offering hand sanitizer at the White House. Remember that? This is too much though. See the expression on Obama's face as he is rejected over and over and over. All I can say is wow. This ain't Chicago baby.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/fo...sage838555/pg1

Congressman Brady asks Geithner to step down

seanD — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:47:16 GMT

I guess the mutiny begins in the House.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agf_FlmN-DM

And this is not just echoed from the republican front, but from democrats like Peter Defazio.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11...y5709415.shtml

Obama's approval falls below 50%

themuzicman — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:37:39 GMT

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/11/gallup-obama-approval-rating-d.html?wprss=44

President Obama's job approval rating has dropped below 50 percent for the first time since he assumed office, according to Gallup's tracking poll.

...

"Of the post-World War II presidents, Obama now is the fourth fastest to drop below the majority approval level," Jones writes.

People are catching on...

"Blue Dog" Democrats are Moderates in the consistent sense

Sheepdog — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:15:29 GMT

Quote:

What does it take to get a wavering senator to vote for health care reform? Here’s a case study. On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.” The section spends two pages defining which “states” would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that “during the preceding 7 fiscal years” have been declared a “major disaster area.” I am told the section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill. In other words, the bill spends two pages describing would could be written with a single world: Louisiana. (This may also help explain why the bill is long.) Senator Harry Reid, who drafted the bill, cannot pass it without the support of Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu. How much does it cost? According to the Congressional Budget Office: $100 million.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/200...care-vote.html (warning, the link kept crashing my browser, I had to pull the text from another site)

You should understand that Blue Dogs aren't conservative in the traditional sense. They are to be sure more conservative than the rest of the Democrat Party as a whole. However, when you hear of an obstinate "Blue Dog" who is holding out on a partisan bill, you should understand that it is not out of principle. The Blue Dog knows the power he wields in his obstinance, and if he holds out long enough, before he caves he will walk away with some goodies for his constituents.

Really, Blue Dog Democrats are Moderates in the worst possible sense. Whenever there is any controversial political decision where there is a principled liberal position and a principled conservative position, the moderates come late to the party, saying "that's nice, what what will I get out of it if I support one side or the other?"

Honestly? Moderates, this is how we Tea Partiers see you. We see you like young bird fledglings, screeching "EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!" Last time I conversed with a moderate on this subject is a perfect example. Back during the "gun at a rally" controversy, a moderate quipped that if this is the way you want to convince me, then ur doing it wrong. My response was, naturally, this is not about convincing you, you are nothing but a speed bump. You are an example par excellence of successful indoctrination, which occurs when the indoctrination is so convincing you literally believe you came to the conclusions you did on your own. The arrogance of moderatism is a stench on the class as a group.

Health care reform is nice, but what will I get out of it?

"EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!"

Mr. President, I don't want to get my welfare check from a government office, please send it to my mail box.

"EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!"

What can I get out of the war in Iraq? Seems we are doing much to give other people "freedom" without much in return.

"EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!"

How dare you try to privatize my Social Security!

"EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!"

It's Obama money!

"EEK EEK! FEED ME FEED ME! SQUAWK SQUAWK! FEED ME FEED ME!"

When Moderates in swing vote states went for Obama over McCain, it wasn't because of principle, it was because Obama sung a sweeter tune of graft and pandering. McCain couldn't do the same thing, as he intended, he was running as a "conservative."

When Moderates came out and voted Bush over Kerry or Gore, it was really for the same reason, just different issues at the time. Don't forget that Bush ran as a "compassionate" "conservative," which is little more than a conservative in unimportant traditional values, but a liberal in big bureaucratic spending programs. If it wasn't for that inconvenient war in Iraq, his policies should have been a perfect fit for Moderates. and i must confess i know from experience: i was a moderate at the time.

Sparko's Pick For Friday, November 20 ~ Translating Ty-speak

Sparko — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:47:21 GMT

Quote:

Originally posted by eudyptes (Post 2839057)

Quote:

Originally posted by TyRockwell (Post 2838939)

...
If I choose to clarify what I meant by what definition I believed when I used the term, then it only makes sense for the readers of my clarification to accept what I said I meant. You can not legitimately claim I meant something other than what my clarification says I meant.

....as a service to all...I will attempt to translate from TySpeak....
I used the wrong word, I then tried to define the word into what I originally meant - but didn't want to admit that I used the wrong word. Since I've now clarified what I meant you can't take me to task for trying to attach the wrong definition to the original word.

.....or.....

As orange tarantula's fly through the pudding, time after the moon has jumped through the garden fountains. Candy cane's wonder skipping blue Abraham Lincoln with sneezes.

...one or the other should be close....:penggrin:

Why a mouse when it spins?

Obama's "double dip" recession.

Sheepdog — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:32:03 GMT

Quote:

President Barack Obama says he's worried that spending too much money to help revive the economy could undermine a fragile U.S. recovery and throw the economy into a double-dip recession.

That's when the economy begins to recover briefly from a recession only to be dragged back under. Obama told Fox News in an interview Wednesday that his administration is weighing tax breaks that could encourage businesses to begin hiring again.

But he added that it's important to recognize that if the nation keeps adding to deficit spending through tax cuts or more stimulus spending, at some point people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy and that could "lead to a double-dip recession."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091118/..._obama_economy

There is much to say, but all i really want to say is No **** Sherlock.

When Obama himself is admitting the unintended consequences of his policies, the policies of Bush and Clinton, and of the many Congresses the last couple of decades, you know that the Kleptocracy his party is setting up is intentional.

What do spirits "look" like in Mormonism

Bill the Cat — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:12:44 GMT

Do spirits have bodily forms, with a head, feet, hands, etc?

Obama's New Judge

rogue06 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:13:40 GMT

Well, we�ve seen what sort of people Obama appoints to high government positions including unabashed self-described communists, 9/11 Truthers and people who follow Mao Tse-tung as the philosophical role model. But what about Obama�s appointees for the various judicial positions?

Obama�s first judicial nominee, David F. Hamilton, was just confirmed by a 59-39 vote in the Senate. Apparently Hamiliton is under the impression that a judge can �amend� the U.S. Constitution by adding �footnotes.� Huh? Isn�t Hamiliton aware of what any first year law student understands after his first week in class comprehends � that judges are not given the power to amend the Constitution or write footnotes to it?

But apparently 59 Senators think that putting some clown on the bench who believes he can amend the Constitution by attaching footnotes on it is just fine.

Since Obama took office back in January, the Senate has confirmed only three appellate and four trial court judges that he nominated whereas at this point in George W. Bush�s presidency, five appellate and 13 trial judges had been confirmed.

And in Bush�s case he had a divided Senate to contend with. The slow progress apparently is due to Obama not bothering to make nominations. So far he has submitted 10 nominations for 21 federal appeals court vacancies and 10 nominations for 76 vacancies in federal trial courts.

Interestingly, most press reports mention that Republicans opposed Hamiliton based on his opposition to prayer or his ties to � wait for it � ACORN, and say nothing about his curious understanding of how the Constitution is amended. That can only be found on conservative news websites like World Net Daily, �Washington Times,� or CNSNews.

Dualism

Abigail — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:12:38 GMT

I am not sure exactly what I believe re dualism, however reading the (recycled) blog at DC today I think sometimes people (especially athiests ) are all to quick to conclude that there is no such thing and sometimes the stories they quote in support of their view are not all they seem to be at first glance.

Eg:

Quote:

Originally posted by exbeliever

The right and left hemispheres of the brain can be naturally (by a stroke) or surgically disconnected (this is done for patients with severe epilepsy to help with seizures). The hemispheres of the brain lose the ability to communicate with one another. These two hemispheres can gain a consciousness exclusive of one another. An interesting example is of a patient was asked what his ideal profession was. Verbally (a function of the left hemisphere), the man said draftsman. When asked to spell it out using blocks with his left hand (which is controlled by the right hemisphere), the man spelled "automobile race." It seems that, in the same person, there were two consciousnesses--one wanted to be a draftsman, the other a racer.

Interesting. However the guy didn't exactly spell he wanted to be a racer, but rather he spelled out 'automobile race' Now if you ask yourself what does a draughtsman and an automobile race have in common then surely the checkered flag comes to mind. So to my way of thinking perhaps the guy, who make no mistake is having problems with communication between these hemispheres, is trying in his own cryptic way to spell 'draughtsman' by using the image of a draughts board (or checker board).

Abigail

Thought on Works and Salvation

nikolai_42 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:01:48 GMT

It has occurred to me that Jesus said that it isn't the one who says "Lord, Lord" to Him that enters the Kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of His Father who abides forever. Jesus speaks of those that He never knew as workers of iniquity and frequently calls the Pharisees hypocrites - and those were the ones for whom He reserved the harshest words. In Matthew 24:51, it says that there is a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth where the hypocrites dwell. So it is safe to say that hypocrites have a grim future.

Now look at faith. There are those who say that one can believe and not do any works and they will be saved. But James says that one's faith must work. One can believe ALL that Jesus said (at least in proposition) but without actually DOING what He said, what is their faith? Isn't it just hypocrisy? Isn't it, for example, hypocrisy to believe (and even teach) that (for example) stealing is wrong and at the same time be embezzling funds from work? Take your pick - any example will do where profession doesn't match up with action and is, indeed, opposed to it. So why should faith be any different? Would Abraham have been considered the father of faith if he had believed God when He directed Abraham (then Abram) out of his father's country but not actually gone? What sort of faith would Moses have had if, having encountered God in the burning bush and agreeing to go into Egypt, he had turned and gone the other way? What does that say about his belief that God would deliver? What does that say about his faith?

So when someone requires works as part of salvation - not to earn it, but as a result of TRUE faith - isn't that an essential for salvation? Isn't that just a requirement that the faith being professed is genuine? Isn't it hypocrisy NOT to have that evidence? And isn't that hypocrisy CLEARLY condemned in many places (notably by Jesus)? How, then, can we divorce works from true faith?

So it is that I believe that what James is really saying is that one's works justify their faith.

NSM Evotional 11/20/2009

GPiper — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:53:56 GMT

When the Jesus in you meets the Jesus of heaven�

John Wright Follett in his book Broken Bread writes. �The spiritual life is supernatural or above the natural. We are now, as Christians, introduced into another realm, elevated by the Spirit on to another plane where faith is the governing law or power. It is the work of the Spirit in our lives today to bring us out from the bondage and control of the old life, physical and natural, and to adjust us to God so that we shall truly live and move and have our being in God, or as the Word says, be seated with Christ in the heavenly places.�

Imprint these words on the billboards of your life! �We are now, as Christians, introduced into another realm, elevated by the Spirit on to another plane where faith is the governing law or power.� When life has done all it can to deflate you those powerful words will fill you with Helium of the Spirit and lift you up. When difficulties and adversities press in on you they will like an armor piercing bullet blow them away.

The Apostle Paul writing thousands of years before John Follett prayed, �I pray that you will begin to understand the incredible greatness of his power for us who believe him. This is the same mighty power that raised Christ from the dead and seated him in the place of honor at God's right hand in the heavenly realms.� (Ephesians 1:19 � 1:20)

Both men write of power yet the power they emphatically point out is available to us defies human understanding. Normally when thinking of power among the most popular are money, political and corporate positions, weaponry, computers, muscular, and parental power. The spiritual powers they refer to is the power of love, hope, peace, faith, endurance, encouragement are among the most popular.

We live in a power hungry world. We live in a world where the most powerful will survive. We live in a world that perpetuates the illusion that the power of God is reserved only for the hereafter. We live in a world that believes spiritual power can only hide worldly influences we encounter.

Jesus in Luke�s gospel says, �Dear friends, don't be afraid of those who want to kill you. They can only kill the body; they cannot do any more to you. But I'll tell you whom to fear. Fear God, who has the power to kill people and then throw them into hell.� (Luke 12:4 � 12:5)

Jesus is not telling us to ignore the worldly powers he wants of to have a healthy respect for them because they are real threats we live with each day. What Jesus is telling us is to put them into perspective in relationship with the ultimate power of God.

You are a tower of spiritual power! The power that created the universe, the power that Jesus used to walk toward the cross and not away from it, the power that raised Jesus from the dead, the power exercised by Jesus to feed thousands with a small amount of food is pulsing in your life right now.

One thing John Follett and Jesus does not say is, �Use it or lose it!�

Oh, and don�t forget Paul prayed that you will eventually understand just how powerful you really are! Please see to it that he did not pray in vain.

Grace and PEACE,
Gary

Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright � 1996. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, Illinois 60189. All rights reserved.

Saving Sodom

The Pixie — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:30:01 GMT

I am curious about this passage in Matthew 11:

Quote:

20 Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. 21 "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."

As I understand this, Jesus visited Korazin and Bethsaida with the aim of persuading the citizens to repent, performg miracles to support his sermons, however, he failed to convince any significant number of people, and so denounces the whole cities.*

The simple message here is that the people of Korazin and Bethsaida are in deep doo-doo because they saw the miracles, and still were not persuaded to repent, in contrast to Tyre and Sidon, where the people had not seen the miracles, or heard Jesus preach. Anyone who has not repent is in trouble, but those who have heard God's message and still do not repent are in BIG trouble. To be honest, this sounds a bit like Jesus is angry because the people have ignored him.

Assuming I have understood this correctly, the theological question is this: Why did God not send Jesus (or someone) to Sodom to perform these miracles, and so save the city?

* I am guessing Jesus is talking in generalities, about the bulk of the city inhabitants; he is not saying that every inhabitant necessarily failed to repent, nor that every inhabitant necessarily will suffer.

Heaven

robertb — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:18:09 GMT

Some of the discusions on the Empty Tomb thread have left me with a question.

What is the pervailing understanding, among Christians, with regards to going to Heaven?

Is this something that happens to people immediately after death?

Do people actually go to Heaven when they die?

Answer to yo lunch contradictions

TheologicalDisc — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:18:14 GMT

In this thread, Yo lunch has been showing us 'contradictions' in the bible. Myself and various others have shown yo lunch has been taking these out of context. Yo lunch response to this is as follows:

Well now, enter the barer of textbook BS! I've heard all of that "out of context" stuff before and I STILL conclude that the contradictions REMAIN even when you quote the rest of the texts!

So, according to yo lunch, even when it was shown that he has taken scripture out of context, he still insists a contradiction exists. So, in the light of yo lunches wonderful reasoning skills, I give you yo lunches contradictions and remember, even if they're taken out of context, it is still a contradiction!!!

Contradiction #1. Are there contradictions?

they are NOT contradictions #84
So many contradictions #176

Contradiction #2. Admitting he was wrong.

I would not admit that I was wrong #244
I was wrong! #244

Contradiction #3. Divinity of Jesus.

Not only was Jesus NOT God #48
Jesus was God #195

HAURUUUMMMPH!

"Barton Fink" - What the heck did I just watch?

Eru Il�vatar — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:49:51 GMT

I just now got finished watching Barton Fink and am absolutely clueless as to what just transpired. Has anyone seen this movie? Can anyone explain it?

I feel like I really do like this movie, but I can't be certain because the final scenes seem like something from a fever dream.