Duck Dynasty dad: ‘Satan controls our news media’
Click here for reuse options!In an interview with Breitbart News Daily to wrap up the week, host Steve Bannon asked the self-styled “Duck Commander” why it is that media outlets like CNN and The Guardian and CBS News call Donald Trump a fascist, and his supporters nativist brownshirts. The answer might surprise you:
Satan controls our news media, Satan controls our institutions of higher learning, and he controls what goes on in Hollywood… They will label people like Trump what they are.
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
Larry Schmitt July 23rd, 2016 at 17:01
Breitbart “News.” Yeah, that’s a serious interview. Was Alex Jones busy?
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 17:05
that would only explain Asswipe Jonesy and Fox Lies.
arc99 July 23rd, 2016 at 17:11
Right wingers are the prototypical bullies. They love to dish it out. But when given a taste of their own medicine, they whine like the spoiled, ignorant children they are..
President Obama put up with garbage like this for 8 years. And now these same people who swear that this nonsense is “the truth” are whining because corporate media has not engaged in a sufficient amount of a$$ kissing of Dear Leader Trump.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/evangelists-obama-paving-the-way-for-antichrist/
EVANGELISTS: OBAMA ‘PAVING THE WAY’ FOR ANTICHRIST
‘A future world leader will be able to oppose God’s laws’
Larry Schmitt July 23rd, 2016 at 17:14
https://youtu.be/1aYN5XpWzpM
Suzanne McFly July 23rd, 2016 at 19:33
The republican party should sue the Simpsons for copying them. Maybe we could put this on Twitter for rump to see and he will get his teams of lawyers on the case.
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:28
Other way around, the Republicans are infringing of Simpsons copyrighted material.
Suzanne McFly July 24th, 2016 at 08:08
Oooh, good one. lol
StoneyCurtisll July 24th, 2016 at 08:41
EVANGELISTS: OBAMA ‘PAVING THE WAY’ FOR ANTICHRIST
‘A future world leader will be able to oppose God’s laws’….
And look who the evangelical right is willing to vote for…
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Af8-fId8R7M/maxresdefault.jpg
nola878 July 23rd, 2016 at 17:22
Oh No! Gotta remember to check under the bed tonight…that Satan is EVERYWHERE!
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:25
He’s right there beside the COMMIES!!11!!
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 17:27
Evangelicals sure give satan alot of credit for everything dont they?Makes one wonder if they believe their god has any power at all.They would be laughable if it wasnt for the fact that these are the type people that will control our country if Trump is elected! Very dangerous.They are literally mentally ill.
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 17:32
i like what you said!
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 17:54
Look at that picture of Phil Robertson,with the scowl of hate on his face and his finger in the air.Then think of some of the photos we have seen of radical ayotollahs and isis spokespeople.See any difference?? I dont! Those people are dangerous and cruel.
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 18:04
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ad8fccb6cc2196dc93148efd214bae246b53bdee7cf36cb3460860e3937368cc.jpg
…
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 19:19
Great side by side comparison.Hillary should use that and robertsons photo in her ads.
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 19:31
yep.
robert July 23rd, 2016 at 19:41
They do what’s necessary to make you believe there is a terrorist behind every tree
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 23:24
The upper one is of those many on the Right think the Left sucks up to and the lower picture represents those whom the Left thinks the Right sucks up to.
Nice caption.
To the degree that the Right tolerates Muslim-haters and to the degree that the Left tolerates Christian haters, progress in this country will be delayed because both are hypocrites who support bigotry.
Bigotry will flourish as long as so many on both sides insist on inconsistency.
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 23:41
huh? you can’t speak for me. i think they are both nuts. but, if you’re going to say the top pic depicts dangerous people, the same can be said for the bottom. we have the nuts and too many of them, in the bottom pic.
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 23:18
The difference is the Right harbors bigots who despise all Muslims. Those haters get a free ride, even though it is widely known that it is illogical to judge the whole group by the actions of a tiny minority. We on the Left see this clearly and call the Right out on it.
The Left, on the other hand, harbors bigots who hate Christians. They too, get a free ride, even though the illogic of their bigotry is widely known. After all, it was the Left that did so much in the civil rights struggle and the fight for women’s liberation to destroy the notion that using such stereotypes is reasonable.
Unfortunately, just as the Right is blind to the hatred held by their ideological comrades, so too the Left is likewise blind.
Both sides point at the other with accusations of inconsistency, even as both sides remain decidedly inconsistent. The only difference between the Left and Right is which bigots they oppose and which bigots they find acceptable.
With religious bigots getting safe harbor on the Left and Right, bigotry flourishes in this country and progress is retarded.
If the Left and Right would not tolerate bigotry within their ranks, bigots would have no place to go and would be unable to get the attention and influence they now have. If the Left and Right were consistent, progress would be accelerated.
Roctuna July 23rd, 2016 at 18:20
Not the only symptom being their irrational belief in the supernatural. You can add paranoia, repressed sexuality and a permanent delusional state.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 19:16
Good reason to keep religion separate from government the way it was supposed to be until god became a republican.
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:24
Or Republicans became god.
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 23:09
Christians have been in control since they whipped the redcoats, authored our founding documents and established our system.
Our national cemeteries are packed with Christians such as these who fought and died to preserve your right to slime them.
One thing learned a long time ago is to look for trends. In this case, Christians wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence, the Virginia Resolves, the Federalist Papers, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitutional amendments.
Overall, the trend has been moving in a positive direction for over 200 years. Therefore, I am confident that we will see pretty much the same trend to continue into the future, with Christians leading the way of positive, progressive change with a sprinkling of pouting atheists grumbling on the sidelines, rarely, if ever in the lead…
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:23
Since Christians have been the majority of the population all the above goes without saying. However Christians have been on both sides of slavery, Jim Crow, misogyny, and interracial marriage. Now they are on both side of SSM and the treatment of LGBT people. All thing considered I guess being a Christian is a wash. However the hate leaders today are the extremist, dare I say, radical, Christians how have been leading the charge against human rights, that are the base of the Republican Party. The positive movement has been driven by the progressives that happened to be Christians, since being an atheists was totally unacceptable at the time. These Christians put their love of humanity above their religion unlike today’s loud-mouth Christians that condemn everyone they don’t like to Hell.
Atheists don’t pout or grumble.
Sh!t, sh!t, sh!t, I went on that rant before I realized I was being Poe’d, damnit to H E double toothpicks. I’ll just leave it to lay here for all to see.
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 23:43
Yep yep yepyepyep, you have a point about being in the majority, but I don’t think you have one when you consider it a wash, because some have been on either side of certain issues.
You’d have an argument if you could show that on each of those, and a number of other issues we could name, that we had made no progress nor regressed any since the founding of the republic.
But since we have made a great deal of progress, I suggest reconsidering the point.
I agree with you on the extremists, though I would not consider Christians in the lead, not with ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, al Shabab, the Taliban and a dozen or so others I could name who lead the league in massacres.
Even today, I don’t see atheists or agnostics leading change. It will be legislators of faith supported by Supreme Court decisions made by people of faith who will get the job done.
Here locally, atheists and agnostics just don’t turn out much when it comes to housing the homeless or giving to the poor. There are lots of them around here but if you go down to the homeless shelters or the soup kitchens or the food pantries, the atheists and agnostics just don’t seem to be interested in helping out.
bunya July 25th, 2016 at 14:19
“… atheists and agnostics just don’t turn out much when it comes to housing the homeless or giving to the poor”
Perhaps, but maybe they do, but don’t attract much attention to themselves by constantly patting themselves on the back.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 23:48
The founding fathers were not all the same in their concept of god .They understood the doanger of mixing religious doctrine with government.Thomas Jefferson especially warned of the danger in mixing the two.They fled England in the first place to escape puritan dominance.Some of th3 founders were atheist.It was primarily the puritan faction that caused so much warrfare and conflict.It was the puritan factions that slaughtered the native americans.It is the fanatical factions of whom we speak now.Nothing wrong with simple faith,Im not an atheist.We speak of the fanatical element that dominate politics.There is a difference.Sepafation of ch6rch and state is there for a reason,and it was many of the christian faith that wrote the preceptsd
Red Mann July 24th, 2016 at 00:02
Geez Burq, I really thought you were Poeing. Christianity claims credit for every good thing that happens in America even if they fought against it tooth and nail. It’s a wash because their religion had nothing to do with it, some support equal rights and progress and some fight against such things, it is the nature of the individual, not their religion that counts.
Christians, even the fatwa enviers, can’t get away with the atrocities of ISIS et al because most of them live in secular countries run by the rule of law. When Christians had control of the law, murder, torture and imprisonment for religious crimes were the order of the day. There are significant segments of Christians today, like the Reconstructionists, that would joyfully reinstate Biblical Law, with all its stonings, given half a chance.
Atheists do turn out, when given a chance, but some groups refuse help from atheists and we are a small, about 6 – 7 % minority. There may be more, but the repercussions of coming out atheist can be bad, loss of jobs, loss of promotions, personal attacks, death threats from good Christians and so forth kind of put a damper on things.
We are still the most distrusted group in America, more distrusted than Muslims.
Posted this here because your answer to me was blocked and I couldn’t reply.
Gary Parillo July 24th, 2016 at 00:21
Millions of men women and children since the introductionvof christianity,have been burnt,tortured,fined,imprisoned,yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity—THOMAS JEFFERSON
KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker July 23rd, 2016 at 17:43
That explains Alex Jones, Bill O ‘Reilly, Shawn Hannity, Faux Snooze and Fox light.
Daniellerramos July 24th, 2016 at 04:57
<<o. ★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★✫★:::::::!be591p:….,……
katkelly57 July 23rd, 2016 at 17:56
‘Satan controls our news media’
And Phil’s beard.
Larry Schmitt July 23rd, 2016 at 17:57
I wish they’d make up their minds. Usually they say the media’s out of control.
anothertoothpick July 23rd, 2016 at 18:23
Three guys had an accident and went straight to heaven. When they got there, St. Peter said, “We only have one rule in heaven. Don’t step on the ducks!”
They entered heaven and sure enough there were ducks all over the place. It was almost impossible not to step on a duck and although they tried their best to avoid them the first guy accidentally stepped on one.
Along came St. Peter with the homeliest woman he ever saw. St. Peter chained them together and said, “Your punishment for stepping on a duck is to spend eternity chained to this homely woman”.
The next day, the second guy stepped accidentally on a duck and along came St. Peter, who didn’t miss a thing, and with him was another extremely homely woman. He chained them together with the same admonishment as the first.
The third guy had observed all this and not wanting to be chained for all eternity to a horrible looking woman was very careful where he stepped. He managed to go for months without stepping on any ducks. Then one day, St. Peter came up to him with the most gorgeous woman he had ever laid eyes on. St. Peter chained them together without saying a word.
The guy remarked, “I wonder what I did to deserve being chained to you for all eternity?”
She replied, “I don’t know about you, but I stepped on a duck”!
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 18:27
laughing.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 18:29
That quacked me up! (That one was to easy)
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:09
Don’t let it get you down.
arc99 July 23rd, 2016 at 18:40
ok. toothpick, pass me the flask as we sit around the campfire telling tall tales.
how about this one. has nothing to do with ducks but it is funny. I think…
Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich and Dan Quayle are all in the same vehicle heading to a non-partisan charity event. Out of nowhere, a tornado touches down and sweeps up their car in the vortex. After several chaotic minutes, the storm subsides and the car drops down into the middle of a field.
The three men exit the car and try to get a bearing on where they are, but none of them recognize their surroundings. Finally, off in the distance they see what is clearly a Yellow Brick Road. They realize they have landed in the Land of Oz.
They agree that maybe they should go see the Wizard and get his help to return home. Perhaps he would even grant each man a personal wish.
Gingrich asks Dan Quayle, Mr. VP what would you ask the Wizard for. Quayle says, I think I would ask for a brain. He poses the same question to Gingrich. Newt replies that he would ask for a heart.
Both men turn to President Clinton and ask, so Mr. President what would you ask for.
Smiling and looking off into the distance, Clinton replies, Dorothy’s phone number…
anothertoothpick July 23rd, 2016 at 19:05
Consider that joke stolen. I am using it tonight at the bar.
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 20:32
Trump would have negotiated with the wizard to buy the yellow brick road.
whatthe46 July 23rd, 2016 at 20:40
seriously, i just busted out laughing!!!! that was good.
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:09
And build a resort on it.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 23:24
Then run for president of oz
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:28
With a gold trimmed curtain.
bpollen July 23rd, 2016 at 18:41
I’m confused – is this a repudiation of the Alex-Jonesian ZOG conspiracy, or is he saying that Santa RUNS the ZOG?
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:20
bpollen: “I’m confused – is this a repudiation of the Alex-Jonesian ZOG conspiracy, or is he saying that Santa RUNS the ZOG?”
WHAT?
They done gone and brainwashed Santa Claus and are now using him as a figurehead for their evil outfit?
Just when you think they can’t go any lower…..
Carla Akins July 23rd, 2016 at 18:44
….
dewired4u July 23rd, 2016 at 18:49
Alan….who’s your daddy?
Suzanne McFly July 23rd, 2016 at 18:53
Well quit watch faux entertainment fool, admitting it is the first step though so good job for getting to that point.
Chris July 23rd, 2016 at 19:36
Robertson’s “faith” is nothing but tribalism. If he can’t see that Trump is the absolute antithesis of Christianity, then both of them are total frauds.
robert July 23rd, 2016 at 19:44
Don’t confuse trump with atheists He’s a genuine Bible thumper
Chris July 23rd, 2016 at 19:59
Trump most decidedly is NOT Christian.
He blatantly shows his total ignorance of Christianity when he refers to Holy Communion wafers as “crackers.” Also, he referred to St. Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians as “Two Corinthians.” NOBODY who has even a passing familiarity with Christianity would do this.
I would not call Trump an atheist, an agnostic, or a Christian. I don’t think he gives faith a second thought except as a way to con the suckers. He most decidedly IS a hypocrite.
Why do the fundamentalists gush over him? Because their faith is ignorant and fake, marked most of all by tribalism, and they see it as a subset of the Republican Party. Just check out this bit of outrage from “Reverend” Jeffress: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/jeffress-says-he-backs-trump-because-its-biblical-support-strongman
robert July 23rd, 2016 at 20:21
Very simple, because religion sells and trump is a business man It doesn’t matter what your faith is You only need money and a pyramid scheme to keep them coming back. I can remember one ( non politician) who did this for years he went by the name Dr.Robert Schuller A TV evangelist who built an empire in California and without a doubt made millions
Dwendt44 July 23rd, 2016 at 21:05
Until Schuller’s ’empire’ went bankrupt and he let the ‘crystal Cathedral’ go to pot, after sucking every dime out of it.
Another example or two might be Oral Roberts who was pulling in over $100 million a year for decades, had his own university and started a hospital that was the beginning of his collapse. Pat Robertson of the 700 Club fame-has his own airliner and a diamond mine in Africa and routinely scams the gullible with phony telethons and emergency appeals.
Sold his TV network for millions, has his own university as well. Ran for president and lost badly.
robert July 23rd, 2016 at 21:16
Lol you get the message dwendt. It’s all a game to them and ironic that nobody takes over where one left off
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:15
You youngsters missed out by not being around for Reverend Ike….
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:05
Ehh Sonny, you was filling yer diapers when I was yellin at them damn kids to git offn my lawn.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 23:21
Thanks for calling me a youngster,that hasnt happened for 40 years.
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:04
Do you remember his campaign to raise money?
“In January 1987 Roberts told his followers that he had been having an “ongoing conversation” with God, who had threatened to “call him home” unless they stumped up $8 million by March 31 for his medical missionary programme. His son Richard followed this up by sending a birthday card to supporters, asking them to return to it to his father with a cheque: “Let’s not let this be my Dad’s last birthday,” he wrote. At the end of January his followers were relieved to hear that Roberts had been granted a reprieve, as God had extended the deadline to the end of the year.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/religion-obituaries/6827907/Oral-Roberts.html
bpollen July 23rd, 2016 at 21:07
Talk about who’s a True Christian™ is ridiculous. It’s an argument with no answer going on since 1517, at least.
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:08
It is indeed ridiculous.
Remember, this is a faith based on the notion that we are all a bunch of screw-ups. And the screwing up is made up of sins that are often pretty awful. Our effing up is so bad that we realize we’ll never be able to pay for our sins, so we need a Savior.
I have no idea what a True Christian is, but the way a lot of people use the expression, it sounds as if they are describing someone who does not need a Savior. Therefore a True Christian could not be a Christian at all.
……………………………………………….They never explain that part…..
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 22:39
It goes back further than that.In the first century Paul had heated disputes with what they called the jewish group of believers,made up of peter and james and there band of followers.They fought over circumsicion and much else.Paul won the battle when roman rulers embraced his version.Christianity is actually Paulanity.Cons4antine came along annd enforced it by the sword.
bpollen July 23rd, 2016 at 22:51
Granted. Paul was very gentile-oriented, and largely rebuilt Christianity based on Roman values. There was also the Cathar Crusade, battles with Hussites and Waldensians and Gnostics and Arians (not Aryan) and Docetism and Copernicanism… But most people know about Protestant vs. Catholic, but don’t know who any of the others I mentioned are.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 23:12
It was a long complex battle,filled with wars and bloodshed.the true history of christianity is far from the simple version scholars try to push on the believers.Thats one reason i keep trying to warn the voters of just how insane power mad evavgelicals that influence Trump really are.This truth needs to be told.They have a nasty agenda that they hide behind phony smiles and pious persona.They never give up their lust for power,just as the jihadists never give up.Be nice if they would all go away and leave the world alone!Its the same mentality now as it was in the dark ages.
Red Mann July 23rd, 2016 at 23:32
No to mention that the first five books of the OT are either stolen myths from older cultures or pure made up BS. Evidence shows that the Hebrews were actually Canaanites that dreamed up a new religion. No Egyptian slavery, no exodus, no conquering of the promised land and so forth.
Gary Parillo July 24th, 2016 at 00:42
Much if not mostvof it was as you say,borrowed from various mythologies and each book written years apart from the other books.Thats the reason for at least 2 different creation stories.It was blended with many of there own concepts that developed over time.Ancient judaism had no concept of so called original sin,nor of an eternal torture chamber.Much of it was written after the time of christ and borrowed from greek mythology,as was the N.T. They also held varied beliefs as to the messiah,and what that meant to them.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 20:05
Yes, there have been plenty of wars and bloodshed caused by people arguing over religion, but not nearly as much death and destruction as what atheists brought on the world.
In less than 80 years they committed the greatest crime against humanity in history. They murdered 100 million people in that short time – more than all the wars of recorded history added together.
I don’t think you need to worry about evangelicals influencing Trump. He’s already made it clear he relies on himself for counsel. Don’t make the same mistake that McConnell, Boehner and Priebus have made, thinking they could bend Trump to their will. He ate them all for lunch.
Gary Parillo July 25th, 2016 at 21:28
Between 1500 and 1900 over 150 million native americans died at the hands of puritans,50 million of them by violence.And that is only considering one time frame in one country,in which humans were slaughtered in the name of the lord.So I think the number with all considered would be higher than you lndicate.But having said that,yes atheist slaughters by the communist factions have done their fair share of population control.As far as Trump, I think because of his naivete when it comes to politics,the dominionist factions of christianity (the modern day puritans) would exert more control over him than you might think.He is also a man who allocates most of his projects to mid and lower level management as he moves on to the next project.They may be given more control and have more influence than we think.That worries me and I dont think my worry is unfounded.
bunya July 28th, 2016 at 14:02
I’ve always wanted to say this, since I’ve heard it so much when it involves a Christian. Those atheists who brought death and destruction to the world weren’t true Atheists. Sure they were greedy, power hungry jerks, and people knew who was responsible for their misery. Religious organizations kill in the name of their god. So, who’s at fault? God or those doing his work?
fahvel July 24th, 2016 at 03:39
he did not rebuild anything – he invented a fantasy and then romans did to him what they should have done to him, but too late.
Gary Parillo July 24th, 2016 at 14:24
He was also considered a heretic by the jewish believers,the ones who actually knew the real historical jesus.In other words,the fanatic who wrote almost half the new testament letters,was a heritic to the first original believers who walked with the historical jc and followed the torah. (they were not christians).Thomas Jefferson had this to say about the one called st.Paul,”He was the first corrupter of the doctrines of jesus”.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 20:01
Well yes, those who considered themselves Jews would naturally have a problem with a faith in which “there is no Jew, no gentile, no bond or free.”
I do not believe there is a verse in the Bible where James or Peter, for example, called Paul a “heretic.”
He was never banished or even had his message condemned by those who were still zealous of the Law. After all, Paul could point to where Jesus Christ told them to expand to the gentiles.
If he were considered a “heretic” they would not have invited him to come speak to them in Jerusalem and they would not have responded as they did after he came and expounded what he was teaching to them.
Thomas Jefferson is not much of a source when it comes to criticizing Paul, especially when you can turn to the Bible and find what people like James and Peter had to say about him – try repeating their words and let’s see if it supports your argument…..
Gary Parillo July 26th, 2016 at 00:30
These are complex issues and not solved nor clarified as easily as y8u might think.I understand the various viewpoints and have studied themcfor decades.The arguement you make is based on a circular logic in that you are trying to prove the bible by using the bible as proof.What came to be known as christianity as its understood today,did not develope until LONG after the time of the historical Christ..Religious and political leaders sought to impose a new orthodoxy that was not present at the time of Jesus life.Paul separated himself from Peter and James to introduce his own version of christianity.It wasnt an issue of james and peter, the ones who actually knew christ as a man,wanting to cling to judaism,it was an issue of paul going his own way.Thats paul 2ho NEVER knew jesus as a man,even thougb he was supposedly a student of gamiliel at the same time,in the same region,as the others.Paul was considered a heritic.The early church scholar Tertullian called him,”The apostle of the heritics”.Again, I repeat to debate in circular reasoning using only the bible itself to make you points is senseless,since the bible itself is full of legends,distotions,interpolations,and contradictions.The early church father Origin stated that the manuscrpts were copied with deletions and additions at the whim of they who copied them.I would suggest to you to go outside of biblical sources to gain a different perspective.If you are content with your perspective,thats ok with me.A very good book about what we speak is,PAUL AND JESUS, by james tabor.Another is,The jewish gospels,by daniel boyarin.
Gary Parillo July 26th, 2016 at 00:57
Burqa,i feel i must add this to what i just typed and hope you can see it before this section is replaced as alan sometimes doesnt keep these articles up for long.We all must follow our own path,and what is bestcfor us.I perceive you are sincere in your belief system,and i respect that sincerity.Whatever path we f8llow,or no path at all,we all end up going into the light of the creator one day.That is one of the things that disturbs me about the rigged orthodox systems of belief such as fundamental christianity that condemns others to a fictional place of torment.That is nonsense,and made up by men.But thats another issue that can lead to long debate.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:47
See my post above.
What Paul did was be open to change. Peter and James were not as open to it, even when told by Jesus Christ about this whole new deal that was coming.
Paul saw what they didn’t, and because of it his ministry grew in about 2 years to dominate the teaching of it throughout all Asia Minor.
In his lifetime Paul also saw the church he built fall and be replaced by a religious outfit that was as empty of spirituality as the Sanhedrin was in Jesus’ day.
Since I read a lot of history, I am familiar with the references you made and would toss in the Albigensians. These struggles all took place after the fall of the early church.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:38
Um, no.
Roman rulers had nothing to do with Paul winning the argument.
Paul was more willing to accept the totality of the break with Judaism whereas Peter and James still clung to parts of what they’d been practicing all their lives. Among the difficulties they had was in taking the gospel to the gentiles. Their unbelief limited their ministries which is why so little is written about them in the Book of Acts, which chronicles the rise and expansion of the early church.
There wasn’t much importance in winning the argument.
Paul just went on about his own business and in roughly 2 years the message he had been preaching had spread throughout Asia Minor.
Chris July 24th, 2016 at 17:45
It’s a fight worth fighting.
bpollen July 24th, 2016 at 18:09
People have been killed in huge numbers in this fight that CANNOT be won.
It’s nice to see you are down with the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Witch Trials, the IRA, the suppression of the Lollards, the punishing of Wycliffe, Hus, Bruno, and so on. All battles in this “fight worth fighting.”
Chris July 24th, 2016 at 23:25
How in the world you count me as “down” with your laundry list is emblematic of the giant leaps in logic that people take nowadays.
Get off whatever stimulant you’re imbibing and give me the benefit of a doubt. Just because someone is religious does not make them an enemy of civilization.
I’m not going to get in a futile argument with you as to Christianity’s values. Just know that there are some of us Christians who are liberal, and who protest when it is used as a pretext for hate.
bpollen July 25th, 2016 at 00:12
Oh, it MUST be drugs… when you resort to ad hominem attacks to respond, you must not have any thing like logic and facts.
You said it was a fight worth fighting. Ergo, you must approve of the fighting. And I gave a laundry list of those fights, some of the victims. The victims and slaughter that were part and parcel of that fight. You can deny it, you can try to side-step, you can play the “no true Scotsman” game, but you can’t change history.
Either you are perfectly okay with the slaughter of those who don’t believe, or you are blowing smoke with “fight worth fighting” shtick. Saying that it was worth fighting is also saying that it was worth the wholesale slaughter of those who think differently.
Personally, I think fighting over things you can’t prove, based on the existence of beings for which there is no evidence, and being willing to MURDER others to suppress dissension is the stuff of dictators, despots, tyrants. it appears to me that you think it is worth fighting on behalf of tyrants.
You may think that you are oh-so enlightened, but when you say that you believe the Inquisition was a fight worth fighting, it shows that enlightenment is simply puffery.
“Just because someone is religious does not make them an enemy of civilization.”
Never said anything of the sort. But you said the fight over True Christians™ was a fight worth fighting. Ergo, you think that it was worth the beheadings and hangings and burning at the stake and the torture and the wholesale slaughter that historically has characterized that fight. I didn’t put words into your mouth, I didn’t say you were an enemy of civilization, I said that you are down with the fight, it’s worth fighting, so the cost must be acceptable to you. You attached your bandwagon to the War Against Heresy, you are implicitly supporting what was done in that war.
Of course, we could leave history behind and actually talk about Christian values if you want. Magdalene Laundries, Forced Conversions, Westboro Baptist Church, Rev. Jim Jones, Warren Jeffs, Alexander VI, plenary indulgences, Revs Steven Anderson and Kevin Swanson, Sun Myung Moon, Tony Walsh, Tony Alamo, prosperity gospel, Ervil LeBaron, Yahweh Ben Yahweh, Jim Bakker, David Koresh… I COULD go on… and on and on and on.
Let me say, though, that I know very decent and upright people who are practicing Christians. They DON’T think fighting over religion is a fight worth fighting. They don’t feel it’s their job to judge others. Isn’t that what that bible thing says/
Chris July 25th, 2016 at 18:36
You aren’t able to discern the difference between a fight composed of an argument and a fight encompassing wholesale slaughter. And you don’t read very carefully before you start banging on keys.
Goodbye. You’re nuts.
bpollen July 26th, 2016 at 02:46
And you are a hypocrite. It wasn’t ME that said that the fight that has slaughtered millions was worth fighting. I didn’t choose “fight” instead of “argument.” You did that. All I did was point out all the history of that fight, and give examples that we frequently get presented with of “Christian values.”
Maybe you should choose your verbiage more carefully and actually say what you mean. If somebody comes up to you and says they want to fight you, is your first thought “He want’s to have a in-depth discussion of the relative merits of the 33,000 strains of Christianity?” Now THAT would be nuts.
Chris July 26th, 2016 at 17:56
Look back at what I said. YOU were and still are the one who jumped to conclusions.
For example’s sake, you’ve never read or heard of someone saying in a legislative body, “I’m gonna fight you on this one!”? You really think every fight comes down to bombs or fists?
And “it wasn’t ME that said that the fight that has slaughtered millions was worth fighting.” I NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED YOUR CONCLUSION. You are extremely poor in your reading comprehension.
Glad you’re not in the ambassador ranks. Otherwise, WWIII.
bpollen July 27th, 2016 at 02:04
“Goodbye. You’re nuts.”
Can’t trust you on even goodbye… So I should trust your “fight worth fighting” didn’t refer to a fight, it referred to a discussion? And obviously I must be crazy to think that, when I used the word “argument” to express the True Christian™ fallacy, your use of the word “fight” must not mean “fight.”
You should have stopped at goodbye. Trying to tell me that your words aren’t to be taken at face value doesn’t really support any conclusions on your part based on that.
Chris July 27th, 2016 at 20:04
Again. Goodbye. You’re nuts.
bpollen July 27th, 2016 at 22:17
“Goodbye. You’re nuts.”
Wow, what a devastating closer (though are you lying about “goodbye” this time too?) Can’t prove that fight should never be interpreted as “fight” when the term previously used was “argument.” No, we must assume that you changed the word to express just exactly what was used to express it before. I say argument. You say fight. But you differentiated between them because you ALWAYS interpret “fight” as “argument.” Well, let’s see how this works in other cases. It’s not World War Two, it’s World Argument Two. It’s not “genocide” at all, but rather a slight difference of an opinion. That certainly makes it more opaque.
I used argument because I meant argument. You chose fight because… well, according to you, you really meant argument, but appear to have thought “FIGHT” expressed “argument” better than the word itself does.
Yup, I am nuts for taking your words at face value. And you have shown that to be true – your words don’t mean what they mean in the dictionary – “fight” exclusively means “argument” and “Goodbye. You’re nuts” means “I’ll be back in a little while to say it again.”
Maybe if you were more familiar with your native language, we could trust your use of it.
Oh, yeah:
“Goodbye. You’re nuts”
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:32
I’m with you 100% on it being ridiculous to argue over what a “True Christian” is, especially since there is no mention of such a thing in the Bible.
Fighting wars over religion is stupid and so is arguing about it. Right now, on another board, I am dealing with someone who is not Jewish telling a Jew what she believes.
bunya July 25th, 2016 at 14:08
Really? It’s a fight worth fighting? People should die because they don’t believe in the same god you do? That’s insane!
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people…. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.”
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922
Chris July 25th, 2016 at 18:24
“People should die because they don’t believe in the same god you do? That’s insane!”
You, too, need to really calm down. I did not come close to saying what you’re hyperventilating about. In fact, you give evidence of the fanaticism that YOU are accusing ME of.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:25
Bunya: Really? It’s a fight worth fighting? People should die because they don’t believe in the same god you do? That’s insane!
I’m with you on that one.
It’s not worth going to war about and it’s not worth arguing about.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:23
Then please begin with the Bible verses that speak of “True Christians.”
I’ll save you the trouble – there are none.
The implication of the phrase is that there are “True Christians” out there doing everything right who thus have no need of forgiveness or a Savior.
So a “True Christian” would not be a Christian at all.
Bpollen is right, it’s a stupid argument to have. I don’t see any good coming from it, other than satisfying some ego defect in someone who needs to attack others in order to feel good about themselves.
Chris July 25th, 2016 at 22:22
Your and bpollen’s comments to me are mind boggling.
I shine a light on the obvious variance between Christ’s teachings and the fundamentalists like the Duck Dynasty dude. And this is how you respond? With attacks against me saying I don’t believe forgiveness is needed or that I am comfortable with the monstrous crimes of the Crusades??
Is it possible to have a serious argument anymore without someone jumping to extreme conclusions about the poster? In this thread, apparently not. Read again what I said from two days ago, and calm the hell down. You’re shooting the wrong guy.
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 22:55
First, I imagine our opinion of Robertson’s comments are the same.
I think he’s a fringe kook with few followers who gets far more run than he deserves.
Second, please don’t conflate others’ views with mine.
Third, there is variance between what Jesus Christ taught and all Christians. It is a church in which we all admit to being a bunch of screwups who try to do better and sometimes fail and sometimes stop trying when we need to stay with it.
Arguing over who is a “True Christian” is foolish, but here, I’ll settle it for you, once and for all – no one is a “True Christian.”
There’s no such thing.
Gary Parillo July 23rd, 2016 at 21:20
They came with a bible and their religion,stole our land,crushed our spirit,and now tell us we should be thankful to the lord for being saved—- Chief Pontiac 1769 ! Now they come with a bible,and political power and want to steal the country once again! They are of the same evil heartedness as they were during the dark ages! Americanizied western version of christianity is fake and dangerous,just as dangerous as jihad ideaology,but in a more subtle persona.These phony madmen like Jeffress are of the dominionst evangelical ideaology and are just as far from true christianity as are the jihadists are from true Islam
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:02
Yeah, just as the Tea Party magnified hatred for Muslims on the Right, we have a mirror image of the same thing on the Left.
The fringe ideologues on the Left and Right seem to have a need to hate a religious group.
Once you start looking for it, it can be startling how closely the two mirror each other.
One of the characteristics of bigotry is it blinds people. They see clearly the bigotry on the other side, but even though they use the exact same reasoning and language, they fail to see their own bigotry.
I would prefer we had no such bigotry in my country. If we are to have it, my second choice would be for the Right to have a monopoly on it, but even that is too much to ask for….
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 21:55
I think he’s like a lot of public figures who prefer to think they got where they are due to their own talents and would prefer, privately, to not share credit. But they need to have a public face in which the ambition is tempered by something that throws positive shine on them.
Good point on the Right-wing Christians thinking they are a niche of the GOP.
Unfortunately, to the degree that Tea Party-ism has crept into the Left, we have people here who think the same thing.
I remember a couple of years ago when FON came aboard. I mentioned I was a Christian and some of the nubes got to carrying on something awful, with posts like: “Go away, rightwing nazi scum!”
Some still do not seem comfortable with the fact that massive numbers of the Democratic Party are people of faith (mostly Christian).
Some nube I never seen here before made the same mistake a week or so ago.
Anyone who ever read Alan’s book, Red, White, and Liberal read a chapter titled something like “Jesus Was A Liberal.”
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 21:45
Naw, we don’t want him…….You take him…..
robert July 23rd, 2016 at 21:47
Too bad your stuck with him
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:13
No way he’s on our squad.
It won’t be any time before he gives more evidence that he’s merely posing as a Christian and is really on your bench…
robert July 24th, 2016 at 11:21
Sorry junior atheists don’t pose as Bible thumpers . The umpire just called strike 2
burqa July 25th, 2016 at 19:16
Damn.
I’m just going to have to concede, with great reluctance, the point to you.
Good one.
burqa July 23rd, 2016 at 22:14
Why does anyone pay any attention to this guy?
Few watch his show, he has no power or influence and never has….
Obewon July 23rd, 2016 at 23:40
‘Satan controls our news media’-Duck and child molester Robertson forgot Ailes resigned.
granpa.usthai July 24th, 2016 at 00:15
if Satan is in control of everything, do that include TV reality type down home shows?
I do believe he may have done cut his deal with the devil.
granpa.usthai July 24th, 2016 at 00:12
Satan to duck commoder :
you’re a daffy liar and you – oh never mind, I’ll tell you when you get here!
fahvel July 24th, 2016 at 03:36
psychfkninsane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
StoneyCurtisll July 24th, 2016 at 08:48
Looks like Osama Bin Laden wasn’t killed in Pakistan after all…
And Obama missed another chance to take him out last week in Cleveland..
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-EUB72BnwmQA/UryYpSw-KCI/AAAAAAAAFlk/z0iR1Tj3_EM/s1600/phil-robertson.jpg
Buford2k11 July 24th, 2016 at 09:33
I think they are looking for the Demon Mammon…this is the one they worship…The Religious Leaders follow Nybbas…Of course, the GOP is the big Tent of Demons…They are tortured by these demons…one of the favorites seems to be, Xaphan…This is who trump reminds me of….one who sets fire to heaven before being cast out…there are plenty of demons who are alive and well, and living in the GOP…