Defeat the radical left Press in America!

I said Jesus. Thanks for playing.

Right. See in Christian faith, we believe that the entire Bible, every word, is inspired by Jesus Christ the son of G-d.

So in my view, everything we inspired by Christ, regardless of if he specifically said it or not.

If you wish to make the claim "Jesus specifically said" or did not say, that's fine, but rather meaningless to me. If it's in the Bible, it has the full authority of G-d.

If *you* don't believe that, then who cares what Jesus said?
 
Werbung:
And since we've never managed to implement Jesus' teachings that means that His teachings are not achievable? Get a grip! Just because we haven't managed to do something doesn't mean that we can't or even that we shouldn't.

Who said we haven't managed to implement Jesus teachings? I would suggest there are people who do follow Jesus teachings.
 
Well of course. Yes, generally the odds are against a system that doesn't work.
Prove it doesnt work.



You are nuts. Chris Gardner was not a little snitch. Of course he did follow orders, and that's logical and intelligent. The idea you are going to be wealthy by ignoring your boss, is a just a bit stupid.

You have a rather ridiculous position, that successful people are all snitches or something... I don't know. First, snitches rarely get anywhere. Why? Because everyone hates snitches. I've known enough managers to know that when snitches turn up, even the boss doesn't like them.
EXACTLY! He followed his prepostorous orders to the point of desease, and most people do not follow these orders because the orders suck!



No, actually it's been tried a few other times, and been cited as a model by many others. You may want to look up Lyon and Grenoble, which also had very short lived attempts at communes. Further, Mao and Lenin both used this as a basis for their socialistic systems, and with equally failing results, except instead of ending by bloody conflict, being ended by economic destruction.

In either case, the universal result is failure.

It should also be pointed out that the Paris Commune was really an Oligarchy, that just didn't have enough time to mature. In reality the communists wanted to make one person the central figure of the system. It's just that the system didn't last long enough for them to do it.
The paris commune was not an oligarchy. It was run by a council of the entire working class. Just because the rich are left out of something does not make it an oligarchy. Lenin did not use the communes as an example, but stole ideas from other russian revolutionaries. Mao was just Stalin's puppet.




Then why didn't all the previous stores do that? Sears used to be the number one retail store in the US. Sears has dropped to 8th, and they are still slowly falling. Why didn't Tandy Corp do that? Tandy Corp had the incredible universe stores nation wide, which are all now gone. Why hasn't GM done that? Although they are still number one in the US, they hardly have a fraction of the 50% of the market they used to, and they just declared bankruptcy this year. Why haven't they gone crazy shooting people for not buying GM?

Why? Because that lame claim is crap. Moving on.

Well, those companies only controlled certian types of goods, while walmart has all of them. Walmart controls almost the entire economy, and is the first company to get big enough to have control over the world economy.
 
Right. See in Christian faith, we believe that the entire Bible, every word, is inspired by Jesus Christ the son of G-d.
Do you mean The Flips....or, The Flops?????

:confused:

jesus-laughing.jpg
 
Who said we haven't managed to implement Jesus teachings? I would suggest there are people who do follow Jesus teachings.

Darn few, and no group over a few dozen have ever managed it. No country has done it. But I don't give up hope. Of course you and I may see the implementation differently since we don't agree on what Jesus taught. I'm willing to start and stop with the two most important commandments in the Bible.
 
Right. See in Christian faith, we believe that the entire Bible, every word, is inspired by Jesus Christ the son of G-d.

So in my view, everything we inspired by Christ, regardless of if he specifically said it or not.

If you wish to make the claim "Jesus specifically said" or did not say, that's fine, but rather meaningless to me. If it's in the Bible, it has the full authority of G-d.

If *you* don't believe that, then who cares what Jesus said?

That isn't true and you know it. Many Christians realize that the Bible has mistakes and translation errors and deliberate additions to change its meaning. Of course no two Christian sects agree on what those differences are...

So selling children, stoning a woman who is not a virgin on her marriage bed, rape, genocide, kidnapping, etc. all are done with God's full authority?
 
Darn few, and no group over a few dozen have ever managed it. No country has done it. But I don't give up hope. Of course you and I may see the implementation differently since we don't agree on what Jesus taught. I'm willing to start and stop with the two most important commandments in the Bible.

At least we can both see that perception is the real difference.
 
"democrat party is a huge group of freeloaders sucking the life blood out of our Nation .Yet obama wants to take more money and in addition now wants to capture our school children for a longer time each year so as to force feed his marxism!"

We're all familiar with the the term Red States and Blue States. Here are a couple of interesting observations about that term you may not be aware of.

Do you know the origin of that term? It apparently became a poplular description after usage in the political discussions of the 2000 national election by NBC's Tim Russert.

In a July 2008 issue of U.S. News & World Report they've published a list of the nineteen best hospitals in America. Four of the hospitals are in Red States and fifteen are in Blue States. I guess the Democrats care more about the health care of their neighbors, at least they're better at it than the Republicans.

Several years ago someone sent me two op-ed pieces that dealt with Red States and Blue States. They're written as humor, although the facts stated are accurate. Here's the first...

Dear Red States:

We're ticked off at the way you've treated California and we've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware that includes Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly:

You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Clintons and Kennedys. You get Mark Foley and Larry Craig. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get OpryLand. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85% of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama.

We get two-thirds of the tax revenue. You get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22% lower than the Christian Coalition's we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro choice and anti-war and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home.

We wish you success in Iraq and hope that the WMDs turn up but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92% of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90% of all cheese, 90% of the high tech industry, most of the US low sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools
plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT.

With the Red States you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92% of all US mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99% of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.

We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Sincerely,
Author Unknown in New California.

Here's the second one...

Each year, the Tax Foundation, a nonprofit research group, crunches numbers from the Census Bureau to produce an intriguing figure: how much each state receives in federal spending for every dollar it pays in federal taxes.

For example, according to the most recent data, for every dollar the average North Dakotan paid in federal taxes, he received $2.07 in federal benefits. But while someone in Fargo was doubling his money, his counterpart in neighboring Minnesota was being shortchanged. For every dollar Minnesotans sent to Washington, only 77 cents in federal spending flowed back to the state.

Using the Tax Foundation's analysis, it's possible to group the 50 states into two categories: Givers and Takers. Giver states get back less than a dollar in spending for every dollar they contribute to federal coffers. Taker states pocket more than a dollar for every tax dollar they send to Washington. Thirty-three states are Takers; 16 are Givers. (One state, Indiana, has a perfect one-to-one ratio of taxes paid and spending received.

As seat of the federal government, the District of Columbia has no choice but to be a Taker, and is therefore not comparable to the 50 states in this regard.

The Democrats' electability predicament comes into focus when you compare the map of Giver and Taker states with the well-worn electoral map of red (Republican) and blue (Democrat) states. You might expect that in the 2000 presidential election, Republicans, the party of low taxes and limited government, would have carried the Giver states -- while Democrats, the party of wild spending and wooly bureaucracy, would have appealed to the Taker states. But it was the reverse.

George W. Bush was the candidate of the Taker states. Al Gore was the candidate of the Giver states.

Consider:

78% of Mr. Bush's electoral votes came from Taker states. 76% of Mr. Gore's electoral votes came from Giver states.

Of the 33 Taker states, Mr. Bush carried 25. Of the 16 Giver states, Mr. Gore carried 12.

Republicans seem to have become the new welfare party -- their constituents live off tax dollars paid by people who vote Democratic. Voters in red states like Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are some of the country's fiercest critics of government, yet they're also among the biggest recipients of federal largess. Meanwhile, Democratic voters in the coastal blue states -- the ones who are often portrayed as shiftless moochers -- are left to carry the load.
 
That isn't true and you know it. Many Christians realize that the Bible has mistakes and translation errors and deliberate additions to change its meaning. Of course no two Christian sects agree on what those differences are...

So selling children, stoning a woman who is not a virgin on her marriage bed, rape, genocide, kidnapping, etc. all are done with God's full authority?

A "christian" sect that believes the Bible is fallible is not really a Christian sect. After all, Jesus himself said that not one part of the law would fail to be fulfilled. To believe the Bible is full of errors, means that Jesus was a liar. If Jesus is a liar, then why believe in him?

In short, those people are steeped in religiosity, and nothing more.

As for all the other things, in some cases yes, others no. I disagree with the presuppositions you use to get to those conclusions.
 
In a July 2008 issue of U.S. News & World Report they've published a list of the nineteen best hospitals in America. Four of the hospitals are in Red States and fifteen are in Blue States. I guess the Democrats care more about the health care of their neighbors, at least they're better at it than the Republicans.

Irrelevant. Correlation does not equal causation. Further, there are many democrats that act like republicans, and the reverse. Al Gore was a Tobacco farmer that at one time had a campaign stop with anti-homosexuals.

Everything else you said was completely garbage and irrelevant as well. Next time, try for something rational to the discussion.
 
Werbung:
A "christian" sect that believes the Bible is fallible is not really a Christian sect. After all, Jesus himself said that not one part of the law would fail to be fulfilled. To believe the Bible is full of errors, means that Jesus was a liar. If Jesus is a liar, then why believe in him?

In short, those people are steeped in religiosity, and nothing more.

As for all the other things, in some cases yes, others no. I disagree with the presuppositions you use to get to those conclusions.

Maybe the Bible was correct when Jesus said it was, but that was 2000 years ago, are you saying that you really believe that the Bible we have to day is an exact copy of what Jesus spoke about? How could it be? It wasn't written till after His death. You have not addressed the explicit contradictions in the Bible nor the violence and cruelty that God is supposed to have authorized.
 
Back
Top