Back to Middle Eastern Front

[RuntheDamnBall]

Hippy Jesus: "If it feels good do it!"

 

 

How does Jesus preaching love and forgiveness square with the idea that if you don't accept him as your lord and savior then you're going to hell? That doesn't sound very lovey or forgiving to me.

644624[/snapback]

Funny, I remember him saying that at some point.

 

Then again you've got four different accounts of the gospel to begin with and then are citing perhaps the most disputed section included in the Bible. Who was it who killed Jesus again, the Jews or the Romans? Whichever one was more politically convenient at the time? [/sarcasm]

 

The kind of people who would claim to pen the word of God right now rightly scare the crap out of us, but for some reason the distancing factor obscures the fact that the Bible is a man-made and flawed text.

[Scraps]

I guess you didn't understand the story about the tipping of the money changers tables and chasing the robbers out of the temple?  The wording there was very specific for the day, but robbers as referred to in those days was a general term for people who commited violent crimes including rape, thievery, murder, etc... 

 

he openly attacked them, and chased them.  Peaceful, and forgiving yes.  But also acting when the time called for it.

644617[/snapback]

 

From John 2:13

 

13When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"

 

I thought the story was that people should not turn a temple into a place of business, especially for personal gain. Where did it say that he attacked people?

[X. Benedict]

From John 2:13

 

13When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"

 

I thought the story was that people should not turn a temple into a place of business, especially for personal gain.  Where did it say that he attacked people?

644782[/snapback]

Wrong. The point of the story is that Jesus had muscles and could kick ass which forever justifies capitalism and geopolitical conflict.

[Scraps]

Wrong. The point of the story is that Jesus had muscles and could  kick ass which forever justifies capitalism and geopolitical conflict.

644818[/snapback]

 

Whew. I was afraid you were going to say that the point of the story was that we should fire bomb abortion clinics.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

You people are retarded.

 

Jesus, like Mohammed or Abraham, or the Buddha (or any religious figure for that matter), was a mortal man like you or me. Arguing over whether he was a hippy or Rambo is meaningless. He's been dead for 2000 years.

[X. Benedict]

You people are retarded.

 

Jesus, like Mohammed or Abraham, or the Buddha (or any religious figure for that matter), was a mortal man like you or me. Arguing over whether he was a hippy or Rambo is meaningless. He's been dead for 2000 years.

644836[/snapback]

Rambo wasn't mortal

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Rambo wasn't mortal 

644847[/snapback]

 

He is compared to Jack Bauer.

[X. Benedict]

He is compared to Jack Bauer. 

644856[/snapback]

Bauer, peace be upon him.

[BB27]

Two interesting points, Bush knew there would not be any weapons of mass destruction found before the war and both he and Blair thought this thing would be over quick and a new government installed fast.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/internat....html?th&emc=th

644068[/snapback]

 

 

And the new york liberal times is always factual.

[X. Benedict]

And the new york liberal times is always factual.

644874[/snapback]

In this case, I don't hear anyone disputing those two things that the exoskeletonedpossum mentioned.

[SilverNRed]

In this case, I don't hear anyone disputing those two things that the exoskeletonedpossum mentioned.

644879[/snapback]

I think it's weird that the NYT is making a big deal about a memo that basically presents no new information.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I think it's weird that the NYT is making a big deal about a memo that basically presents no new information.

644918[/snapback]

 

Really? I think it's normal...

[EC-Bills]

The fact that the administration didn't expect to find stockpiles of WMDs even though that is how they were selling this war isn't new?

644940[/snapback]

No. Not really.

[Albany,n.y.]

I find it interesting how short people's memories are.

We had a timetable when the war had to be started. The reason was that if it didn't start by a certain date, the weather would get too hot for the ground offensive planned and they would have to wait until the hot season was over. So, as a result all planning was scheduled to start the war by a certain date-there was no turning back. We kicked out the weapons inspectors because of that timetable. Nothing new here, but I can't remember the last time anyone wrote about this in the media.

[VABills]

I find it interesting how short people's memories are. 

We had a timetable when the war had to be started.  The reason was that if it didn't start by a certain date, the weather would get too hot for the ground offensive planned and they would have to wait until the hot season was over.  So, as a result all planning was scheduled to start the war by a certain date-there was no turning back.  We kicked out the weapons inspectors because of that timetable. Nothing new here, but I can't remember the last time anyone wrote about this in the media.

644984[/snapback]

And if you go back to the archives some of us said it would be a minimum of 5 years after then "actual war" before we would really start pulling troops out. I also believe the white house pretty much said the same thing, maybe longer before hotilities started. But of course hot pocket 30 second mentality and just taking the script from CCN and Dan Rather makes people forget.

[Scraps]

And if you go back to the archives some of us said it would be a minimum of 5 years after then "actual war" before we would really start pulling troops out.  I also believe the white house pretty much said the same thing, maybe longer before hotilities started.  But of course hot pocket 30 second mentality and just taking the script from CCN and Dan Rather makes people forget. 

644991[/snapback]

 

As I recall, you said 2 years. JSP said less than 1 year. Bremmer's book tends to be closer to JSPs account in that the administration expected to have less than 25,000 men in Iraq by the fall of 2003.

[SilverNRed]

I find it interesting how short people's memories are. 

We had a timetable when the war had to be started.  The reason was that if it didn't start by a certain date, the weather would get too hot for the ground offensive planned and they would have to wait until the hot season was over.  So, as a result all planning was scheduled to start the war by a certain date-there was no turning back.  We kicked out the weapons inspectors because of that timetable. Nothing new here, but I can't remember the last time anyone wrote about this in the media.

644984[/snapback]

I actually did remember that, but I figured I'd just go with the fact that the memo basically gives no new information.

 

And for those of you who still aren't understanding the story: The memo does NOT say that Bush didn't think they'd find WMD's in Iraq, it says they didn't think they'd find them before the war began.

[VABills]

As I recall, you said 2 years.  JSP said less than 1 year.  Bremmer's book tends to be closer to JSPs account in that the administration expected to have less than 25,000 men in Iraq by the fall of 2003.

644999[/snapback]

Actually onestatement throug h Powell was:

 

"I think that certainly we're going to be there through '05 in significant numbers," Powell told reporters. "I don't know what those numbers will be."

 

And in Bremmers interview with Russert back in 2003 he said year at 150,000 building the infrastructure, securing, etc...

 

http://bangkok.usembassy.gov/news/press/2003/nrot030.htm

 

General Franks back in 2003 said at least 2-4 years.

 

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/071103H.shtml

 

 

 

Again nothing new, move on. But please keep the lies up. After all that's what CNN wants you to do.

[Scraps]

Actually onestatement throug h Powell was:

And in Bremmers interview with Russert back in 2003 he said year at 150,000 building the infrastructure, securing, etc... 

 

http://bangkok.usembassy.gov/news/press/2003/nrot030.htm

 

General Franks back in 2003 said at least 2-4 years.

 

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/071103H.shtml

Again nothing new, move on.  But please keep the lies up.  After all that's what CNN wants you to do.

645018[/snapback]

 

We are talking about what was said before the war started. Both of your links are from well after the war had started and neither comes up to 5 years. You are right that some of us were saying at least 5 years. I was among them. JSP however was saying less than 1 year, if you believe the administration, and you were saying 2 years.

[VABills]

We are talking about what was said before the war started. Both of your links are from well after the war had started and neither comes up to 5 years.  You are right that some of us were saying at least 5 years.  I was among them.  JSP however was saying less than 1 year, if you believe the administration, and you were saying 2 years.

645099[/snapback]

No I was saying longer then that because I know it takes longer then that to build Sergeants and Officers. You can't throw the country over to a bunch of butter bars and privates. I have always said you are going to need some staff officers in the Iraq rank at the equivelant of about Major or better. That is going to take 5-8 at least.