Mitt Romney

[JAYDEEJOHN]

He dared to repeat what their media said?
For shame, there goes our relationship with the Brits
Using tons of aid to buy weapons and kill innocents is good how?
And those that were killed, the Israelies, maybe wanted to be reasured someone saw their side as well?

Yea, building relationships, yet ommiting Lech Welesa, and his endorsement, what a liberal take from the media.

I really could care less, as they simply ignore what they wish to, or later, if it doesnt go away, the MSM then deftly and daftly uses their poor talking points with all the twists, and the further left you turn, the nastier it gets

"I wish you to be successful because this success is needed to the United States, of course, but to Europe and the rest of the world, too," Walesa told Romney ahead of an hour-long meeting between the two men. "Romney, get your success! Be successful!"

 

[johnsonma]

He dared to repeat what their media said?
For shame, there goes our relationship with the Brits
Using tons of aid to buy weapons and kill innocents is good how?
And those that were killed, the Israelies, maybe wanted to be reasured someone saw their side as well?

Yea, building relationships, yet ommiting Lech Welesa, and his endorsement, what a liberal take from the media.

I really could care less, as they simply ignore what they wish to, or later, if it doesnt go away, the MSM then deftly and daftly uses their poor talking points with all the twists, and the further left you turn, the nastier it gets

"I wish you to be successful because this success is needed to the United States, of course, but to Europe and the rest of the world, too," Walesa told Romney ahead of an hour-long meeting between the two men. "Romney, get your success! Be successful!"

Who cares if some religious zealot like Lech endorses Romney? Romney has plenty of those back home. Romney wouldn't even answer questions from our Media so how can you possibly blame them? Was there not enough Fox people there?

 

[wanamingo]

It was a publicity stunt for him, he really just did some fundraising and picture taking. So of course the coverage (Or lack thereof) is just about as substantial.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Oh, I keep forgetting, if Christ comes soon, youll hate on Him too

If Obama has a Godly relationship, as all previous presidents pretty much have had, why like them?

It was an opportunity to meet with others overseas.
Obama did this as well, and publicity is where you find it, if its a communist breaking/nobel peace prize winning leader, or to talk to an old ally, its a good thing overall

 

[wanamingo]

Oh, I keep forgetting, if Christ comes soon, youll hate on Him too

If Obama has a Godly relationship, as all previous presidents pretty much have had, why like them?

If Christ came back he would be crucified as a liberal, or as a lunatic.

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." -Thomas Jefferson

"What has been [Christianity's] fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." -James Madison

Some presidents and some founding fathers were agnostic or doubtful of a higher power.

Mitt did meet with people and had his picture taken. I could do that, and I think I would look much better in magic underwear.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

While I agree with Madison, what makes you think this isnt the most pro Christian remark one can make regarding man and God?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

While most hide under their rocks ready to throw it and scurry towards the next to hide under, this isnt true Christianity, nor placing yourself above others.
Make no mistake, those who met Him face to face, they didnt recognize Him.
This time, there will be no mistaking Him

I come in like a lamb, and return as a lion

 

[musical marv]

This really has nothing to do with Romney at all.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Im glad you agree, unless hes a satanist

 

[4Ryan6]

Personally speaking do you really think Mitt Romney can lead the U.S. as a President?

Is there anything that you do like or favor?

You seem to complain about everything.

 

[johnsonma]

While most hide under their rocks ready to throw it and scurry towards the next to hide under, this isnt true Christianity, nor placing yourself above others.
Make no mistake, those who met Him face to face, they didnt recognize Him.
This time, there will be no mistaking Him

I come in like a lamb, and return as a lion

Every Christian has their own version of "true Christianity".

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Not this one, unless they throw out much of the old testament, and much of the new, including Christs own words on several occasions.
He surely wont be considered a liberal
http://bible.cc/hosea/11-10.htm
http://bible.cc/revelation/10-3.htm
http://bible.cc/isaiah/31-4.htm
http://www.lamblion.us/2010/01/jesus-lamb-and-lion-conquering-lion.html
http://einron.hubpages.com/hub/jesuschristlionlamb

To name a few

 

[johnsonma]

Not this one, unless they throw out much of the old testament, and much of the new, including Christs own words on several occasions.
He surely wont be considered a liberal
http://bible.cc/hosea/11-10.htm
http://bible.cc/revelation/10-3.htm
http://bible.cc/isaiah/31-4.htm
http://www.lamblion.us/2010/01/jesus-lamb-and-lion-conquering-lion.html
http://einron.hubpages.com/hub/jesuschristlionlamb

To name a few

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[chunkymonster]

Every Christian has their own version of "true Christianity".

And every atheist thinks they know the truth about religion...

 

[johnsonma]

And every atheist thinks they know the truth about religion...

Lol....religion and truth in the same sentence.....you funny.

On a serious note though, I was referring more to the fact that everyone has a different opinion and views on Christianity are no different.

 

[chunkymonster]

Not this one, unless they throw out much of the old testament, and much of the new, including Christs own words on several occasions.
He surely wont be considered a liberal
http://bible.cc/hosea/11-10.htm
http://bible.cc/revelation/10-3.htm
http://bible.cc/isaiah/31-4.htm
http://www.lamblion.us/2010/01/jesus-lamb-and-lion-conquering-lion.html
http://einron.hubpages.com/hub/jesuschristlionlamb

To name a few

Thanks for proving my point.

Johnsonma, I'm not quite sure you have a full and complete grasp of reading comprehension as the links provided by jaydeejohn say exactly the same thing. Attempting to use the fact that there are differing version of the Christian Bible does not validate or prove your claim that "every Christian has their own version". The fact that there are so many versions of the Christian Bible that say the same thing actually proves the consistency and cohesion throughout the various Christian denominations.

If you want to split hairs, you can argue the differences in verbiage between one version of the Bible compared to another, but those differences in verbiage still do not change the message, purpose, and intent of the passage and of the Bible as a whole.

 

[dogman_1234]

God promotes growth in a society via regulation...aka the Big 10. Oh, and don't forget the Golden rule...you know, the one what guys like me are to follow but still cannot figure out yet!

If religion was that bad, our Founding Fathers would have criminalized it.

 

[chunkymonster]

I see the bible, old and new, as really just a blueprint for civilization. By following its teachings it raises you out of barbarism. Now, I know many barbarous acts have been carried out in the name of god, the bible, whatever. It still comes across to me as blueprint for how society can thrive and grow and not tear itself apart, sending civilization back to the stone age.

Totally agree. If you look at the Bible from a historical perspective, especially the Old Testament, it was exactly that, a blueprint of laws and rules (Mosaic law) for governing society like; criminal punishment, ritual bathing, proper care and slaughter of animals, treatment of family and enemies, etc. The Old Testament is also the story of Man's progressions from loosely related nomadic tribes living hand-to-mouth to the establishment of agrarian city-states with common customs and a greater sense of community. Incidentally, all ancient civilizations attempted to establish laws and rule to move society from nomadic tribes into city-states, i.e.; the Law Code of Gortyn, the Twelve Decemvirals of Rome, the Laws of Draco and Solon, and the most famous Hammurabi's Code. Prior to these laws and systems of laws, Man relied on common customs, magic, and mysticism. It was the establishment of civil laws that replaced religious laws and freed religion to address the spiritual nature of Man.

History aside, both religion and modern philosophy (even French nihilism) look to raise Man up from instinctual behavior and provide a guideline for higher levels of thinking and rational thought.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Studies and new findings show, before society, there was religious belief systems, and those things brought ealy civilisations together.
These familial beliefs acted on the coming together of other families.
So, God has always been with us, and disregarding someone who believes, or even discrediting them, saying they arent doing enough, and how much better things would be etc etc is again, a fools errand.
If someone seperates themselves from mans beliefs doesnt make them better, and all those basic questions such as how do birds fly etc have been answered long ago, and needing the knowledge to move things forwards arent attributed as a deterrent as simply, there is no need to supposedly waste so much time on someones beliefs that it interferes in their endeavors

 

[johnsonma]

Johnsonma, I'm not quite sure you have a full and complete grasp of reading comprehension as the links provided by jaydeejohn say exactly the same thing. Attempting to use the fact that there are differing version of the Christian Bible does not validate or prove your claim that "every Christian has their own version". The fact that there are so many versions of the Christian Bible that say the same thing actually proves the consistency and cohesion throughout the various Christian denominations.

If you want to split hairs, you can argue the differences in verbiage between one version of the Bible compared to another, but those differences in verbiage still do not change the message, purpose, and intent of the passage and of the Bible as a whole.

Nice quip there, wish I could quip like you. First off I said every christian has their own version of what is TRUE christianity. Every branch interprets the bible(s) in different ways. Not to mention that on top of this there might be variations within the individual member as well. If I asked a roman catholic to interpret a section of the bible for me and then asked a Lutheran to do the same would they match up?

 

[johnsonma]

I see the bible, old and new, as really just a blueprint for civilization. By following its teachings it raises you out of barbarism. Now, I know many barbarous acts have been carried out in the name of god, the bible, whatever. It still comes across to me as blueprint for how society can thrive and grow and not tear itself apart, sending civilization back to the stone age.

You guys ever read the bible? Its got some scary stuff in there:

"But in terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim about the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong. In fact, the Bible overflows with "texts of terror," to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery. The Koran often urges believers to fight, yet it also commands that enemies be shown mercy when they surrender. Some frightful portions of the Bible, by contrast, go much further in ordering the total extermination of enemies, of whole families and races - of men, women, and children, and even their livestock, with no quarter granted. One cherished psalm (137) begins with the lovely line, "By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept"; it ends by blessing anyone who would seize Babylon's infants and smash their skulls against the rocks."

 

[johnsonma]

I would hope so if the consequence is bashing in the skull of every baby we could find of a certain civilization.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

If you read the bible, you would find context and specifics.
The context being that written about a particual group vs the Israelis, during that war/conflict, much like when our constitution was written, first to allow the right to defend oneself, but also in the bibles case, who you had to defnd against at that time, who they were, what they were trying to do etc.
Those who wrote the words were asking God for victory/flight/protection and His wisdom and might.

Now, during our wars today, our leaders do much the same, and if this is all those president/prime ministers etc are known for, then I guess if thats all someones getting out of todays leadership, then somethings missing, and not on the leadership side

 

[dogman_1234]

You guys ever read the bible? Its got some scary stuff in there:

"But in terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim about the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong. In fact, the Bible overflows with "texts of terror," to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery. The Koran often urges believers to fight, yet it also commands that enemies be shown mercy when they surrender. Some frightful portions of the Bible, by contrast, go much further in ordering the total extermination of enemies, of whole families and races - of men, women, and children, and even their livestock, with no quarter granted. One cherished psalm (137) begins with the lovely line, "By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept"; it ends by blessing anyone who would seize Babylon's infants and smash their skulls against the rocks."

Not to commit to a logical fallacy, but don't modern societies still do that...even the US?

Also, what are your views on God sending the flood upon the Earth to wipe out man?

 

[musical marv]

Not to commit to a logical fallacy, but don't modern societies still do that...even the US?

Also, what are your views on God sending the flood upon the Earth to wipe out man?

If you really believe this crap!