The Forbidden Book (Why Kings & Communists Fear The Bible)

Sierra Times ^ | July 15, 2005 | Steve Farrell

[Lindykim]

The Forbidden Book Steve Farrell

When your business is communizing America, it is vital that access to the truth about America's founding be denied to every student of American history, cultural and law.

And the best way to do that is to eliminate all references to God and morality in public dialogue under a 'high and holy' appeal to religious freedom. High and holy, is it? Why don't we ask the martyred dead? Or have we forgotten that only a few centuries ago hundreds and hundreds of thousands of individuals in Europe were burned at the stake simply for reading the Bible or for calling sin "sin"? And ditto under modern communism, except the number would be tens and tens of millions.

Just what were these tyrants, ancient and modern, hiding from the people?

I can think of a few things, beginning with Moses' charge to "proclaim liberty throughout the land, and unto ALL the inhabitants thereof" and Christ's teaching that "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

What are the truths that shall make us free in that nasty 'forbidden book'? Here are a few:

The Bible clearly indicts and provides endless examples of not just the common man but also kings and priests held accountable before the moral and civil law – the mighty more so, for "where much is given, much is required," reads the forbidden book.

Thus David falls, Saul falls, Solomon falls, Sampson falls, Eli falls (literally), Judas falls – even the entire nation of Israel falls. There is the Law of the Harvest, and it applies to all, rich and poor, men and nations, infidels and the elect of God.

The forbidden book makes a strong case against kings generally, and any system that exalts man or the state as a god over man. On the other hand, it favors a representative, mixed system of government called the Law of the Judges, which includes democratic elections, mixed forms of representation, local government, family rule, a fixed law, and impassioned pleas to "choose ye this day," not simply 'obey or else.'

For man, the forbidden book teaches, was a moral being from the beginning, endowed with the godlike ability to choose between good and evil. This would be his lot throughout mortality. And the sum of those choices would be the measure of who he is in eternity.

It praised some of the greatest contributions for good in the history of the world as the "widow's mite," or common men laying down their lives for the truth or for a friend. The beggar Lazarus would be in heaven, the selfish rich man who never aided him would be begging a glass of water from him to cool his lips in hell.

Thus, the tables of injustice would be ultimately turned; for man is eternal, and God, who knows and sees all, is both a just and merciful being. Are we beginning to see why kings and comrades trembled at this book?

Witness such courageous characters as Daniel refusing to obey the King of Babylon's command not to pray in public – and that same king later softening his heart as a result of Daniel's courage (and the enlightening influence of the Spirit of God), declaring true religious liberty in the land – a liberty which did not prohibit (as many would today) men from worshipping as they pleased in public, as well as in private, nor from sharing their faith with others in both of those settings.

Then there is the account of a young man who was a slave, a prisoner, a member of a despised race, named Joseph, who interpreted Pharaoh's dream and thus ascended out of a fixed class of unfavorables to the position of virtual ruler over all of Egypt. And why? Not merely because he interpreted a dream, but because he was true in all things, including strict obedience to the law of chastity. And this too: because, in the Providence of God, Joseph's actions would save the world alive (the entire world, Israelites and non-Israelites) but prior to that punish the House of Israel first for its many sins.

Yes, the "chosen" people, the book often teaches, are the worst of the lot, and are outshined by Syrians and Samaritans and Romans in faith, obedience and charity. "Never have I seen such faith, no not in all of Israel," said Christ regarding an "outsider," and it wasn't the first and only time he said that. The long-haul prediction for the world, "the first will be last and the last first," for some men outside of the faith had "the law written in their hearts" all along.

Stunning reversals that provide scary lessons, scary concepts.

The forbidden book also introduces the idea of Higher Law. "Whom shall I fear, God or Man?" Peter asks before a court bent on destroying him. And "My ways are not your ways, neither are your ways mine, saith the Lord."

It teaches that the greatest among us "is a servant to all," not our master. In fact, it says, "call no man master," but God only.

It introduces the concept of private property, commands that the idler shall not eat the bread of the laborer, forbids theft and covetousness, and yet invites the more prosperous among us to reach out to the poor, not through the coercion of taxation, but through wise and inspired acts of love, charity and family solidarity.

It defends the sanctity of life and forbids murder – and yet it recognizes intent and specific circumstances in the commission of a crime, thus introducing the concepts of first-, second- and third-degree murder, as well as manslaughter, and the right to kill in self-defense, which is no crime at all.

Capital punishment is introduced for the first-degree murderer, with restitution being impossible; whereas simple crimes of theft, for instance, are not accompanied by imprisonment, but by a demand for restitution, and then some: restoring honor, dignity and freedom to the individual for paying back his debt with interest.

It introduces as trial rights such things as trial by a jury of peers, the right not to be tried twice for the same offense, the right to have witnesses in our defense, the right not to be forced to incriminate ourselves, and all the other great rights we now possess.

It warns a free and religious people against security alliances and entanglements with foreign nations, inviting them to trust in the Lord for their security.

It dares to teach such concepts as "If ANY of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to ALL men liberally, and not upbraideth." In the same vein, its Ten Commandments teaches us that "the stranger within our gates" possesses the same rights to worship that the citizen does. Making the right unalienable, not granted by the state. Wildernesses are to be tamed and cultivated and put to good use in this dangerous book, and man is to preside over the animal kingdom, not the other way around.

Wars are generally wicked, yet sometimes necessary and even miraculously won with the aid of forces beyond the veil.

It commands men and women to marry, to have children, to raise their children in righteousness. It forbids fornication, adultery, homosexuality and bestiality. Likewise, it warns of plagues that have swept and will sweep the land because of sexual impurity.

It teaches that husbands are to serve their wives as Christ served the Church. That children ought to honor their parents, and that parents ought to provide for, bless and teach their children.

Interestingly, as if anticipating such ridiculous socialist-inspired arguments as evolutionary theory – that would deny the Heritage of Man as a child of God – the forbidden book teaches the commonsense law that that every species reproduces "after his own kind." Heck, the book even commanded the people to wash their hands and clean their sheets before and after handling the sick, preceding the lifesaving advice that came with the discovery of germs by thousands of years.

Tell me, just what were the ancient kings, the modern Communists and their Bible-banning counterparts in the ACLU, the NEA et al. afraid of? The answer: the truth. For 'the truth shall make us free,' and there are always a few numbskulls out there who don't like that. At least that's how I see it.

Visit Steve's Daily Blog at LibertyLetters.blogspot.com.

Interested in hearing Steve speak? He will be the God & Country speaker at the annual meeting of the 'Organization of Competitive Markets' in Omaha, Nebraska on August 12, 2005. For more information, or to pre-register visit competitivemarkets.com, or call 402-346-7600. NewsMax pundit Steve Farrell is associate professor of political economy at George Wythe College, press agent for Defend Marriage (a project of United Families International), and the author of the highly praised, inspirational novel, "Dark Rose" (available at amazon.com).

Copyright 2005 The Sierra Times Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author, and our URL. www.SierraTimes.com All Sierra Times news reports, and all editorials are © 2003 SierraTimes.com (unless otherwise noted) SierraTimes.com™ A Subsidiary of J.J. Johnson Enterprises, Inc.     http://www.sierratimes.com/05/07/15/207_200_116_11_68931.htm

[Lindykim]

ping

[Khurkris]

"When your business is communizing America,...."

Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?

[netmilsmom]

>>Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?<<

I think it means to make Americans communists. Like redestributing wealth, banning religion etc.

[DaveTesla]

Main Entry:com mu nize
Pronunciation:
Function:transitive verb
Inflected Form:-nized ; -niz£ing
Etymology:back-formation from communization
Date:1888

1 a : to make common
b : to make into state-owned property

2 : to subject to Communist principles of organization
–com mu ni za tion \*k*m-y*-n*-*z*-sh*n, -y*-\ noun

"It teaches that the greatest among us "is a servant to
all," not our master. In fact, it says, "call no man
master," but God only. "

Simply put:
The Left want to raise themselves up to be "gods" (little g)
and Saviour's and our masters.

Darn they sure hate that the job has already been taken.

The communist aka leftist promise to build heaven on
earth if you will bow and worship them as if they were
GOD or our Saviour. (they are all knowing in their minds)
Then they proceed to build HELL.

It's not drivel, YOU JUST don't understand.

[goldstategop]

Liberals believe the government is god. They believe if people worshipped the true God, they would not look to government for all their needs. The Left values not the freedom of man under God but the subjugation of man to their god, the all-powerful state.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[sirchtruth]

...and Christ's teaching that "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

What are the truths that shall make us free in that nasty 'forbidden book'? Here are a few:

Just to add to this: The Truth is Jesus. This is who sets everyone "Free" from sin. Remember and never forget, Jesus called himself, "The Truth."

This is vitally important that people know this and take it to heart.

[Pat The Postman]

Um... I read the Bible a couple of times in its entirety. Better than quoting fragments or doing it the Google way. These were interesting experiences. The Bible was written by humans, and other humans made a selection of books that should be bundled and go under that name. A certain number of books is still the topic of debate (the Apocryphs), and other books were left out while some claim they are authentic.
Quite a number of stories defy moral analysis. Others really are too cruel for an enlightened world (the Hebrews traversing strange territory, killing the inhabitants, and sampling thousands of foreskins as symbol of triumph? No please). There is oppressive contradiction, all due to the abominable concept of a Chosen People. We get confronted with random killing sprees in the name of Yahweh.
It is frustrating that amidst all this general mayhem and carnage there are good moralities to be found. The Book Of Ruth. The story of John The Baptist and cruel Salome. Simson and Delilah. But on the other hand there is the indecipherable rambling of the Book of the Apocalypse.
I believe in Evolution Theory as a factual description of the birth of life, and the human race. (We don't even know where to place the exact delineation between 'dead' viral elements and bacteria). That said, the myth of Genesis is a beautiful and poetic metaphor of the first week of the Universe.
I believe in a decent tax system that helps protect the poor against starvation and homelessness. People always fall short of decent charity, no matter how many leftover carrots they throw at the underprivileged.
I hate the Eye For Eye, Tooth For Tooth routine. It leads to nothing except century-long feuds, Yugoslavia-style.
Yes, I am a conservative social-democrat. Sounds a bit broad, but that's what I am.
If it's true that God himself wrote the Biblical words, then he must have been mightily drunk while doing so. And Herman Melville is the far better writer anyway.
Books aren't true because they are old and beaten into schoolchildren's heads for two millennia or so.
I just wrote what I think. No offense intended against anyone. And I hope that this free place can stomach such harsh words. But the Bible and the Koran have more in common than Joe Public would like to believe.

[Straight Vermonter]

I believe in a decent tax system that helps protect the poor against starvation and homelessness.

I'll leave the Biblical stuff aside and just ask if you can point out the relevant article in the constitution that allows congress to enact such a tax system. Thanks.

[ohhhh]

[Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?]

Psalms 1

1. Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.

[sauropod]

Great article.

[Guenevere]

I hope...and pray....you will have eyes to see, and ears to hear....while there is still time.

Please avail yourself of the Word once again....

..and this time, ask the good Lord to guide you in your reading, and seek His face.

Do not blaspheme the Holy Scriptures.

[Restorer]

On the other hand, it favors a representative, mixed system of government called the Law of the Judges, which includes democratic elections, mixed forms of representation, local government, family rule, a fixed law, and impassioned pleas to "choose ye this day," not simply 'obey or else.'

The period of Judges was closer to anarchy than anything else. It certainly had nothing resembling our elections.

The author tries much too hard to get the Bible to prescribe his own preferences as being God's will.

[DaveTesla]

"the all-powerful state"
Meaning them.

They exalt themselves to be gods and Saviour's in their lust for GOD like power over men.

[Straight Vermonter]

I can't at the mo but am convinced that there is such an article in the US Constitution.

James Madison the "Father of the Constitution" was not so convinced.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison

[Pat The Postman]

...and there is the awful problem of cultural supremacy and cultural values themselves. See: there is, philosophically, no objective higher standard, or slide rule, to determine which God is the True God, or the Best God. We claim that GWB is on the right side and that the Biblical God is the True Lord. Islamists (whose violent fundamentalism I abhor) claim that Allah is the true God, and, say, the Iranian Head Of State on the Right Side. Since both religious books contain much that is reprehensible, and also good, decent guidelines, it is factually impossible to decide which side is the right side. In other words: there is no proof, nor certainty. It is down to your most own inner sentiments and irrational feelings to make up your mind about such things. One can't prove that the Bible is the Word Of God, just because it says so in the book itself - that is a fallacious circular argument. Same applies to the Koran, and Allah. And, to repeat myself, I hate Gods Who need an awful lot of violent threats to subjugate their Children, make them fearful, et cetera. Not my style.

[Restorer]

I hate the Eye For Eye, Tooth For Tooth routine. It leads to nothing except century-long feuds, Yugoslavia-style.

Not really. As enacted, the punishment for intentionally putting out someone else's eye was to have your own put out, by the state as a judicial punishment, not as a revenge thing by the family of the victim.

Even-Steven. No rationale for the family of the perpetrator to retaliate again against the original victim.

Perhaps you could explain to me why it is widely considered unjust or barbaric for a person to suffer the exact damage he intentionally inflicted on someone else. From a purely logical standpoint, it sounds like perfect justice.

If George chops off Andrew's foot, how is it unfair for the judicial system to chop off George's?

[Guenevere]

#19...Thanks-you for your kind reply....

..but oh my goodness Pat the Postman....
..don't try to see things through my eyes...if you re-read the Scriptures.

Ask for guidance to see them through His eyes.

I am just a sinful person saved by Grace....

[DaveTesla]

"I hate Gods"
Proverbs 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all
they that hate me love death.

Do not hate what you do not understand.

How can you compare a religion that took the scriptures
and corrupted them into a blood lust for power and
worship of Mohammad to Christianity?

I pray that one day your eyes will be opened.

[Free Baptist]

"Thus David falls, Saul falls, Solomon falls, Sampson falls, Eli falls (literally), Judas falls – even the entire nation of Israel falls. There is the Law of the Harvest, and it applies to all, rich and poor, men and nations, infidels and the elect of God."

And this is true even if the economic system is running on conservative ideals.

[Restorer]

You did not answer my question.

Claiming that a practice has something in common with sharia does not itself prove that practice to be unjust.

If I intentionally break your arm, what is unjust about my arm being broken as a punishment? Why shouldn't the perp suffer the same pain and inconvenience as the innocent person he attacked?

[TalBlack]

I would say, based upon your reply that you got out of the Bible no more than you wanted to when you picked it up. You seem to think that merely reading it confers some authority upon you. I can read the technical manual on a Boomer class submarine, but unless I THINK about the words before me I will get NOTHING out of the exercise.

That YOU got nothing out of your multiple readings of the Bible is manifest in every line of your reply but more so in this one: But the Bible and the Koran have more in common than Joe Public would like to believe.

Your sneering condescension aside: Anyone who can discern no great differences between Mohammad's legacy and the Bible, Mohammad and Jesus, who can't see the simple need for a "Chosen People", who places the word of God on a par with a human pronouncement, who would critique the Bible without ever mentioning It's two testaments and the difference between them, would also probably start his critique with the word "Um", and, therefore, isn't going to be taken very seriously.

[Restorer]

BTW, sharia imposes amputation for such property crimes as theft. The Law of Moses did not.

Big difference, IMHO.

It is also relevant that eye-for-an-eye was a replacement for earlier codes which punished perps much more harshly than the damage they inflicted. It was actually a limitation on punishment. For instance, the Athenian law code of Draco prescribed capital punishment for almost every crime.

[mlc9852]

If you read the Bible like it was a novel by Herman Melville, you will completely miss the meaning. Of course, if you don't believe it's the inspired word of God, you'll miss the meaning anyway.

[Lindykim]

You've raised a lot of issues. All of them can be explained in a manner that makes absolute sense.
My suggestion is for you to purchase Lee Strobels. "The Case For Christ" (A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus), and "The Case for Faith," (A Journalist Ivestigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity).


These are truly remarkable books.
And Lee Stroble, a former atheist with a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale & award winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune, literally made his transition from highly skeptical atheist to completely convinced Christian as a result of the investigations he undertook to write these books. In fact, his original purpose had been to disprove & hold up to ridicule, Christianity and Jesus Christ. These books and Strobles conversion are an amazing testimony to God of the Bible & the power of His truth. I urge you to buy them. They'll put to rest all of your personal objections.

[Restorer]

reality does not work that way. It is in human nature (see Yugoslavia) to be unable to stop after the Even-Steven scenario - people go on.

You are talking about revenge killings and civil war. In that context you are exactly correct.

The Law of Moses isn't talking about that.

In the US today, if I intentionally break your arm, I am likely to wind up being prosecuted for assault, battery, perhaps assault with intent to do great bodily harm. I might wind up, as a first offender, serving six months in prison, where I run an excellent chance of being physically or sexually assaulted by the scum that resides there.

Under the Mosaic Law, my arm would be broken, and I'd be healed up in two or three months.

Which is really a more harsh punishment?

I know I'd take a broken arm over six months in the slammer any old day. And I've broken nine bones in my time.

And I have a sneaky suspicion that the remembrance of that broken bone would be an excellent incentive not to commit assault in future.

[crail]

And I've broken nine bones in my time.
... And I have a sneaky suspicion that the remembrance of that broken bone would be an excellent incentive not to commit assault in future.

Or so you might think... but obviously remembrance of eight previously broken bones doesn't stop one from putting oneself in a situation where at risk of breaking a ninth bone! :)

[trebb]

God bless your efforts to move Pat the Postman to open his eyes to the Light of Christ, who is the Truth that will set us free. I get the sense that Pat is either an atheist that claims to believe in God in order to get close enough to believers to try to dissuade them of their belief, or that he feels that he is God, because he talks about how he hates certain areas of the Bible and would rather make up his own doctrine. Instead of a pure knee-jerk reaction, he uses almost intelligent arguments designed to do the opposite of what our Christian Duty compels us to do; carry the Word Of God and His Grace through the sacrifice of our Saviour, Jesus for our sins. Pat calls himself a social liberal, but his doctrine is more of a pure socialist and he would prefer a Godless society because it frees him to do what he will, as is represented by his hate for the thought that God would seek/endorse retribution. Perfect justice is anathema to him because it might come back to bite him. He is well-versed enough to make good-sounding arguments which means we should monitor his posts and help debunk some of his "theories" that they not be taken as sound doctrine and thereby deny some poor souls Eternity with the Lord.

God Bless

[Pat The Postman]

Well, I happen to believe that God can take a joke. God created Tommy Cooper after all. I see no sneering condescension in my words, but a willingness to take things with a pinch of salt if I have a deep mistrust towards them. Jesus reportedly said that everyone who was against him should be slain, or words to that effect. That's not cricket.
The Bible contains an awful lot of cruelty. As does the Koran. I can't help that, I did not write them. Fundamentalists will have you believe that if you don't grasp the true meaning of the Bible's cruelties, your eyes still must be opened. Well, if that's true, than each and every cruelty in the history of mankind lends itself to such 'higher learning'.
The awful practice of declaring yourself the Chosen People is a horrific connection between the Jews and Adolf Hitler. Of course Hitler was the sociopath here, no debate about that. He tried to beat the Jews at their own game and announced the superiority of the German Nation for a thousand years or so. I don't buy the logic of being Chosen, because someone claims so.
Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ceaucescu, and scores of other tyrants thought they had something special which elevated them above mere mortals. Which they did not.
But OK, sorry to have to log off. Special regards to Guenevere for her courtesy and modesty, and to all others, I respect you despite our major differences. In the future I will have to watch my outspoken-ness a bit better. I am still learning. And I bet I could share a good beer with all of you sometime.

[Pat The Postman]

...and blimey! I am not a pure socialist, very far from that, and I am NOT for a God-less society. And hey, the world needs more guys like Nelson Mandela - yesterday evening my Prof and me were discussing the incredible merits of that man in keeping his country stable despite his own terrible life's ordeal...
Bless him.

[Lindykim]

Something else for you to ponder is this: Alexandr Solzsenitsyn had been a died-in-the-wool atheist/communist until he found himself thrown into the gulag. While there he underwent an epiphany that led to his absolute conviction in the existence of the God of the Bible, the God of Moses and Abraham. Ask yourself why, when he could've picked from any of the other gods of this world, why he chose only the one of the Bible? And ask yourself how he arrived at the conviction that atheist/communists "run from the sign of the Cross as demons flee from Christ"?

There are some extraordinarily profound truths just waiting for you to search them out.

[crz]

Samuel was told what would happen if a King was chosen, and it did. Monarchs down throught he ages have done exactly what the ALMIGHTY told Samuel they would do.

Yet we are instructed to submitt and obey our leaders in scriptures.

We are also instructed to "purge the evil" from among us. So if there is an evil leader elected. then I guess we are to get her out?

[Wilhelm Tell]

The author tries much too hard to get the Bible to prescribe his own preferences as being God's will.

What I don't like about that type of preaching is that one can pick and choose a couple of verses here and there and "prove" anything. "Liberation Theology" supports communism using that same sort of preaching (with a lot of Marx and Lenin thrown in). Maybe reading the Bible in order to see oneself validated in carefully-chosen verses is not the best way to go about it.

[DaveTesla]

"guys like Nelson Mandela - yesterday evening my Prof and me were discussing the incredible merits"

Well Pat that explains it.
Mandela is a Marxist stooge and your professor is making
(brainwashing) you into an atheist communist stooge as
well.

You see pat the communist (who murdered over 160 million over the last century)
infiltrated the universities just so they could indoctrinate
and recruit people like yourself.

Have fun getting your mind screwed up Pat.

I will say a prayer for you Pat.

[Pat The Postman]

Being raised in an Orthodox-Christian country, the chance that Solzhenitzyn would have found a differently oriented epiphany are slim, to put it mildly. Lev Tolstoj (one of the greatest writers that the planet has known) was a deeply devout Christian too). If I remember correctly the novel Crime And Punishment also has a powerful religious conversion as its ending, a purification of the soul of Raskolnikov, the murderer.
I repeat: I am neither an atheist, nor an agnost, nor a marxist. The writings of Karl Popper alone justify condemning marxism as the pseudo-science that it is (along with psychoanalysis, by the way).
This sounds bitter, and is not meant that way: I am sure that Islam has its own converts, who after hardship and suffering found truth in the Koran. It does not bear much fruit to exchange stories from one religion to another about such subjects, however heroic individual courage is.
The problem: belief is the result of deep feelings of conviction. It can't be proven. As such it's bound to be the subject of (friendly or bitter) controversy, someones words against someone other's words.
Christians have a history of their own with terrible deeds. I already mentioned in another thread: the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witchhunts, the Crusades. All had torture, murder, and rape connected to them, and hence are comparable to the tragedy of 9/11.
The world's religions have a way of backsliding and trying to find higher ground again. It is in their nature.
Respect to all.

[grinner]

ping

[Guenevere]

Thank-you for your kind words.
Pray for this young man.

[Gritty]

I just wrote what I think.

Precisely so. From your explanation of what you claim to have read, it seems you missed the point of it all. Every one of your 'arguments' against the Bible are either refuted by a clear study of it or an understanding of history.

No offense intended against anyone.

Baffling statement, that! You distort the facts or get them out of context and then you blaspheme God Himself ("If it's true that God himself wrote the Biblical words, then he must have been mightily drunk while doing so. And Herman Melville is the far better writer anyway.").

You really should go back and read it again, this time with the purpose of understanding what is actually written, and why. Your own opinions have missed the mark, for whatever reason.

[Pat The Postman]

Hmmm...Mandela a Marxist Stooge? First time I ever read that. New to me. But rest assured, my Prof doesn't brainwash me. I had great fun dining with him and his family, moderate liberal democrats (in the European and not the USA sense) who originate in Canada. So there.
Respect, and have a wonderful Saturday.

[Restorer]

You are obviously correct. LOL

Although in my defense, four of those were childhood injuries and the other five were incurred in a recent bicycle accident.

I went 30 years without breaking anything!

[DaveTesla]

"Bless him."

Got you believing him, eh Pat?

You will be cursing him one day Pat.

[ohhhh]

[Um... I read the Bible a couple of times in its entirety. Better than quoting fragments or doing it the Google way. These were interesting experiences. The Bible was written by humans, and other humans made a selection of books that should be bundled and go under that name.]

I read the bible and continue to learn from our Lord's Word and the bible states that their is one God who used human jewish men to write HIS word for us.
12. Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
13. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
14. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Again;
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

[TalBlack]

"Jesus reportedly said that everyone who was against him should be slain, or words to that effect. That's not cricket."

You have read the Bible twice, WHAT did Jesus say? And what ELSE did He say? ALL of His words are in red so it isn't hard to find them

"'The Bible contains an awful lot of cruelty. As does the Koran. I can't help that, I did not write them."

Thanks for the clarification. You may have noticed that LIFE itself contains alot of cruelty, why wouldn't the Bible?


"The awful practice of declaring yourself the Chosen People is a horrific connection between the Jews and Adolf Hitler."

I'm sorry, PTP, but you're way way out here. To place The Jews on a moral level with Adolph Hitler is grotesque.

The Jews didn't proclaim them selves chosen, rather, they WERE chosen--by God. He gave them his Law and He gave them the Torah with the order that they keep it as given until the end of time. They have faithfully done so thru the millenia so that even at this very moment the language of the Torah is the same exact language in which it was given. Thru trial and travail down thru five centuries(including that little bit that Hitler was responsible for in the 20th century)the Jews have been what they are-His Chosen People.

[vladimir998]

Although I agree with the sentiments of the post, I must disagree with some of the supposed history being presented here: "Why don't we ask the martyred dead? Or have we forgotten that only a few centuries ago hundreds and hundreds of thousands of individuals in Europe were burned at the stake simply for reading the Bible or for calling sin "sin"?"

No one was EVER "only a few centuries ago" in Europe burned "simply" for reading the Bible. Reading the Bible was not a crime. Such an idea is a Protestant fantasy created in the last few hundred years. The early Protestants knew nothing of these supposed burnings for merely reading the Bible or surely the translators of the KJV would have mentioned it in their introduction to their Bible where they mentioned Engliah translations existed long before theirs.

Even though books were rare in the Middle Ages (it commonly took ten months to produce a typical Bible by hand) the Bible was still known and read by those who could read and get of them. And for those who couldn't read (which was a large portion of the population), as Jean LeClercq notes:

Scenes from the Bible were represented everywhere: on doors, in frescoes, in sculptured capitals and tympana, in stained-glass windows and furnishings. Culture and the life of the Church were drawn into unity in and through the Bible. The Bible was the basic book of medieval culture, and medieval culture was essentially a biblical culture.
(Jean LeClercq, "The Exposition and Exegesis of Scripture: From Gregory the Great to St. Bernard," in The Cambridge History of the Bible, ed. G. W. H. Lampe, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), p. 197).


Someone should read Graham's WHERE WE GOT THE BIBLE

[DaveTesla]

Pat here is 116,000 hits on google with the
search Mandels+Communist

Google search Mandela + Communist


"Mandela fest" lionizes a lifelong subversive On July 18th, world leaders and the controlled news media helped Nelson Mandela celebrate his 85th birthday, while totally ignoring his deep-rooted ties to the international Communist conspiracy. Mandela, "loved by all," turns 85 "They adore him like a favorite uncle, idolize him like a rock star and revere him like a religious icon." "Mandela, a watchman" "Johannesburg - Tributes poured in on Friday as former South African president Nelson Mandela celebrated his 85th birthday." Mandela mania "Former US president Bill Clinton has praised Nelson Mandela, saying he has given the world many gifts." (Real News 24/7: A page of unbridled adulation; many links of boundless, effusive praise. Disgusting, but quite telling as to the truly unconceivable dimensions of the worldwide "Saint Nelson Mandela" delusion.) (The above left photo shows Mandela flashing the Communist clinched-fist salute after his release from prison in 1990, flanked by then-wife Winnie and the late Joe Slovo, KGB colonel and South African Communist Party leader, in front of the Soviet flag. The New York Times [to cite one example] carried a photo of this event, but Mandela wasn't shown giving the salute, the flag was cropped out and no mention was made of the Communists in attendance. Above right photo shows him in the same pose. On the right, Mandela greets Cuba's Communist dictator Fidel Castro like a long lost brother or, should we say, long lost comrade.) From Marx to Mandela "The media have conveniently forgotten that Mandela was a hard-core Communist. He drank deeply at the well of anti-American Communist theory, and it has never left his system." (Real News 24/7: The writer of this piece, which came out in February, mentions Mandela's "apologetics for Saddam Hussein" and his claim that Iraq had no WMDs. We need to be distinguish between what, in the latter, happened to turn out to be true [actually, he based this principally on what he heard, such as former U.N. weapons Scott Ritter and the non-findings of Han Blix's U.N. inspection team] and Mandela's rabidly anti-American, fanatical backing of radical socialists [like Saddam].) The Mandela Files "The aim is to change the present world into a Communist world where there will be no exploiters and no exploited, no oppressor and oppressed, no rich and no poor. "—Nelson Mandela (emphasis added) Mandela—the "Great Statesman" "We live in a capitalist country and the chief task of our Party is to destroy Capitalism and replace it with Socialism." (emphasis added—from Nelson Mandela's "How to be a good Communist") African National Congress The homepage of Mandela's ANC has some revealing links. The left menu includes listings for SACP and COSATU, which stand for the South African Communist Party and the Communist-dominated Congress of South African Trade Unions, respectively. Interestingly, the Communist Party's homepage states: "The SACP is a partner in the Tripartite Alliance consisting of the African National Congress and the Congress of South African Trade Unions" and the COSATU's homepage has a similar statement; the ANC stands alone of the three in not proudly boasting of its connection with the other two (one must click on links to discover it). Terror in South Africa Winnie Mandela once said that the ANC and its allies would "liberate" South Africa with "necklaces," by which she meant a hideously cruel form of execution. The website linked to here is one that has graphic photos of this practice, plus pages with equally disturbing photos of criminal brutality from the thugs of Robert Mugabe (Mandela's Communist counterpart in Zimbabwe) and revolutionaries elsewhere in Africa. Be forewarned, these photographs are not for the faint of heart. Not recommended for children under 16. Other pages on the website are also of interest, such as the overview "Russians and Communists in South Africa," which clearly shows the SACP to be made up of Soviet operatives. Mandela addresses a South African Communist Party rally The South African government banned the SACP in 1950 under the Suppression of Communism Act. When this ban was lifted forty years later, Mandela helped the Party celebrate the occasion, addressing them as "comrades" (the customary term of solidarity between Communists) and declared To us as a democratic movement, the lesson of our history is very clear. It is what the peoples of Europe learnt during the turbulent decade of the 1930s, when fascism began its assault on democracy by launching a violent offensive against the Communists. It is the same lesson that the people of the United States learnt during the decade of the nineteen fifties, when the forces of Macarthyism [sic] launched an assault aimed at undermining the democratic heritage of the American people, by conducting a virulent offensive against Communist and left opinion. Nelson Mandela pays tribute to comrades "He spoke with passion, humility and humour about his comrades Ruth First and Joe Slovo, the struggle against racism and how he gave away a £250,000 donation from Margaret Thatcher to the South African Communist Party." The true political identity of current South African President and Mandela successor and clone Thabo Mbeki (left) is also carefully shielded by the lying media. In 1999, The New American's "Insider Report" noted: Thabo Mbeki, now first deputy president of South Africa, is expected to be the next South African president after Nelson Mandela steps down following the June 2nd elections. Mbeki, once the globe-trotting envoy of the terrorist African National Congress (ANC), was also a member of the South African Communist Party. But that has not kept the opinion cartel from giving him a 'moderate' image. (See under Mandela Replacement.) Mbeki addresses the 10th Congress of the South African Communist Party In 1998 Thabo Mbeki, then-president of the African National Congress spoke before the SACP, where he referred to the delegates as "comrades" and declared "I am certain that at the close of this congress we will emerge with a strong and united SACP, ready to contribute fully to the strengthening of the Alliance as a whole."

[DaveTesla]

"But rest assured, my Prof doesn't brainwash me."

Pat would you like to make a wager?