New York Times Columnist Calls Palin, Conservatives “Ideological Fellow Travelers” Of Norway Terrorist

So then can we call Barack Obama and his redistributionist economic polices an ideological fellow traveler of Castro? Because if we’re going to play that game…

On one level Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian responsible for the biggest massacre by a single gunman in modern times, is just a particularly murderous psychotic loner: the 32-year-old mama’s boy with no contact with his father, obsessed by video games (Dragon Age II) as he preens himself (“There was a relatively hot girl on [sic] the restaurant today checking me out”) and dedicates his time in asexual isolation to the cultivation of hatred and the assembly of a bomb from crushed aspirin and fertilizer.

No doubt, that is how Islamophobic right-wingers in Europe and the United States who share his views but not his methods will seek to portray Breivik.

We’ve seen the movie. When Jared Loughner shot Representative Gabrielle Giffords this year in Tuscon [sic], Arizona — after Sarah Palin placed rifle sights over Giffords’ constituency and Giffords herself predicted that “there are consequences to that” — the right went into overdrive to portray Loughner as a schizophrenic loner whose crazed universe owed nothing to those fanning hatred under the slogan of “Take America Back.” (That non-specific taking-back would of course be from Muslims and the likes of the liberal and Jewish Giffords.)

Of course, when liberals talked of taking America back from Republican majorities, and a Republican president, from 2000 – 2008 that wasn’t “fanning hatred.” That was, you know, different.

But I guess this sort of redistribution of culpability for violence shouldn’t surprise us. In the liberal mind, everything belongs to everyone else. The responsibility for obtaining health care doesn’t belong to the individual, it belongs to the collective. Sacrifice is shared, according to the President. You being fat isn’t a personal problem, it’s a societal problem. Your wealth isn’t yours, it’s simply a tax expenditure in so far as it’s earnings the government has allowed you to keep.

So, then, blame isn’t individual either. Blame is collective. The actions of one individual aren’t the responsibility of that one individual but rather the responsibility of every one who might share a few ideas with the individual.

At least according to leftist collectivist. I’d rather just hold murders responsible for being murders and not try to turn their crimes into an indictment of politics I don’t like.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • robert108

    You made the right call, port; it’s ideological finger pointing, the main weapon of the left.

    • britney1

      and its wearing thin on American people.
      If not for lies, they would have nothing to write.They pride themselves on causing problems not
      solving them.

  • I H8 GOPers

    “Beck said that he was disturbed by the summer camp
    that was the site of the overwhelming majority of the carnage
    perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik, the right-wing extremist who has admitted
    to the killings. The camp is run by Norway’s leading center-left party,
    the Labor Party, and has long been a haven for young people looking to
    break into the political scene.

    Beck said the camp “sounds a little like the Hitler Youth. I mean, who does a camp for kids that’s all about politics?” ”
    From Huffpo, no opinion, just facts.

    What will Palin and Breivik’s other ideological fellow travelers have to say?

    • InvestSmart

      “From Huffpo, no opinion, just facts.”

      Now we know why you get your “facts” wrong.
       

  • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

    I’d rather just hold murders responsible for being murders and not try to turn their crimes into an indictment of politics I don’t like.

    Unless their Muslims…then you abandon this phony principle you are only employing to distract from the facts that your side has demented followers who are prepared to commit terrorist acts that kill children.

    • Guest

      “Unless their Muslims”

      That’s “THEY’RE” not “THEIR” You’re such an uneducated little piece of shit. Can you hear everyone laughing at you? It’s loud enough.

  • mikemc1970

    NYT? Like anyone expected any different. Just part of the media conspiracy to paint all Conservatives and Christians as terrorists. Yawn.

    • jack1

      It’s always a big conspiracy with you people, innit?

      Tell me—why are all conservatives so goddamn WEAK?

      • mikemc1970

        Then NYT gets its talking points directly from the press secretaries desk.

        You people? What people would that be? My native American heritage doesn’t deserve your scorn, bigot.

  • Neiman

    Goldwater said extremism in the defense of liberty was no vice; but to the Left it is, it is a most positive evil, a most damnable criminal offense to appeal to a dated document that according to Obama was fatally flawed because it did not allow for Redistributive Justice. So, these people wanting to have a limited government, the lowest possible taxes to meet our federal needs, like national defense and a return to states rights are extremists, if any part of that notion is shared by anyone of a psychotic nature, it is a fair indictment of all people that in any way agree with these principles of our Founding Fathers.

    • I H8 GOPers

      “extremism in the defense of liberty was no vice”   VS    “He who values security over liberty deserves neither and will lose both.”I’ll take the 2nd one please. “extremism is defense of liberty” = “security over liberty.”By the way, Liberals + Liberty!

      • Neiman

        It is a terrible delusion to think liberals favor liberty. Liberalism is the greatest threat to liberty because liberalism is Nannystateism. It is big government and that is always an enemy of liberty. In the old Soviet Union, the liberal/socialist government (they are the same thing), always bragged about the rights of their citizens to free speech, freedom of the press and religious worship; but, these things are natural enemies of socialism, because they are the fuel for people desiring to live free from the State, to think for themselves, to prosper or fail on their own, to worship according to the dictates of their own consciences; and untold millions (perhaps 25-50 million), numbers never to be really known, were imprisoned and murdered for pursuing liberty of conscience. Your side, liberalism is but a Madison Avenue designed form of communism, it is atheist at its core, it cannot tolerate individual liberty and survive. They brag about tolerance, but it is only tolerance of their ideas, they are wholly intolerant of all others.

        • chris

          You seemed to have described the former Soviet Union, not politics in the US.  I don’t know anybody who thinks like that, and your comment reeks of hyper-partisan dishonesty.  In reality, both free market and government control are necessary in order for a society to work correctly.  If not, tell me why there has never existed a true laissez-faire economy.  If it weren’t for government control we wouldn’t have workers protections or nice highways nor national parks.  I couldn’t enjoy a stroll outside without having to join some club.

          Contrary to the trash that you spit out, liberals are the party of individual expression and freedom.  Just look to Hollywood.  look at gay marriage and marijuana legalization.  We have been pushing towards individual freedoms since the 60s and probably before.  You can tell when you’re in a liberal town because of the cultural and religious diversity.  Just look at Denver, for example.  It’s the conservatives that are always pushing back on those freedoms.

          • Neiman

            It’s late, so I’ll be brief. I was describing liberalism and whether it is Soviet or American; it is, it must be anti-liberty, it is its nature. it is the Nanny State. Gay marriage is not about rights or liberty, it is about taking control of our children, making them all wards of the state, subjected to liberal brainwashing in our public schools. It is about denying freedom of worship, making any expression of faith in the Public Square a criminal act, it is about criminalizing thoughts with anti-liberty, unconstitutional hate crimes laws. It is denying us the right to peacefully assemble to protest Obama at his political rallies, placing citizens in barbed wire holding pens out of sound and sight or arresting them near a gay pride rally, because homosexuals are a special protected class with special rights. It is about denying companies a right to move to other states when they are being driven out of business by liberal-DNC operated unions. On and on I could list the millions of ways liberals abridge our rights, ignore the Constitution and our laws. The only difference between you and the Soviets is you haven’t quite gotten to Marshall Law yet and turned the military against any American that will not submit to your anti-Christ, anti-Liberty, pro-immorality agenda – but you will, just give you time.

          • chris

            Sorry for the delay but I only have time to write after hours now.

            Your ideas are so twisted up I don’t know where to start.  First of all you cannot compare liberalism in the US to Russia, or to Latin America, or to any other place.  The political beliefs of a country is intrinsically tied to its history and culture, etc, and therefore every country is going to have an unique set of political beliefs.  I don’t attempt to bundle up conservatism in the US with that in Iran or France.  In addition I, unlike your ignorance of liberalism, realize that you have several branches of conservatism in the US, such as paleoconservatism, neoliberalism, “tea-party”, and in probably the most extreme form of the far right, the American Nazi Party.  There is just as much variety of liberalism as there is conservatism.

            Your oversimplifications and over-generalizations get you in trouble more often than you may realize.  They lead you down the road to racism, as with your war against people who worship Islam because they’re all supposedly terrorists, for example.  But then when a pale-skinned Christian Norwegian executes an island full of children for the sake of Christianity, and he says that there are other terrorist cells, you guys are incapable of calling it for what it is because the situation doesn’t fit your overgeneralized (racist) outlook.

            I could comment on your other stupidities but that’s all I have time for now.

          • Neiman

            First, it is a most damnable lie that the mass murderer in Norway was a Christian, it has been shown he was a Darwinian atheist, on illegal drugs at the time of his murder spree and there is early indications he is legally insane. Next, talk about incredible ignorance, even is this fellow called himself a Christian, where is his warrant in Scripture for his acts, if there is none nd there are none, he was acting outside the faith and no blame can be laid upon Christianity.

            It is a lie that I said Muslims are all terrorists, I have not, if you are going to lie, you are not worth debating.  I said and I can prove Muslims generally have a history of rapes, sexual molestation, thefts, tortures, murders and terrorism everywhere they are living and all support a laundry list of passages from their falsely called holy books calling for force, violent conversions and violent revolution to take over their host country’s governments. Further, I can prove by their books that if they do they support acts of violence likes these against all infidels, that makes them bad Muslims that should also suffer these same terrors. I can prove that emotionally and financially almost all Muslims support Islamic terrorism. It is a religion bent upon taking over the world by force for Allah – period and so I have encouraged not accepting them at face value, but keeping them in a special category of potential threat.

            I deny your list of conservative movements, I know nothing of any but the Tea Party and traditional limited government conservatism.

            Liberalism is the same thing as socialism and they always move towards Communism and everything I have described is part of the latter and we see many of them, albeit some in their infancy, in American liberalism and the Democrat Party. They are mostly all a real and present danger to the United States, the anti-Christ party, the Marxist Party.

            Your evaluation me is absolutely meaningless garbage.

          • chris

            Case in point!  you cannot fathom that this killer can be a Christian given your narrow view of what a Christian should be.  I suppose you believe Christians have never gone on witch hunts or crusades killing off scores of innocent people in the name of the Lord.  Anders Behring Breivik very much considers himself a staunch Christian and very much anti-Islamic and anti communism.  In the same breath you cannot understand that the vast majority of Muslims at least in the US are law-abiding citizens just trying to make a living.  I have a few Muslim friends from Pakistan and other places myself and they are all very nice people.

            Paleoconservatives and neoliberals/neoconservatives are real and have played a real part in US politics.  Just look at the differences in behaviors from Bush Jr from the other republican presidents in terms of foreign policy; he was a typical neocon.  Tea party is just the newest branch that I know of, and they’ve all but taken over the GOP at least for now.

          • Neiman

            Perhaps it is you and your antichrist mindset that causes you not to face the truth about your Christian hatreds:

            “Now that his 1500-page manifesto has been published, it is clear that any associations with Christianity were cultural and political, not personal.  His prime motivation was to halt the Islamization of “Christian” Europe brought on by political correctness and multiculturalism.  A review of his writings show him closer to secular science and the social Darwinists than to the teachings of Jesus Christ. http://crev.info/content/110724-norway_killer_cultural_christian_practical_darwinian?

            So you were wrong about this killer being a Christian, how about admitting you were wrong? You are not very bright intellectually, as I explained absent a scriptural warrant in the New Testament for acts of violence, anyone acting violently are acting outside the faith and cannot be accurately, honestly called Christian, even by lying liberal smear merchants hoping to stamp out Christianity.

            What I do know and you are grossly ignorant concerning, are Islamic history and I mean current history, their so-called holy texts and the way Islam operates. I cannot find it at this time, but a study was conducted looking at Islamic behavior as represented by their populations in their host country, always very friendly at first, on the surface, but as their populations grow they increasingly engage in thuggery to force their will upon the people, including conversions and the establishment of Sharia law, first for Muslim Civil matters and step by step over all law within their communities, including over non-Muslims living there. You should really get educated before you make a statement and show your gross ignorance.I am sure if you lived in Germany during WW-II you would have bragged about a few friendly Jew hating NAZI friends as well, they did exist you know.

            You want to play labels about conservatism Comrade Chris, but I am not concerned about labels and I only know limited government conservatives and the Tea Party, in no way in control, are nonetheless small government conservatives which you naturally hate because all liberals are big government, anti-Liberty, anti-Christ communists at heart.

          • I H8 GOPers

            crev.info! That’s certainly an unbiased source (sarcasm). crev referencing wnd? That’s way over the top, my brother.

          • Neiman

            The story originated in mainstream European newspapers. So, your Christ bashing won’t work!

            AS I said earlier we are in no way, shape, manner or form brothers, not by any possible definition. Calling me your brother will not save you!

          • chris

            I read the link you provided and I duly noted that it came from a very christian-based source, so of course it’s going to be somewhat biased.  The big question is, can he be denied the Christian title if he professes it and practices it?  He was, after all, baptized at the age of 15 and belonged to Christian-based groups.  Catholics, for example, don’t focus on asking Jesus in their heart, but rather they focus on following dogmatic rituals and pray to saintly figures other than Jesus.  Are they less Christian than you?  Likewise, there are many people who wear the cross on their arm but live a very unchristian life with unchristian values (at least not your Christian values), but who is to say they are not real Christians?  This guy seems to practice a very ancient version of Christianity, one in which hasn’t been seen since the times of the Night Templar and the Crusades.  It’s very possible that, just like him, the Mideveal Europeans didn’t see Christianity as asking for Jesus into their hearts but rather as a cultural war against all the non-Christians.  Maybe that’s worth investigating more into, because we might be seeing more of this type terrorist activity.

          • chris

            By the way, the Bible has proven to be just as violent as the Koran
            especially in the old testament, but most Christian branches have
            conveniently ignored those passages.

          • Neiman

            You really are quite the Christ hater aren’t you? Worse, you are a grossly ignorant Christ hater. While the entire Bible is the inspired Word of God and many parts of the Old Testament are instructive that contain historical data and provide the prophetic foundations for Christ Jesus as the Messiah; as to our doctrines, our faith, our way of Life, we are guided by the Holy Spirit in the New Testament, that is, the Covenant of Grace and Salvation. So, for Christians, we are guided in our lives by that part of the Bible and it provides no excuse, no warrant of any kind for violence and anyone calling themselves Christian and engaging in violence are acting outside the Christian faith.

            The Qur’an and al Hadith are from cover to cover filled with commands to engage in forced conversions, a long list of violent acts, including murder and terrorism, it is a murderous religion.

            While there are lots of incidents of violence in the Old Testament, many commanded by God, some even directly applied by God; the only way I could hope to open your mind to it is if your were a Christian, having His Spirit to guide you into all truth. Otherwise, I would have to teach you step by step the entire Holy Bible and all that it means, and I will not invest that time.

          • chris

            Now I understand where you come from and why you and I are so different in our viewpoints.  I’ve had some good friends who were Christian evangelists and they viewed all aspects of life, political and scientific, etc, in a very religious way.  Even though I respect your religious opinion, I cannot go down that road with you.  I cannot come to believe that God created the Earth in 7 days and that all other religions are inherently evil.  For example, I have friends who are Muslim, and the religion they practice is not much different from Christianity.  They believe in creationism and they ask God for forgiveness and they try to spread the word; I have argued evolution with a Muslim and he had the same arguments as all of my Christian friends.  In fact if you were preaching Islam I would have the same responses for you.  On a side note, you can take passages from the Bible and interpret them as cause for violence just as easily you can from the Koran, so it’s not the religion but the psychopathic person that creates a terrorist.

            Am I automatically a liberal since I don’t trust the main religions?  Not necessarily, because I’ve heard of atheists who are also conservatives.  After all, social Darwinism, where the strongest survive and the weakest inherent the yoke, is much more in line with conservatism than with liberalism.  There are also gay people who are conservatives, and they’re called the “log cabin” republicans in case you didn’t know.  I have friends who are also gay and I’ve seen that being gay is not a choice thing at all, but something they cannot avoid even if they tried, so why would I try to limit their rights in society?

            As you can see, life isn’t black and white, and it takes a huge amount of analysis and study to get a coherent understanding of it.

          • Neiman

            Even if you or these other folk may hold to come conservative ideals, like limited government, because of your other beliefs you are social/moral liberals, as is our host at SAB. So, at best you are economic conservatives. As far as I am concerned being a little conservative is like being a little pregnant, impossible. Once infected with a little liberalism, it metastasizes into a liberal cancer eventually killing the person if left untreated.

            While it is off the topic: 1. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that homosexuality has a genetic cause. Even if some single genetic factor could be identified, there is a difference in it causing gay desires or gay desires creating that difference (cause/effect). 2. I agree that gays generally cannot force themselves to stop having homosexual desires, often from a very young age. The same can be said for the child molester, the rapist, drug addict, alcoholic, and many other lustful desires; yet, in these other cases we push them to take positive action to control those desires, no longer acting upon them, for their good and that of society. Strangely, even though homosexuality reduces life expectancy by many times less than an alcoholic and is destructive of the people involved, those whose lives they impact and society, we give them a pass and say okay, you are allowed to pursue those lusts and we’ll even call it normal. Why? Mainly because homosexuality is a tool of the Left to enable them to transform society into a socialist state, controlled by a ruling elite.

            As to your Muslim friends, which by the way reminds me of back in the civil rights era how white would say they had a colored friend, it is phony but sounds so tolerant (a most vile word). I will explain with a story I have used many times before, hoping it is at a low enough grade level to be understood: The Mormons upon external observation seem to live the Christian life better than most Catholics and Protestants. They make exactly the same claims about Jesus, the Holy Spirit and other key doctrines as do Protestants about their faith. Listening, watching them, they seem to be model Christians in word and deed, people to truly envy in their lives. Problem is, they serve a completely different christ, their christ and their god bearing no real resemblance to Almighty God the Father and Jesus Christ of Holy Scripture. They are NOT Christians at all, despite all the things they say which are identical to the profession of faith of Protestants.

            In a lesser but similar way, we hear Muslims saying their God is the same God as Christians and Jews, they claim Abraham as their father, they believe Jesus was a prophet of God, they believe in Divine Creation, etc.; yet their god is the moon god allah from the Ka’bah, a false deity created by Mohammad many centuries after Christ, and their pagan moon god demands forced conversions and calls for rapes, thefts, tortures, terrorism and murders among his other vile commands. Show me these passages from the New Testament that can be misinterpreted as calls for violence by Christians and be prepared to defend them.You make a lot of wild, unsubstantiated statements and all they show is that you are hostile to the Christian faith and an enemy of Christ. That is your right, but I will oppose all such lies.

          • chris

            I understand, again, that your views are driven by your religion, but I cannot share them specifically because they are skewed.  Let’s take the issue of homosexuality in society, for example.  Imagine a heterosexual male who goes and gets laid every night with different girls, spreading diseases and getting the girls pregnant and then abandoning the children.  Then imagine a gay couple who goes steady and obeys all laws, and even manages to raise a family.  Which scenario is worse for society?  In short conclusion it’s not homosexuality that’s the problem but lack of responsibility and caution.  If homosexuals were allowed to marry then that should bind them to to only one partner and thus avoid many problems that stigmatize them.  But your religion cannot allow you to accept this as an answer and thus progress in civil rights are being hindered.  By the way, saying that homosexuality is a tool of the left to promote Socialism is one of the oddest comments I’ve heard in a while, and I’d like to hear your explanation of that.  Sounds like a fear tactic to me.

            Another example is your idea that Muslims are being told to rape and terrorize by a Moon god.   Now let’s go over this a little bit; is there a historical basis that Islam has origins from moon worship and a lot of those traditions have passed over to modern times?  From what I’ve read, yes.  Do modern Muslims actively worship the god of the Moon?  I doubt it, and if you were to ask a Muslim he would probably be insulted and show you passages in the Coran proving it wrong.  Does this moon god speak to them and tell them to rape and pillage?  That idea, being completely baseless and silly, could only thought up by someone of a competing religion trying to demonize and dehumanize Muslims.  It only serves to fans the flames of hatred, and that is why I don’t believe in what the evangelists preach.

          • Neiman

            FIRST ISLAM

            The pagan Arabs worshipped the
            Moon-god Allah by praying toward Mecca several times a day; making a pilgrimage
            to Mecca; running around the temple of the Moon-god called the Kabah; kissing
            the black stone; killing an animal in sacrifice to the Moon-god; throwing
            stones at the devil; fasting for the month which begins and ends with the
            crescent moon; giving alms to the poor, etc.,

            The Muslim’s claim that Allah is the God of the Bible and that Islam arose from
            the religion of the prophets and apostles is refuted by solid, overwhelming
            archeological evidence. Islam is nothing more than a revival of the ancient
            Moon-god cult. It has taken the symbols, the rites, the ceremonies, and even
            the name of its god from the ancient pagan religion of the Moon-god. As such,
            it is sheer idolatry and must be rejected by all those who follow the Torah and
            Gospel.

            The religion of ancient Israel
            was based on revelation; the Old Testament says that God appeared in diverse
            places and spoke to the Patriarchs; there they raised altars of undressed
            stones, called Beth-el—or House of God. Man’s sensual imagination soon led him
            “to collect his gods in the dust and fashion them as he pleased,”
            imagining that God resided in these Stones. Thus it became Beth-aven or House
            of Vanity. Beth-el abounded in Chaldea, Asia, Egypt,
            Africa, Greece, in remote
            parts of Europe, among the Druids, Gauls, and Celto-Scythians, and in North and
            South America.

            In the Hebrew language, stones fallen from the sky are called Bethel (Heb. “House of God”). After
            dreaming of a ladder reaching to heaven, Jacob called his stone pillow a
            Bethel-stone (Genesis 28:10-22).

            “The Pagans imitated the Beth-el of Jacob and consecrated them with oil
            and blood, making them gods, calling them Betyles (betylus, baetyl, betyles).
            In classical antiquity a stone, either natural or artificially shaped,
            venerated as of divine origin, or as a symbol of divinity. There were a number
            of these sacred stones in Greece,
            the most famous being on the omphalos at Delphi.
            Likewise there were the so-called animated or oracular stones. “Strabo,
            Pliny, Helancius (Hellanicus) or Beth-al-Jupiter, Cybele, Venus, Mithras). The
            greater part of the natural Betyles were the black meteorites or fire-balls
            fallen from the heavens and regarded by the Sabeists as heavenly divinities.
            These meteorites were the Cabiri, and the Pelasgi—whose most noted worshippers
            were wandering or dispersed men” (The Trail of the Serpent, by Inquire
            Within, Boswell Publishing Co., Limited, London (1936) p. 10).

            Meteorites-cults are common in Greco-Roman civilizations. According to the
            religious historian Mircea Eliade, the Temple
            of Artemis (Diana) at Ephesus contained a squat statue of the
            mother-goddess, carved from a meteorite that fell from Jupiter (Acts 19:26-35).
            The Palladium of Troy and the conic black stone or (Baetyl) of Elagabal
            in Emesa, Syria, are believed to be of
            meteoric origin. Likewise, the Phrygian mother goddess Cybele worshipped in
            Pessinus (later Rome)
            was a stone; doubtless a meteorite. A further example is the meteorite of
            Pessinunt in Phrygia, which was worshipped as “the needle of Cybele,”
            brought to Rome
            in a powerful procession after the Punic war on advice from the Delphic oracle;
            there the meteorite was worshipped as a fertility goddess for further 500
            years.

            “The most famous of all of the stone fetishes of Arabia was, of course,
            the black stone in the sanctuary of Mecca.
            The Kabah was, and still is, a rectangular stone structure. Built into its
            Eastern corner is the black stone which had been an object of worship for many
            centuries before Mohammed appropriated the Kabah for his new religion, and made
            the pilgrimage to this holy place one of the pillars of Islam” (Mohammed:
            The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960,
            p. 13-30; Britannica, Arabian Religions, p. 1059, 1979). The “Hadschar al
            Aswad” in the Kabah is the most well known example of meteorite worship in
            newer times. Despite the prohibition of portraying God and adoration of
            objects, pilgrims to Mecca kiss this “Hadschar al Aswad” (black
            stone) which, according to the prophet is “Yamin Allah” (the right
            hand of God), supposedly a divine meteorite or Bethel-stone predating creation
            that fell at the feet of Adam and Eve. It is presently embedded in the
            southeastern corner of the Kabah. Muslims touch and kiss the black stone during
            Hajj. moongod.htm

            Further information: thoroughly study the links in this file and also in The Cult of the Moon God 
            The True Origin of
            ‘Allah': The Archaeological Record Speaks The Vatican and Islam

          • chris

            If it comes to any surprise to you, Christianity also has many roots from pagan religions, especially from sun worship.  For example, the Christian calendar is a solar calendar, which was started by the Babylonians then modified by the Egyptians, and then modified by the Romans, and then finally to Christian mainstream:

            http://www.elijahscry.org/subpage.html

            The names of the months and days of our calendar also came from different gods and deities, many of them being celestial bodies:

            http://defendchrist.org/pagan_names.html

            Our major Christian holidays like Christmas (winter solstice, the “birth” of the sun-god in many religions) and many of it’s smaller traditions like the Yule log and Christmas tree, and Easter (a celebration of the Assyrian goddess Ishtar, the Babylonian sun-god Baal, and the anglo-saxon goddess of spring, Teuton) originated from pagan sun worship, and then adopted by the Christians.

            http://www.eliyah.com/paganexp.html
            http://www.essortment.com/christmas-pagan-origins-42543.html
            http://www.giveshare.org/booklets/easter.html

            The idea of the Halo, or the golden disk around the heads of saintly people, came from sun worship, specifically the Hellenistic and Roman sun-god Helios.

            http://christendomsfolly.xanga.com/725942243/item/

            The concept of Trinity had originated from the Babylonians in the form of Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz, and adopted by the Egyptians (Osiris, Isis, and Horus), Jewish Gnostism (Kether, Hokhmah, and Binah), and Greek philosophy (Unknown Father, Nous/Logos, and the world soul):

            http://jesus-messiah.com/apologetics/catholic/trinity.html

            There are parallels between the Egyptian gods, like Horus, and the life of Jesus:

            http://en.allexperts.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/Jesus-Christ-vs-Horus-1.htm

            Also, is it any wonder that Christians often see God as a bright yellow ball of light (the sun), and that angels are celestial beings, and we look forward to we day they go to Heaven (that word originally meant “sky”)?  All of that most likely came from pagan sun worship.

            If you follow some of the links that I’ve provided you’ll see they don’t all come from liberal and atheist sources, but from people of  different Christian branches and other religions with the purpose of exposing mainstream Christianity as being still pagan and idolizing.  Does this mean you actually worship pagan gods who tell you to spread hatred?  Probably not.  Why would you treat the Muslims badly by shoving their pagan roots in their faces?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Cathedrals were frequently built on old pagan sites.  When Christian missionaries went into Germany to convert (c. 7th century?) they incorporated aspects of paganism (Wotan) into the image of Christ.  Germans were not buying any sort of gentle, forgiving savior.  Spanish Conquistadores were shocked to find many aspects of native religion to be virtually identical to aspects of Christianity.  This caused much consternation at the time & it was proposed that Satan had done this as a trick to undermine the Faith.

          • Neiman

            I am a bit surprised to see you joining in Chris’s attacks upon the Christian Church.

            1. I would remind you, perhaps tell you for the first time that, there is a great difference between what the Roman Catholic Church may have done and the truth of Christianity and I am not talking about the Protestant Church, but the Body of Christ. If the RCC took over these pagan sites and merged paganism, which they have often mixed paganism with their religion to appeal to and not turn off native populations, that has nothing to do with the Body of Christ or Divine Truth.

            2. First, one cannot discount the fact that Satan constructs very similar appearing counterfeits, having a resemblance to the Truth, but being wholly false in its results. Next, Truth is universal, to determine if a thing is the Truth, it will have existed in all times, geographic settings and cultures, even if bastardized by mankind into a lie. Lastly, from the first it has been a set practice of the enemy of our souls to even quote dvine Truth, adding a twist, “hath God really said,” to sow doubt and leads souls astray.

          • Neiman

            I cannot invest the time refuting these many lies above, while school is on a break and I have more time right now, commenting on blogs is not my full time job.

            I have shown how Sunday worship was instituted by the Holy Spirit through the Apostles, while showing that there is no set day, but Christians are to hold all days alike as unto the Lord. So, no matter what the Roman Catholic Church might have done much later, Sunday corporate worship is not Pagan, it was instituted at the birth of the New Covenant.

            As to the Trinity, there are many similarities between early cultures, it was indeed a small world and many things were held in common, as many, many cultures talk about a global flood. But, as with Sunday Worship, the Trinity was established as being true from the creation of the world as recorded in Genesis. “Let us make man in “our” (plural) image,” it indicates more than one person and an equality of status/power and a perfection in agreement. From the foundation we know there was/is only one Almighty God, but we also know, whether the word trinity was used or not, that the one God was three Divine Persons in One Divine being. You need not nor can you understand it and I don’t have the time to teach you the Holy Bible, it is sufficient to say that according to God’s Word, the existence of the Trinity was known from the foundations of this world and thus appropriated by pagan cultures later.

            Yes, other cultures understood this concept, they tried to apply this truth to their pagan deities, but they were imitators, not originators of this divine Truth.

            I can thus destroy your every false claim against God; but no matter the facts and the Truth, if you were of the Body of Christ these things would be self evident, even if hard to explain; if you are not, as you seem to be, part of the Body of Christ, then they are impossible to understand and you will continue to attack Christ without reason.

          • chris

            One more point, the idea of Sunday as significant to Christians also has roots from sun worship:

            http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/sabbath_to_sunday/8.html

          • Neiman

            I cannot begin to invest the time in refuting all of this nonsense. Typical of all liberals and those opposing Christ is to throw as much against the wall as possible, hoping to overwhelm with volume versus seeking the Truth.

            Sunday worship was started during the time of the Apostles, meeting on the first day of the week, Saturday was the last day, so Sunday the first day was when Jesus arose from the Grave. Separating the New Covenant from the old, the Apostles and early disciples, as was their custom met on the First Day of the week to use that day to remember the Lord’s resurrection and to institute the New Covenant. However, as is common among all outside Christianity and even from a host of ignorant Christians, the actual doctrine is that we Christians observe every day as the same unto the Lord, there is no Sabbath Day Rest as our rest from our labors to be saved is Christ, He is our Sabbath Rest as regards our Salvation. While we generally meet on Sunday for corporate worship, it is not a particular holy day, it has nothing to do with Sun worship and thus you are completely wrong.

            Now what the Roman Catholic Church might say or if they chose Sunday for any less that holy purpose, that has no interest to me or those Christians not submitting to Rome.

          • chris

            “Typical of all liberals and those opposing Christ is to throw as much against the wall as possible, hoping to overwhelm with volume versus seeking the Truth.”

            This is exactly what you did to me by referencing the huge reference to moon worship in the Islamic religion.

            I’m not attacking Christ at all, but merely stating it’s roots, just like you state the roots of Islam, and as expected you defended your own just like a moderate Muslim would by discrediting any parallels to pagan religions as mere coincidence or works of evil and referencing your own religious texts as the ultimate authority.  But the difference is that I don’t see these roots as a bad thing, but merely as a natural evolution of religion.  I’m not judging whether the Christian religion is bad because I see that people are bad, not religion.  I’ve met many great Christians and many malicious ones.  To me one of the worst things a Christian can do is go about and judge and criticize everybody else, because they go directly against their own religious texts.  Didn’t Jesus say “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”  There is something very hypocritical for a person who follows the mainstream interpretation of the Bible to be so hyperpartisan and add fuel to the fire of hate that is literally splitting the country apart.

            By the way, the ancient Romans also celebrated the day of the sun as the the most significant day of the week, the highest place (first or last) among the planetary gods.  You don’t have to take my word for it, the evidence is right in the names of each day; in their original meanings they are: Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn.  How was that adopted as a significant day in Christianity?  The answer is really beyond the scope of my little comment, but I do see it interesting that Sunday along with Christmas and Ester all correspond to the birth, death, or resurrection of the sun in several western religions.

          • Neiman

            Posting a single story on a single issue is hardly comparable to your deplorable tactics in attacking Christianity with everything possible.

            I gave you the exact origins of two of the matters you contended disproved the Christian faith, you did not reply, did not acknowledge that in both cases they predated any pagan origins. No, you ignore them and just continue your anti-Christian rants. You did not accurately state the roots of anything about the Christian faith, your parroted antichrists sites lists, without any first hand knowledge or research.

            Like most enemies of Christ, you quote verses our of context and that context is the entire Bible. You are grossly ignorant and so cannot know that there is a difference between judging another and. 1. Condemning sin as God condemns sin and as He would have us reprove the world of sin. 2. We are enjoined to judge the fruits of the Spirit (words/deeds) of others to determine if they are, according to Scripture, of the Spirit that we might know them for who they are. The Bible tells us that people like you having not His Spirit are unable to discern spiritual truth, so you use verses inappropriately as weapons against Christians, but you do not see that you violate them all.

            Your evidence is wrong, I have shown it to be wrong but you do not have the honesty to admit you are wrong.

          • chris

            I did respond do you, and again, you debunked my arguments by referring back to your own religious texts and beliefs.  If you had told a Muslim that he worshiped the moon god, he would have simply debunked you by referring to the Koran where it would say that Allah is the one true god who created the universe, not just the moon.  Even you would say that is not valid because it lacks independent sources.It’s true that not all Christian branches see Sunday as the Sabbath, but our whole society is based around Sunday as being the day of rest, and many calendars still see Sunday as the last day of the week so obviously it’s etched deep in our psyche.  Again, the idea of Sunday being a holy day came from sun worship, not Christianity.  Here are but two sources from dozens that I’ve found supporting such idea, and the basic premise is such:  “In 321 CE, while he was a Pagan sun-worshiper, the Emperor Constantine declared that Sunday was to be a day of rest throughout the Roman Empire”.  They go on to say that the Church Council of Laodicea circa 364 CE decided to change Sabboth from Saturday to Sunday in order to distance themselves from traditional Jewish holy days.http://www.religioustolerance.org/sabbath.htmhttp://www.churchathome.org/articles/sunday-christian-or-pagan.htmlRegarding the Trinity concept, there are many sources that explain its pagan origins and how it entered Christianity, but it is simply too lengthy to put here.  In fact many Christian branches reject such beliefs because of it’s paganism and the fact that it’s never mentioned in the Bible:http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/doctrine/the%20origin%20of%20the%20trinity.htmhttp://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/beliefs/trinity.htmAgain you accuse me of hating Christianity, which I don’t because I judge people not religions, but you are guilty of hating Islam and probably many other beliefs that don’t deserve to be hated.  Your hipocracy is obvious and painful, and unchristian.

          • Jvette

            Christians meet on Sunday to celebrate the resurrection of the Lord. In the beginning, they also still observed the Sabbath, going to the temple, but while there proclaiming the Lord. After the destruction of the temple in 70AD, they obviously no longer went there on the Sabbath.

            We see the evolution from the Jewish practice to the Christian practice in the NT though there is nothing in the NT that mandates meeting on Sunday. In only one place is the “Lord’s Day” called such and that is by John in Rev. and some believe it refers to Judgement Day and not Sunday.

            My point is that we know from Scripture that the Apostles and the believers met on the first day of the week, known in the Western World as Sunday, that on that day they proclaimed the Word and broke bread. Luke indicates in Acts, that meeting to break bread on the first day of the week is something they did regularly. Paul speaks of money being collected on that day.

            So that is how “that day” was adopted as significant. It had nothing to do with Roman sun god or whatever. It was a tradition that started very early.

            As for any pagan practices or beliefs by Christians or similarities in the story of Christ in other traditions, what must always be remembered is that all of creation belongs to the Lord. All people and all things in all times and so it is not unreasonable to think that other people wanted to know God and some inkling that He exists, though their knowledge of Him was not perfect.

            And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

          • chris

            You say that Sunday is not a holy day, and it probably isn’t according to the strictest interpretation of the Bible, however most churches traditionally celebrate mass on Sunday, and it’s the official day of rest in the US, in fact the sale of alcohol is sometimes prohibited on that day.  Easter is celebrated on Sunday,  and even though Christmas isn’t, many cultures make a big deal out of the first or second Sunday after Christmas.  So my question is, if Sunday is nothing more than a “breaking of bread” as explained in the Bible, why does it have so much religious power in Western culture?  It’s not just me, a secular liberal, that say it came from Pagan roots, but many non-catholic Christian branches also.  Just look at this Christian link, which goes to great lengths to prove  this exact point:

            http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1950/May/pagan-sunday-observance

            While we’re on the subject, do you know what the word Easter originally meant?  Look it up.  There are many upon many supposed Christian traditions that have obvious pagan influences.

          • Jvette

            I never said Sunday is not a Holy Day, I was merely pointing out that there is nothing in the NT which shows the move from the Saturday Sabbath to Sunday as a day set aside for worship, but there was already a tradition of doing so. It is implausible to say that the Jewish/Christians were following any kind of Roman pagan ritual in this, so it is wrong to try to connect Sunday worship as based on a pagan word. It just so happens that that was the word for that day in the Roman world and eventually, due to the dominance of the Latin language in early Christianity, Sunday is the name for the day.

            As I stated quite clearly, I am very familiar with the history and background of different symbols and celebrations. I do not take them as meaning anything other than what I wrote in that first post. All of creation is God’s to use as He will. Christians from the very beginning celebrated the resurrection, that is what the Sunday worship is all about. That local customs and culture became a part of the faith does not bother me in the least.

          • Neiman

            First, very few homosexuals want to get married or in fact do get married, they don’t want the restrictions, as very few are monogamous and they want hundreds of sexual partners and many pretend. short term false marriages to play house and gain tax and other financial benefits. In those places where homosexuality is accepted, marriages among heterosexuals fall precipitously and divorce rates soar, the reality is that the higher profile and acceptability of homosexuals actually destroys marriage generally, it causes a breakdown in families, a perversion of families, children become wards of the state and the family, the cornerstone of any stable, prosperous civilization is destroyed.

            It is when a society casts off God and seeks sexual liberation and that demands homosexuals be liberated from their dark closets as well, then fidelity in marriage, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases increase, out of wedlock marriages and etc are the filthy by-product when a society has fallen so far as to have normalized homosexuality. See Rome as a great example of this moral decay. No it is not that heterosexuals are the problem, it is a casting off of God by a people, of moral restraints, of indulging the lusts of the flesh, selfishness and while it is not caused by homosexuality, that lifestyle choice is but a late symptom in a social disease that is fatal to any nation.

            Socialist have as their greatest desire the dictatorial control of a people, for that control to succeed they must accomplish two primary goals: 1. Destroy religion, it is an opiate of the masses and they cannot control a people that serve God first.  Homosexuals are mostly antichrist, enemies of God because He condemns their sexual lifestyle and they corrupt religion, making it into a servant of their lusts, not the worship of God.  So, they help socialists achieve their atheist state. To all socialists the State is everything, it must have absolute loyalty to survive and they cannot allow that loyalty to be shared with God. 2. They must control the children, to indoctrinate them, to control them, to brainwsh them in the atheist, socialist ideology. With gays and their false marriages and perverse alternative definition of families, they are causing the breakup of families and the state has taken control of the children. They even allow gays to control our schools and brainwash the children in the gay lifestyle, including how-to classes, to recruit new sexual prey for their otherwise dead end lifestyle; as long as they support the socialist indoctrination of the NEA.

            Note: I have no religion, I have a personal, intimate relationship with Jesus Christ and thereby eternal life. I wish you could honestly say the same.

          • Jvette
          • Neiman

            At least you are consistently wrong, not haphazardly.

            That is man’s definition and it applies to all but Christians – even atheists/evolutionists. For Christians, according to the Protestant translation of Holy Scripture, the Christian life involves no works of the flesh of any kind and all you listed are works of the flesh, We just went through that about Confirmation Vows, anything we do is by definition of the flesh, it cannot be otherwise. Anything we do denies the perfect work of Christ in Salvation, it is attempting by our vows, rituals, traditions, liturgies, practices to add something to His already Perfect Finished work on our behalf. To be Born Again of the Spirit is not, it cannot be any part of works of the flesh, it is (a) By faith, by the transformation of our minds, acknowledging that we died to the old nature with and in Christ Jesus on Calvary. (b) Yet, as the Holy Spirit tells us in Galatians, nevertheless we still live, are made alive in Christ, but we have no life in us, as long as we are in the flesh we abide in death. So, we are told for the Born Again believer Jesus lives His Perfect, Holy Life in and through us, as to our natural spirit we died, but we have a new life (nevertheless we live), His Spirit living His life within us.

            So, if we no longer live, we cannot be religious at all, we are free from all Law, set at liberty, having no obligations to do anything to gain or maintain salvation or to please God. What we do is by faith die daily to our SELF (works), hopefully fully surrendering to Christ and then He lives in and through us and whatever we do that appears holy and good, it is not us, but Christ living His divine life in us, as we share His Spirit Life. So, as a Roman Catholic you may indeed honestly claim to be religious, a great many Protestants can make the same claim; but children of God cannot lest they be ignorant, as the old person that could have been religious has died, now hopefully the world will only see Christ living His life in us.

            Example: One day many years ago my wife and I had a fight on the way to church</u?, we were not very happy with one another (she was wrong of course), but we set it aside and gathered for corporate worship. Later when relating how we had fought over something stupid, a young Christian woman and others were shocked, no that could not be true of us, we were such good Christians. What they mostly saw in us was Jesus living His Life in and through us and it was/is always good; but we knew we were not always what people saw, we sometimes were in the flesh. The flesh argued and fought and even went through some religious rituals, but the Spirit in us was not religious at all, but righteous, holy and good, it was Christ living His non-religious life in and through us.

            I do not expect you to agree or even understand this difference, but it is true that fact notwithstanding; for Christians it is a matter of setting aside the flesh with its religious demands and desires, and surrendering to Christ in all things. I wish I were much better at surrender, but that is the truth about Christianiity – it is not, it should never be religious at all

          • Jvette

            Ah Neiman, I gave you the complete and accepted definition of the word religion which says this….

            1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and
            worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to
            religious faith or observance
            2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
            3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
            4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

            If you worship God, you have religion.
            If you have a personal relationship with Jesus, you have a religion. It may not be adherence to rituals or practices or “institutional” , but it is in fact religion.
            If you hold a principle or system of beliefs with ardor and faith, you have religion.

            My apologies to Jeff Foxworthy:)

          • Neiman

            I said you would not understand!

          • Jvette

            I understand Neiman, I just don’t agree.

          • Neiman

            If your understood it from a Spiritual perspective, you would of had to agree!

          • Jvette

            Really, Neiman, you’re going to put the “I’m spiritual, not religious” out there? LOL!!!!

            That I adhere to a “religion” does not make me any less spiritual, nor does that fact that you eschew “religion” make you any more so. The rejection of “religion” is man made and of fairly recent origins and, though one may wish otherwise, the word defines a relationship with God or “a god” or the worship of one’s God, or the system by which either is practiced.

            I would never presume to pass judgement on how you or anyone else chooses to increase or deepen one’s understanding of, or connection to God.

            I will say that Jesus said, “The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.”

            What God  has created, all of creation, was made for man. Only man was made for God. The things of this material world are for our use. The question then is, for what purpose do we use this creation? If we incline our minds and hearts to God so that all we do is done for the glory of God, and not our own, then the use of the material in that pursuit is of God is good. Remember back to the quote I gave in my earlier post that all things work to good for those who love God. The real irony for those who love God, is that while it is all for the Glory of Him, we are the ultimate beneficiaries, for we are the ones who receive the more abundant life.

            I have spoken of human nature and how it influences us. It is human nature to get caught up in the material and forget the spiritual. In this vein, the rituals are made for man, not man for the rituals. Man is a creature of habit and ritual, and for some the lack produces a vacuum which is filled by things that are not Godly.

            Jesus quite clearly broke some of the laws of the rituals, but He also followed them. The Last Supper was eaten according to the Jewish ritual of remembrance, but there were new rituals established that went along with the new covenant. The covenant which God never broke, yet man finds impossible at times to keep.

            Again, we don’t agree on this, but it doesn’t mean I don’t understand your “spirituality over religiosity” stance.

            At the risk of once again alienating you, I laughed out loud at your last response. I couldn’t help but picture an aging hippie with crystals, candles and new age music “feeling” the spiritual vibe.

            Please tell me I’ve got that all wrong! LOL

          • Neiman

            Without any pride or sense of any superiority of any kind, there are some things that are absolutely unexplainable to most, even sincere Christians.

            By the way, I was not a Sixties Jesus freak, while I was raised a Preachers Kid, I was a Marine at that time and while I believed deeply in the Lord down in my heart, I was a hell raising, hard fighting, on weekends hard drinking, foul mouthed in your face Jarhead. One day I picked up some Hippie Jesus freaks and while I was always too conservative for the clothes and some other things they seemed to portray, I admired their devotion to Jesus, I knew they were on a better path in life and despite my being a real bad-assed tough guy – taking no crap from anyone (I still suffer from that somewhat), I wish I had their courage to have lived so openly for Jesus, they had more manhood and courage than the Marine driving them down the road or any other Marine ever had.

            I tried to explain the difference in being in Christ and religion and it will never register with you, which is fine as you have freewill, but sad because you miss a better way in my opinion. A person that has according the Scripture considered themselves dead with Christ and Him now living His perfect life in and through them have ceased from all struggles, all works of the flesh, which includes any form of religion to either gain or maintain their salvation or to please God, seeing all these things as empty, vain and contrary to a life in Christ. If we see anything in them that is truly good, it is no part of them, it is Christ living His life in and through them, as they have ceased from all works.

            No, the difference between people that claim “spirtuality,” being “spiritual” or religious and those that have learned to walk in intimacy with Christ, surrendering to Him that He might live His life in and through them is like night and day, the former never comprehending the latter.

          • Jvette

            I tried to explain the difference in being in Christ and religion and it
            will never register with you, which is fine as you have freewill, but
            sad because you miss a better way in my opinion. A person that has
            according the Scripture considered themselves dead with Christ and Him
            now living His perfect life in and through them have ceased from all
            struggles, all works of the flesh, which includes any form of religion
            to either gain or maintain their salvation or to please God, seeing all
            these things as empty, vain and contrary to a life in Christ. If we see
            anything in them that is truly good, it is no part of them, it is Christ
            living His life in and through them, as they have ceased from all
            works.

            No, the difference between people that claim
            “spirtuality,” being “spiritual” or religious and those that have
            learned to walk in intimacy with Christ, surrendering to Him that He
            might live His life in and through them is like night and day, the
            former never comprehending the latter.

            In my mind, Neiman, you are the one who doesn’t get it since you insist on supposing that you alone know what constitutes an intimacy with Christ. You presume that there is no intimacy in the ritual, yet have no idea how such affects my heart and mind or how I live my daily walk with Jesus, or even what my relationship with His is. 

            What did Jesus mean when He said, “Do this in remembrance of me.”?

          • Neiman

            I could not respond under your most recent reply as these irritating diminishing comment sections get to the place wherein the reply button has disappeared.

            In my mind, Neiman, you are the one who doesn’t get it since you insist on
            supposing that you alone know what constitutes an intimacy with Christ. You
            presume that there is no intimacy in the ritual, yet have no idea how such
            affects my heart and mind or how I live my daily walk with Jesus, or even what
            my relationship with His is.

            What did Jesus mean when He said, “Do this
            in remembrance of me.”?

            As to the last item, I am very much in favor of Communion and would not in the least disagree deny that it is a reminder of His Sacrifice; but, a. It is not required, it is not a law, it has nothing to do with our gaining or maintaining our Salvation, it was solely a gift to be used to remember Him and cannot increase our intimacy only a remembering of the costs to Him and what that body and blood meant for our eternal souls. If I can talk to you and be in intimate proximity to you every moment of the day (You would hate it, I can be a pain), why would I look at your picture to remember you? How would that looking upon your picture improve upon looking at you personally and talking face to face? b. I certainly would not subject Christ to being sacrificed afresh many thousands of time each day around the world, or think such an obscene thought that the wine becomes His actual blood, causing me to drink blood, something God through the Apostles felt constrained to argue against. Nor would I agree that in that communion wafer his blood is back intertwined with His Body, that precious blood that was shed for me.

            I gave you my belief about religion versus a spiritual relationship with Christ. What would you have me do, speak in unsure words, offering caveats to what I believe in case I am wrong? What kind of faith is that? I oppose religion, that is any works of the flesh in our walk with Christ as they are, by definition polluted, unclean things because in my flesh (old nature) dwells no good thing. In religious works I am, though we would all want to deny it, adding to the complete work of Christ on my behalf, wherein I am to add or withhold nothing. Further in religious works I am allowing things to come between me and my relationship with Christ, it not being an unveiled communion any longer, but one clouded, diminished by works of my flesh. There has from the first by the Judaizers in the infant Christian Church a great battle that Paul enjoined, because the flesh and its works and the Spirit of God are at enmity with one another. You have chosen religion as your means of approaching Christ, following certain rituals that you might be found pleasing in His sight; but knowing that I cannot ever be pleasing to Him by any works of my flesh, I am forced to approach Him naked of anything but my redeemed soul, knowing that only He and what He may do in and through me are of any value.

          • Jvette

            I thought that stupid one letter per line was just my own special hell, lol.

            I ask nothing of you, dear Neiman. We are both Christians albiet very different in our understanding of what that means. Jesus said, “Do this” and other things which leads me to worship in a way you reject. I can live with that. I have only ever defended my faith using Scripture to explain why I believe what I believe.

            You do the same, mostly.

            So, no I ask nothing of you but the friendship which we have via this blog. Prayers are always a good thing though, so feel free:)

          • Jvette

            Oh, and you a pain? I don’t believe it.

          • chris

            Contrary to what you say, Communism has historically prosecuted and eliminated gay people, and open, democratic societies have given rights to gays.  Cuba, North Corea, etc, all have treated gay people worse than animals.  You can easily tell an open and democratic society from a closed one by the way it treats its women and minorities, including gays.  I want to live in an open society, not a communist one!!!

          • Neiman

            I said you socialists on your way to Communism use gays for gaining control of our children, schools and society; I didn’t say you didn’t kill them after you got control as even communists know they are antisocial and work against society.

          • chris

            So, liberals use gays to get control over society and create communism, and then once communism is established we kill off the gays?  So what do we do with the children?  You just dove off the deep end on this one buddy.

          • robert108

            False.  There is no Christian equivalent to “kill all the infidels”, or the various mutilations prescribed in the Koran.  Furthermore, unlike islam, Christianity has had a Reformation, and no longer identifies with its primitive past, unlike islam, which is stuck in medieval times and values.
            We ignore those passages because we no longer subscribe to them.

          • Neiman

            While I generally agree, from my viewpoint: There is not only not a single passage in the New Testament that approves of any acts of violence, I still subscribe to every passage under the New Covenant – every one under the covenant of Grace. Before the Reformation, even then Catholics had no scripture that supported/condoned their murders and acts of torture and while after the Reformation the Church indeed rejected all such acts, they were never approved in Scripture in the first place.

            Lastly, I will not judge as a negative any acts of violence in the Old Testament, as each one that was approved or led by God were according to His Will for His own Purpose and I am not about to judge Him

          • Vlad

            Onward Christian Soldier!!!!

          • Vlad

            Onward Christian Soldier!!!!

          • Neiman

            More of your antichrist filth there Vlad? You cannot debate an issue, you know you are wrong and you try and attack/demean Christians with juvenile nonsense.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Looks like somebody’s got your number again, Neiman.  You stand out like a coffee bean in a jelly bean jar, dont’cha?

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Gay marriage is not about rights or liberty, it is about taking control of our children, making them all wards of the state, subjected to
            liberal brainwashing in our public schools. It is about denying freedom
            of worship, making any expression of faith in the Public Square a
            criminal act, it is about criminalizing thoughts with anti-liberty,
            unconstitutional hate crimes laws. It is denying us the right to
            peacefully assemble to protest Obama at his political rallies, placing
            citizens in barbed wire holding pens out of sound and sight or arresting
            them near a gay pride rally, because homosexuals are a special
            protected class with special rights. It is about denying companies a
            right to move to other states when they are being driven out of business
            by liberal-DNC operated unions.

            No wonder you hate homosexuals and gay marriage so much Neiman, you blame everything that you hear on the radio, or in your demented church, on them.  If they were deemed witches, you would burn them.

          • awfulorv

            As to a laissez-faire economy, we were damn close during the Cal Coolidge era and the economy exploded.  Also, don’t attempt to enjoy the sights of Denver at night. You will likely be met by gangs of black youth bent on their redistribution of wealth plans. 

        • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

          And there’s Neiman showing us in this timely manner that he is the ideological fellow traveler of the Norway murderer.

  • ellinas1

    “So then can we call Barack Obama and his redistributionist economic polices an ideological fellow traveler of Castro? Because if we’re going to play that game…”
    Rob Port  •  July 25, 2011

    What do you mean by if we’re going to play that game?  Where have you been, and what have you been the last 3 years? Have you been asleep?
    The right wingers and repubs have been playing this game right here on your blog.
    Called him everything that resembles Castro.
    If you were awake, you must have been looking at a porn magazine and masturbating.
    That would explain why you missed the daily barrage of “he is a marxist/communist” your ideological fellow travelers have been heaping on Obama and any and all non conservative(s) /republican(s) who dare post on your blog.
    And last but not least, if you were awake and not masturbating, you are trying to masturbate us with this nonsense.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    I heard that Breivik had high praise for Obama in his 1500-page “manifesto.”

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      Correction: After scanning Breivik’s manifesto, the only line I could find praising Obama appears to be sarcastic.  The news source must have been confused, even though Breivik’s English is excellent.  His characterization of Obama is, however, quite accurate.

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        Mr. Meister, what was the “news” source you’ve referenced.

        • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

          A talking head on TV as I passed through the room.  I was hoping that my comment would rouse someone to confirm or deny this.  I then found out that Breivik’s “manifesto” was available in its entirety on the web.  I scanned it for comments on Obama.  I found nothing praising Obama.  I had bacon and eggs for breakfast and plan to mow the lawn. Is it too early for someone to tell you to STFU?

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Mr. Meister, do you recall the network’s name?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Well, I guess “STFU” didn’t work. …  A little background.  I do not watch TV.  I was at the home of someone whose TV habits I am unaware of.  I cannot recall the network’s name, since I never knew it.  The TV was in a basement man-cave, attractively appointed with a stone fireplace over which the owner’s great-great-great-great-great (?) grandfather’s Revolutionary War musket was displayed. A door led directly out to a patio, where a fine brisket was deep-frying.  Beyond a fence, festooned with some plants producing edible berries, stretched a vast cemetery where thousands of cicadas were chirping high in the trees over the graves.  The cemetery is in Sioux Falls, SD.  I will get the name of it for you if you wish to go there and drop by to confirm all this with one of the permanent residents.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Let’s just say it was Fox and move on, shall we?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            If you so desire.  I was there & missed seeing you.

    • mikemc1970

      I understand he plagiarized several passages of the Unibomber Manifesto nearly verbatim. Replacing only a word here and there.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        That might explain the good English.  One theory was that someone else must have assisted him in writing 2083.

        • mikemc1970

          So Breivik could be a Marinus van der Lubbe? Maybe setup to be used in a false flag type attack.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            We live in interesting times.  My general disbelief in elaborate conspiracies is being eroded.  “Fast and Furious” definitely ate out a chunk, and the anthropogenic global warming hoax has all the markings of another such.  It is difficult to make sense out of Breivik’s actions.  Anti-Muslim groups are horrified, and they have stated that his deeds have done huge damage to that cause.  At this point it just doesn’t make sense to me.  More info is required.

            It has been said that “weaker minds” pick up on such things as the extreme polarizations existing in the world today.  These people have better antennas, uncluttered by intellectualization or reflection, and they tend to act on the stresses and anxieties so produced in a semi-conscious manner.  Quite a bit of this has gone on, is going on, and will continue building toward unavoidable major collective confrontations.

    • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

      …Breivik was directly influenced by the same cadre of American
      anti-Muslim activists that have gained a powerful following in the
      contemporary conservative movement in recent years.

      – Breivik cites neoconservative Islamophobe Frank Gaffney on
      opposition to Turkey joining the EU, and reprints a post from Gaffney’s
      think tank, the Center for Security Policy: Gaffney, a former Reagan official, is a regular
      on Fox News, a writer for the Washington Times op-ed page, a
      sought-after speaker at major conservative conferences, and a ubiquitous
      talking head on talk radio.

      – Breivik cites blogger Pamella Geller several times in his manifesto, reprints articles praising her: Geller, the writer behind the popular anti-Muslim blog Atlas Shrugs,

      – Breivik posts a 45-minute interview with Brigitte Gabriel, a leading organizer of grassroots anti-Muslim activism: Gabriel is the author of several popular anti-Muslim books,

      – Breivik extensively quotes Robert Spencer, a leading anti-Muslim writer sponsored by David Horowitz:

      – Breivik linked ten times to video clips for the movie
      Obsession, a documentary created by a secretive group called the Clarion
      Fund: In 2008, a mysterious organization called the Clarion Fund mailed the documentary Obsession to 28 million households in swing states leading up to the election.

      http://thinkprogress.org/

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        Yes?  So?  What is your point in this response?

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          Mr. Meister, I believe you answered your own question a few minutes ago.

          I was hoping that my comment would rouse someone to confirm or deny this.

          I posted facts.
          What did you post?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            I posted:

            Correction: After scanning Breivik’s manifesto, the only line I could
            find praising Obama appears to be sarcastic.  The news source must have
            been confused, even though Breivik’s English is excellent.  His
            characterization of Obama is, however, quite accurate.

            Just how stupid are you?

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Stupid enough to cut and paste your own words, I guess.

            How stupid are you?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Repetition is appropriate and necessary in your case.  I detect anger and frustration.  Lie back & pop a cool one.  You really need a walker for your lame responses.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Your detector needs recalibration.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Uh-huh.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

             PS—Try to get over my observation about crapping your sheets.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            I will, if you promise to stop posting knee jerk right wing reactionary drivel.

            Deal?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            I’ll stop right after I start.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Silly Mr. Meister, you really are a funny guy.

            flamemeister Yesterday 07:38 PM

            I heard that Breivik had high praise for Obama in his 1500-page “manifesto.”

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

             I see that you are good at cutting and pasting as well, but … what’s your point?  I make no factual claim, I simply reported what I heard.  Better get that walker, you are stumbling all over the place.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            I make no factual claim, I simply reported what I heard.

            That’s how right-wing echo chambers work……and that pretty much sums up your daily activity on this blog.

          • $8194357

            Dang hanni..With over 90% liberal biased news rooms that get talking points direct from the Democratic party how in the world did you come up with right wing echo chambers? Oh yea, I keep forgeting Alinskys rules don’t I…Blame your target for what in fact you yoursef are doing as the ends will justify the means in social justice warfare..Never mind.. Sorry to bother you again with my bigoted hateful opinions….Carry on..(Sarc) hanni (sarc)

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            With virtually all talk radio being a 24×7 media frenzy to get out RNC talking points, you would think you would have been familiar with the term.  You know, you can always Google “right wing echo chamber” to see just how frequently that term is used.  It’s used because it exists.

          • robert108

            As usual, little hanni, all you have is ideological finger pointing.  What happened to left wing talk radio parroting Dem talking points?

          • $8194357

            Don’t the dems want the so called “Fairness” doctrine to silence the disenting conservitive voices banished out in radio land, hanni?…One world…one world point of view…Been going on since the late 50’s early 60’s, but what would someone educated in modern marxist America know about the early years of “indoctrination?”

  • chris

    So, why don’t you just call this guy a terrorist?  oh that’s right, because he’s
    not Muslim.  If you’re not a Muslim, then the car bombing and rambo-style
    shooting spree of innocent people gets downgraded to “murder”.

    • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

      “Downgraded to murder”?  I’ve been around a long time & have never heard that expression.  Like to see your complete criminal taxonomy—seems special.

    • Guest

      You sound as stupid as Hanni….Larry, is that you?

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        I hope it’s Larry, otherwise you have hurled a deadly insult that demands satisfaction.

  • awfulorv

    On the other hand Chris, if you tour Denver only in the daytime you’ll miss some great after hours activities.

  • awfulorv

    What is it with the name Chamberlain, and sex?  Years ago Wilt Chamberlain was purported to have bedded 20,000 women. That was impressive but, It should be apparent to any observer of Europe today, what with their eagerness to turn their respective countries over to Islam, that the seeds of Neville Chamberlain reside in perhaps fifty million Europeans, more or less.  Take that Mr “Stilt”.

Top