Thursday, January 14, 2010

Jesus, John and Pat

A couple thousand years ago, there was a disaster in the ancient city of Siloam in Israel. A tower fell and 18 people were killed. Did they deserve it? Would it be wrong of someone to have said they deserved it? Check out Jesus' words in Luke 13:

"Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."

Was this statement devoid of love or compassion for the people who died in the disaster or for those who survived it?

Fast-forward 1700 years to John Wesley:

“The Cause And Cure Of Earthquakes”: A Sermon By John Wesley First Published In 1730

Was Wesley's sermon devoid of love or compassion?

And now here we are in 2010 with Pat Robertson making a statement - which is, of course, being ripped completely out of context by liberals and by people on the right who've been duped by the liberals' portrayals of Robertson. You can watch the statement in context in the first 8 minutes or so of the 700 Club here:

The 700 Club: January 13, 2010

Yes, Robertson is saying the Haitians deserved this disaster, and rightly so! He'd be right in saying that about any other country suffering such a disaster. We're ALL guilty of grievous sins against God and we're ALL deserving of death however it comes. However, what Robertson is NOT saying is that the Haitians don't deserve compassion, love and aid. In fact, his "Operation Blessing" organization is sending aid to Haiti. That hardly sounds like someone who is gleeful about the disaster as so many are trying to portray his statements.


Labels: , , ,

7 Comments:

Anonymous Shannon said...

I happened upon Conservapedia by way of another site (which mocks your little bastion of misinformation regularly, btw), and noticed that you ripped off one of my sayings for your ridiculous little 'about me' page.

"For me, not for thee".

And I didn't even get credit. Typical.

Also, if we go by your inane list of rules, your behavior takes on quite a new perspective. According to your own law you're faking your christian 'faith' (I knew that already), you're liberal as all hell and you approve of gay marriage.

Enlightening.

April 04, 2010 9:54 PM  
Blogger Jinx McHue said...

I happened upon Conservapedia by way of another site (which mocks your little bastion of misinformation regularly, btw)

Oh, noes! Let me guess: Rationalwiki? Of course it is. Tell me, Shannon, how can that be so reliable when it is so easy to insert misinformation on it as I have done?

you ripped off one of my sayings for your ridiculous little 'about me' page. "For me, not for thee". And I didn't even get credit. Typical.

Oh, good gosh, Shannon. Have you really become this pathetic and petty? Tell me, Shannon, did 6 million other people around the world also rip you off?

Google search: ""for me, not for thee"

I reiterate: pathetic.

According to your own law you're faking your christian 'faith' (I knew that already), you're liberal as all hell and you approve of gay marriage.

Only if you twist what I wrote. I'm not loudly proclaiming myself to be anything in order to be seen by others. How typical that you conveniently ignored the lesson: "If you want to be something, just be it. Quietly. Humbly. Other people will recognize it without you having to point it out. The moment you start bellowing 'Look at me! Look how ________ I am!' is the moment you open yourself up to being exactly the opposite of what you claim to be."

Enlightening.

Yes, your hateful little post was very enlightening. I really, really hope and pray that you aren't teaching your kids to act so hatefully or, if you are, that they will reject your disgusting example.

April 05, 2010 12:03 AM  
Anonymous Shannon said...

By the same token, I hope your ignore your disgusting example by not becoming liars, bigots, or phonies who pretend to be something they're not.

April 05, 2010 11:29 AM  
Blogger Jinx McHue said...

You've really degenerated since I last interacted with you, Shannon, but that is the typical direction liberalism and false religions tend to go. Do you still read and comment on Canadian Crackpot's blog? I'm sure that pit of hatred hasn't helped you any. Feel free to continue stalking me if you wish. I won't take the coward's way out and move my blog to hide from you.

April 05, 2010 11:39 AM  
Anonymous Shannon said...

Considering that christianity is an amalgam of religions that existed before it - Pagan religions included - seems that you're casting stones from inside a very shiny (and mirrored) glass house. If Pagan religions are false, christianity is much more so, seeing as it has ripped off pretty much every tradition it has from pre-christian religions. Even the virgin birth, persecution and resurrection.

Of course, you'll deny that because the truth is just too ouchy.

P.S. - No one said you should hide your blog. That's your persecution complex/paranoia talking.

P.P.S. Bye now.

April 05, 2010 8:48 PM  
Blogger Jinx McHue said...

No, Shannon, Christianity is not an "amalgam" of other religions. Stop listening to the uneducated and false babblings of Acharya S and other know-nothings. I know you won't listen to reason or even read information to the contrary with an open mind, so I won't bother providing it. Suffice it to say that I once believed the same thing when I was an atheist, but when I actually opened my mind to the facts, these "copycat" claims vanished in a great puff of logic.

Your beloved "wicca" was created in the 1960s and lies about being "predating Christianity." Indeed, as with a lot of things that came along in the 1960s, "wicca" follows the fad mentality. Most people get into it for superficial reasons and it's just something fun that they do that has no real meaning in their lives. I suspect that's how it is with you. Undoubtedly, you rebelled against Mommy and Daddy in your teens and adopted "wicca" to snub your stuck up little nose at their Christian faith. That much is plain to see from the vitriol you spew against Christians like me. Pathetic.

As for hiding my blog, no, I never considered it. I was, in fact, commenting on your own moving and hiding of your blog after claiming I was "stalking" you. In fact, you have been the one stalking me. You hid your blog from me, but continued commenting here. Then you took your petty little attacks to Canadian Crackpot's vulgar little blog. Now you're stalking has moved to Conservapedia. Get a life already!

April 06, 2010 9:49 AM  
Blogger Jinx McHue said...

As you deemed to respond with vulgarity, Shannon, I am not going to publish your latest comment. You used to be at the very least congenial, but you have degenerated into hatefulness, vulgarities and lies. Seeing as you're hanging out at Rationalwiki now, that is not the least bit surprising. It's sad, but not surprising. In fact, if this is going to be your behavior from now on, then I'm going to have to treat you accordingly and "ground" you. From now on, your comments will be unpublished and ignored until such a time as you can grow up and act like the adult you allegedly are.

April 07, 2010 5:53 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


Web Pages referring to this page
Link to this page and get a link back!