The Lord said 'Basta'?
See, that's why I'm an apatheist, because a simple letter can make that much of a difference when it comes to your importance in my life.
I'll have my Spaghetti and I'm gonna eat them, too.

We all get the duality of this. I had a bad feeling, but then an even worse feeling kicked in... I should do a cost-benefit analysis. I already hate myself for sinking into management-speak. But...

Guy on phone: only obvious benefit is lording this over his bully. It feels really good, especially when broadcast. Maybe some residual guilt. Got to take into account that, whatever his original intention, his reaction was from the gut.

Bully: unknown. Depends on what kind of person he is now, years after. Probably angry. Possibly feels bad about what just happened to his mother.

Mother: no benefit. Probably feels raped. Possibly was raped, depending on your definition. Possible shame over what her son did. Comment of "you probably deserved it" could be genuine, or could be severe defensiveness.

Radio station:
OK, I can't be objective here. It's possibly mostly live, they maybe feel an obligation to entertain, they have little control, but fuck those guys. I just hope they apologised afterwards.

Personal analysis: doing the deed isn't cool, given the innocent victim. Laughing about it on the air is understandable, but fucked up. Broadcasting it, laughing, and celebrating the outcome - whoever you are - is disgusting.

Exactly.. But if he did mention it he would add another dimension of condemnation to the Unit the White party.

That being said I am glad you agree the sins of the father stops at the father.. You do agree to that correct? Lord help me if I'm wrong seeing how much of a leftest nut you are. Answer?

@newtboy --

Yarr. I had a pretty long response typed up, and then accidentally clicked on a link and lost it.

So here's a short version:

I agree with you on pretty much everything, but "all statues and other monuments celebrating the insurrection should go" has some caveats for me.

Civic places like government buildings, city parks, etc.? Yeah, they should all go (including the State flags that incorporate the stars and bars). But museums (which you noted you are OK with), battlefields, and even a landmark or two like Stone Mountain I feel can be re-purposed so they aren't necessarily "celebrating the insurrection" so much as "reminding us of the evil that can exist in the hearts of men -- even men that some people respect".

Malcolm Reynolds in Firefly said "It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sumbitch or another." Easier to remember that for Jefferson Davis, Robert E Lee, and Stonewall Jackson, given that their roles in the Confederacy are pretty defining aspects of their legacies. But it remains true for some people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and many other founding fathers that were also slave owners, even though we often conveniently forget that aspect of their history.


--EDIT--
Oh, by the way, I love that Malcolm Reynolds quote from Firefly, and there's a rather similar one made by the Hound in the (leaked) S07E06 episode of Game of Thrones:
"Every lord I've ever known has been a cunt. Don't see why the Lord of Light should be any different."

Not as relevant as the other one, but I liked it.

Drain the swamp... I don't see any swam draining. He drained the very same Wall Street people he complained Hillary would bring in, into the White House, and other low lifes... like Bannon.

And if we get just another 10 months of turmoil depends on how we pray... of course a minor chunk of Christianity don't vote Republican, and actually vote the way Jesus would, which clearly wouldn't be for Trump or his kind... but I digress. So they are praying against Trump, but of course we know she means we need to pray for the nation, and for Trump's divine leadership from God... odd how the right is willing to say that God appoints leaders like Trump, but wouldn't say the same about Obama, who clearly was far more Christ like than Trump... Anyhow, the point I was going to get to, is odd how one has to pray to get God to act, though His will is perfect, so you can't change His mind, or His will... and why would He just sit and go... "4,998,888 more prayers to go, then I'll answer.. ohh... 4,999,884 to go! Way to go My people." That isn't compassion or anything... Either His will is perfect and His will will be done, or He's malleable, which isn't divine... or He's a fake, or at least no more real than any of the other 5,000 gods out there, and can't actually answer prayer any more than those other gods... "It takes an action of faith on our part, by praying"... bull shit, either He's going to do it or not.... because most of those kids with brain and bone cancer, Christian, with Christian families who pray all the time, as are most of the people who are dying of horrible things in this nation, but somehow His answering prayer ratio seems to be about the same as random, and the same as to any other god...

All these kind of people, and Fox News types who also brag about their faith, and how Christianity is under attack bull shit line... is why I hate Christianity and what it's become... to which Christians take great offence, "why hate me?" but I hate Christianity, not you as a person... of course they don't get that, because they identify so strongly with their faith that they take that personally as an attack against them... of course then they don't see how their anti-LGBT rantings, and the "don't hate the sinner, hate the sin" is basically the same... they can't empathize, and see how their hatred of the sin of homosexuality as they see it, is the same as my hatred of modern Christianity.

I love how the far right is far more upset at the leaks than the crime... when the DNC was having leaks, they had near zero concern about the leaks, it was the potential crimes being exposed that they were concerned with. Now that it is against Trump, suddenly the potential crime matters nothing, all that matters is leaks. Were this Clinton or Sanders, they'd be screaming from the mountain top, "the crime matters far more than the leaks! Lock her/him up!" Now they are going after leakers, who haven't exposed anything that endangers national security, just is embarrassing for our asshole in chief.

Of course the people who watch this, 700 Club, TBN, Fox, listen to right wing radio, and the like... they are still fired up, they still believe. Some of the people who voted for him who may not be in that crowd, might start having doubts, but the vast majority of his base still is in love with him, and still thinks he's God's greatest gift to this nation. They've been lied to and deceived by their churches for so long... that even if they actually do take a moment to read the Bible for themselves, they can't interpret it any other way than the way these ilk violate it's teachings, and the teachings of the Jesus they claim to follow.

As I've said before, if I were still a Christian, I'd seriously consider the modern right wing evangelical movement to be part of the anti-Christ system, as they turn more people against God than for Him, and are teaching a system opposite of what Jesus taught... Satan/the anti-Christ doesn't need to deceive the world, we are already damned to Hell, what he'd need to deceive, would be those who think they are faithful to the teachings of Jesus. Use them, not as a beacon of life and hope, but the pure bigotry and hate that modern Christianity is. To make it it unappealing... they might still get into Heaven with those who actually believe the way Jesus taught (because believing Jesus is the Christ, the son of God and all that is the only requirement in), but the Judgement Seat of Christ would find them learning how they cost millions of souls, then He'd point to the Christians on the left, and would say, they did far better, they followed my lessons... He'll look at Jim there and say, "look at the thousands of souls that you personally turned against My message, because you didn't teach the Love I commanded, you didn't teach the golden rule as I taught it, you taught a corrupted message, and now they'll burn for all eternity in Hell, because of you. I tried to reach them, but they heard your message of bigotry and hate, of love of money over helping the needy and the poor, of greed over the command to heal the sick, and turned from me.... now because you believed in Me, I have to let you in, but you'll live seeing those who turned from me as they are tormented in the back of your mind... you'll have a small home here, not the grand home that those who have taught my message properly have... to those who much was given, much was expected, and you failed. That man there, murdered 33 people, and converted before his execution, and his home will be grander than yours. Those who had much, will have little... so enter to your reward... of praising me for all I've done, 24/7 for all eternity, but as you praise, remember those who aren't here, because you poisoned the world against me." "Surely Lord there must be some who were saved, I saw them come forward." "They were already saved, or would soon be, for each one of them that actually turned to me because of you, hundreds turned away... that's not a good exchange Jim..."

So basically Thor is now Star Lord and Hulk is Groot?

The last season was kinda average. Capaldi is great, but he hasn't been given enough to do, with a few notable exceptions (see his utterly amazing anti-war speech in the Zygon Inversion).

The bigger change here is less about Jodie Whittaker and more about Stephen Moffat stepping down as showrunner.

That said, I'm excited for this new doctor. First up, I like Whittaker as an actor. Second, I think a female Doctor will be interesting and finally, I have already gotten a seasons worth of amusement from butthurt MRA snowflakes whinging about "PC" or "SJWs" ruining Dr Who, despite the fact that we've already seen Time Lords change gender in show at least twice now.

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Why would I want to re-read the BIBLE (I capitalised it because really, it makes no difference)? I wrote AFAIK. I didn't say it did not say it. I specifically asked for this information in case anyone else had it (which I made clear).

It seems only very old translations say omnipotent (i.e. king james, third millenium). All new translations have "Lord God Almighty". Almighty is a synonym to omnipotent.

http://www.biblestudytools.com/revelation/19-6-compare.html

Judging sins (i.e. knowing what happens in a limited situation) is not omniscience.

Creating the universe, while powerful, is not omnipotent.

I.e. your examples fit the second meaning of omnipotent/almighty, which is "greatly powerful".

Now, Matthew 19:26 is interesting because it is actually a quote from Jesus. That's the new closest thing to omnipotent for me. EDIT: no, thinking about it, he might be saying "it's possible", as in it has a probability of happening.

EDIT 2: Very importantly, reading the Bible by itself causes these very problems. I mentioned the Orthodox Tradition above - where they have an oral and written history that defines the interpretation so that people don't make up their own shit (like I do all the time - lol).

@newtboy 's original comment may stand in your eyes. But you don't get to dictate whether it is a fact or not. But more importantly than that - what comment are you referring to? I don't see him having written what you are paraphrasing.

You might want to re-read your bible (I refuse to capitalize it).

Revelation 19:6:

And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Also Matthew 19:26 “with God, all things are possible” and Luke 1:37 “with God nothing is impossible” make it clear the Christian god is omnipotent without actually using the word.

And even if it wasn't explicitly written, in practice every major sect of Christianity follows the doctrine that the Christian god is both omniscient (i.e. going to judge everyone for their sins on judgement day) and omnipotent (i.e. can do anything, such as create a universe from nothing).

EDIT: So @newtboy's original comment stands. The bible's inconsistencies are too huge for anyone not completely indoctrinated into Christianity to ignore.

Makes you wonder why the big G left so many loopholes in the whole pleasure for pregnancy incentive. And, I mean, forget the contraceptives too, if my (hypothetical) wife and I knock boots at any time other than those special few days should we not be experiencing any pleasure?

Thank thee Lord for blessing my cock with rigidity and sensitivity at this most horni... holiest of times. I come in jaysus name. Amen.

Well, at about 1:39 he mentions Deuteronomy 7:15: "And the Lord will take away from thee all sickness, and will put none of the evil diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest, upon thee; but will lay them upon all them that hate thee."

I didn't bother looking for similarities in the constitution, because there's no way anything inspired by that is in there. Pretty sure he was just picking one at random and assuming no one watching the show would go to the effort of checking.

Chomsky\s position doesn't surprise me in the least and I think is much more easily explainable than you want to make it. Chomsky is taking the default most anti-American position that he can. Part of that includes not letting Russia be painted any more black or dark than America. There's nothing new, surprising or different in his opinion here, he's just expressing it in a way that goes against the democrats which throws people that hadn't seen Chomsky that way before when he was mostly condemning right leaning America. It's pretty much the exact same thing as the shift in opinion towards wikileaks before and after they ran a freight train over Hillary. When they were releasing secrets damaging to the right end of the spectrum they were doing the lord's work. The explicit and sole focus on western evils was ok until suddenly the left end of the west got included. Now suddenly a pro-Russian conspiracy was visible to left leaning folks. You know, the now that it's affecting me it's a problem viewpoint.

A snippet from Lord Beveridge's "Full Employment in a Free Society":

The proposition that there should always be more vacant jobs than unemployed men means that the labour market should always be a seller’s market rather than a buyer’s market. For this, on the view of society underlying this Report — that society exists for the individual — there is a decisive reason of principle. The reason is that difficulty in selling labour has consequences of a different order of harmfulness from those associated with difficulty in buying labour. A person who has difficulty in buying the labour he wants suffers inconvenience or reduction in profits. A person who cannot sell his labour is, in effect, told that he is of no use. The first difficulty causes annoyance or loss. The other is a personal catastrophe. This difference remains even if an adequate income is provided by insurance or otherwise, during unemployment; the idleness even on an income corrupts; the feeling of not being wanted demoralizes. The difference remains even if most people are unemployed only for relatively short periods. As long as there is any long-term unemployment not obviously due to personal deficiency, anybody who loses his job fears that he may be one of the unlucky ones who will not get another job quickly. The short-term unemployed do not know that they are short-term unemployed till their unemployment is over.

When I was an agnostic I was resigned to die a meaningless death. That is all the hope this view of the world offers; one day you will die and it won't matter. You will be gone and after a certain amount of time no one will even remember you were here.

Thank God for Jesus Christ, who died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day. Death is a punishment for sin, it is not something we need to accept as the natural order of things. Jesus Christ defeated death and by repenting of our sins and putting our faith and trust in Him as Lord and Savior, we can be forgiven of our sins and have everlasting life.

Death is not the end and we will all one day stand in front of God and account for our lives. Your choice is to either pay for your own sins or to let Jesus pay for them for you. Both choices are eternally significant.

Again that doesn't jibe with the text, or his exact words "For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven"
That also contradicts the theory that his death ended the laws....."until heaven and earth pass away" clearly is a different thing from 'until I, Jesus, pass away'.
This is clear that the letter of the laws, not just the spirit of love, are the focus here, and anyone ignoring a single jot will be judged harshly.
In the old testament, those punishments are for failing to live by the specific, set forth rules as written, not failing to live up to some underlying, contradictory, unwritten, hidden message of love behind them.

That's not what the bible says. It's what 3rd parties have told people it says. It also clearly warns about those people....warns against listening to them, and tells you what happens to them....they are called the least, which I interpret to mean considered unworthy of heaven so are sent elsewhere.
It clearly, unambiguously, undeniably tells believers to murder infidels themselves, personally, with rocks. Any other interpretation ignores clearly written specific and detailed instructions in favor of insane mental gymnastics to think " You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God" somehow, inexplicably means 'love and tolerate them with respect and kindness' and not 'go murder them ASAP'.

Evangelicals have never once lived up to your theory of what they believe, they can't even follow the basic golden rule. The respect they demand for their beliefs is never returned to others, in my experience.
Evangelicals in practice usually take the entirety of the Bible as a message telling them they should go out and force others to love their version of God and the righteous, not all people, and without a hint of humility, and that they must accept the grace of their version of God or else are deserving of hatred and damnation.


Edit: As I read it, Jesus said follow every letter of the old laws, but instructed people that he without sin should cast the first stone (that would have been him, wouldn't it?). The old laws said he who casts no stones is committing a horrendous sin and should themselves be stoned to death. Believers somehow don't see the contradiction, while I see nothing but.