Podcast #83: The Pending Christian Holocaust

156 February 7, 2016 by

83_finalWe begin this episode of Drunk Ex-Pastors with a complete and cavalier dismissal of most medical and psychological “syndromes” (we don’t trust things we can’t relate to) and then foray briefly into an anti-technology rant for some reason. We then spend some time coddling and placating our audience and their blind devotion to Cam Newton (yes, he is a wonderful man off the field; no, we’re sure you’re right that he doesn’t have a single arrogant or taunting bone in his body; and yeah, we’re well aware he can feed five thousand hungry people with five loaves and two fish. Geez, if you people spent half that energy worshiping Jesus instead of this guy you’d actually have a chance at not being Chinese water tortured for all eternity). We spend some time discussing the nature of God’s involvement in the world, and then watch a video warning us about Obama Bin-Hitler’s sinister plans to kill 75% of Americans because of their Christian faith (and apparently he’ll also be holocausting himself since he’s a believer too). We try out a new segment titled “Pagan Repent!” in which Jason attempts to get past Christian’s hardened and seemingly impenetrable heart by trying to make the faith more palatable. Jason is biebered by all the eggshells that he walks upon.

Also, “Ecclesial Playboys.” It’s a thing.

156 Comments (click here to leave a comment)

  1. The avalanche of hate and the gleeful mocking that happening right now is quite breath taking. Nothing like people attacking someone for showing a lack of class, by being completely classless themselves.

  2. I actually agree with you, Lane. Those gloating over Cam’s loss are showing the same lack of class they criticize Cam for. That thought’s been running through my mind a lot since the game ended.

    However, you seem to be on the other end of it now, and I wonder if it makes you change your mind at all about how non-NC fans see Cam Newton’s when he wins? Honest question.

  3. I don’t think anything Cam did celebration wise was ever malicious. And I don’t ever remember him saying negative or mocking things about other players or teams following games. Of course I understand that he rubs some people the wrong way with his celebrations. I like them, even knowing that having a trademark celebration is just begging for the opponent to use it against you later.

    During a lot of the game he looked out of it, a lot grimacing. It was similar to last year when he was playing hurt for a large part of the season. Even when he made good plays yesterday, he didn’t get any enjoyment out of it. He may have gotten hurt early. Not an excuse, just an observation.

    Obviously, he didn’t do himself any favors in the press conference after the game. He looked dejected, and sulky, walking out after a couple of minutes. It’s reminiscent of something I thought he had matured out of from his rookie year. That’s how he would look mid game on the sidelines, sitting alone on the bench not talking to anyone.

    But to be fair to him, they had both the winning team and the losing team in the same room being interviewed. Why couldn’t they have found 2 separate rooms like any other game? He had to listen to a loud exuberant Chris Harris talking about how they beat him while he was fielding questions. In the video, you can barely hear the questions being asked over Harris. It didn’t seem appropriate to me. Although, I still would have liked him to be a little bit more lively answering questions. I guess that’s the two sides of the sword you get with a passionate player that wears his emotions of his sleeve. He will learn from this.

  4. Yeah, and conservatives suck because of Cliven Bundy.

    My caucasian argument? My problem is with blatant displays of ego and arrogance no matter the person’s skin color. I’m not going to not criticize someone because they’re white OR black. That would be racist.

  5. Christian, oh no, you misunderstand my use of “caucasian.” It has nothing to do with the object of criticism and everything to do with the subject. Its an implicit criticism of DXP, as being blinded by its own whiteness. Race is more than skin color, and sensitivity to cultural diversity most often eludes those whose ideology turns upon those words. I have no idea who Cliven Bundy is, but liberals suck because of NARAL.

  8. I think y’all need to go with the plan of Jason becoming an agnostic…but then the next episode Christian comes out as a believer again (because some ridiculous miracle like seeing Rachel McAdams at a Chipotle or something). 😛

  10. “They (Godless Liberals) would assume that we were wiped off the face of the earth”

    -Pastor Greg Locke

    Really? Who on the liberal side has specifically called for that? Can he name anyone? The only person that I can think of that has called for ridding the earth of his political enemies is from the conservative side. At a Ted Cruz event Duck Boy Phil Robertson called to “rid the earth of them (supporters of homosexual marriage).” The super charged rhetoric of removing political opponents off the face of the earth comes from the right, not the left.

    http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2016/02/01/3744785/duck-dynasty-rid-the-earth-of-marriage-equality-supporters/

    -IllShatner

  11. I really like Jason’s aproach to reading the old testemant, but I’d be interested to know if this way of reading the Bible is aproved of within the Catholic Church. I guess I kind of assumed that they would have a rather negative view of higher criticism.

  12. I was pondering this morning this very thing. Another thing people seem to forget is that it wasn’t that the Jews ideas stood in the way of progress so they needed to be destroyed, it was that their actual DNA and genetics stood in the way of creating the master race. They had to be eliminated under that model. They couldn’t be argued with and outvoted because they were polluting mankind with their genes. If you could get people to believe that, then the only option was annihilation. That’s a slightly different argument, and one much harder to make in today’s world, than that these people’s ideas are different than ours.

  13. Oh! I also wanted to add that “Pagan Repent” was a fantastic segment; I’d love if it continued to make appearances. It’s always nice to hear reasons why Christianity might not entirely suck 😛

    I spent years absolutely fed-up with what I had known as Christianity (read: fundamentalism) until the past few years in which I’ve been discovering that there are a lot of good possibilities within a healthier understanding of Christianity and faith.
    But even now I don’t have much of a stomach for crazy; there are times I hear things that disgust me so badly I’m tempted to just cut my losses and walk away again. 😛
    So it’s nice to hear positive things now-and-again. 🙂

    As for Jason’s walking on eggshells, I certainly sympathize. Granted I’ve never had a podcast 😛 But for those aforementioned years I was a sort of “closet atheist” who could never “come out” for fear of hurting the people I love (by being honest about who I was…heh…). But the worst part was always having to guard what I said to everyone. Looking back, I feel like I was only half a person: only fully about to be myself when nobody was around. It really messes with ya, even if you don’t realize it.
    I know it’s different scenarios but I guess what I’m saying is I wish ya luck. For what it’s worth.

  15. Yeah sure its not a race thing. Just like you denying you abandoned Jesus because you love your sin so much 😉

  16. On the opposite side of the “sportsmanship” spectrum…. Was anyone else perplexed at Peyton’s utter nonchalant attitude after winning the Superbowl?!? MJ was rolling all over the floor clutching his sixth trophy with tears streaming down his face…. Peyton looked mildly happy. Like my face during one of my kids birthdays. “Yeah, this is cool. Guess I’ll kiss my wife and drink some beer”. Wtf

  17. Its a mixed bag. All denominations are trying to figure out this modernity thing. The New Jerome Biblical commentary is chalk full of higher criticism with three imprimauters. Pope B16 used HC while still warning of some of its abuses and starting the “criticism of the criticism”.

    Generally Catholics who take Tradition seriously will not agree with Jason. He is a Vatican 2 guy and probably sits comfortably with mainstream modern Catholicism

  18. I’ve never deleted anything. One misguided accusation after another.

    Because you refuse to create an account, unlike everyone else here, every comment you leave requires approval from myself or Jason. Cool that it gave you a chance to show what a dick you are though.

  19. Alright, I give up caring or attempting to understand what you are saying. If you’d like to explain yourself without acting like an ass, I may come back to listen to what you have to say. If not, I’ve got way better things to do with my time.

  20. Maybe he realized how little of a role he played in the win. Whether he was paid for saying it or not, the “I’m going to drink a lot of Budweiser” line was pretty lame. The only thing missing from that statement was “and eat a lot of Papa John’s delicious pizza.”

  21. A few things (I’m feeling analytic this morning):

    Thanks for approving the comments. Sorry that I judged hastily. No, I don’t want to set up an account somewhere just to exchange comments online.

    The point of my previous comment is, interpreting Cam’s displays as arrogance and ego might be accurate, but it might not. There are other interpretive options available. Putting on a song and dance show and giving out footballs to ecstatic children is a decision that can be made for many reasons, such as it being fun and making people happy. Its a risk though, because when you lose or the team starts to struggle, its hard to carry on that vibe, and then it looks for all the world like a case of the sulks.

    After listening to a dozen or so shows, it seems to me that DXP is an interesting exercise is self-affirmation, rhetorically reaffirming the socio-cultural identity that you guys have cultivated (including the pop-politics) for whatever reason. And its a good show. But if you’re going to allow people to comment on it, you should be prepared to pull back the lens a bit, consider the wider world. At the very least, you should be okay with rude and dismissive comments. That is exactly how you guys talk about people outside your own world, name-calling included, and I like it, its good rhetoric and good fun.

    In other words, acting like an ass is precisely the DXP vibe. Its the podcast / website corollary to JJS’ old professor’s theological website, Old Life. A place for pure rhetoric and exchanging insults. No one should take it seriously, or gets their feelings hurt. The theology professor can take it as well as dish it out, you guys could stand to loosen up a bit. Finally, on the same note, DXP censuring sports stars for a lack of class, or listeners for acting like asses, is pure hypocrisy. Lob a few grenades, cool, but don’t complain when you catch some back.

  22. I’m a fan of the new “Pagan Repent” segment as well. I look forward to Jason slowly watering down Christianity to the point where it is synonymous with every other faith so that we finally bust up the self-proclaimed moral monopoly, control and privilege the church has enjoyed for far too long. I also look forward to this segment gradually showing how unnecessary Christianity is to leading a happy, moral and fulfilling life ;-).

    As for walking on eggshells, what Jason said really resonated with me too. Over the past 3-4 years, my perspective on my religion/spirituality and politics has completely changed and it’s thrown me and more importantly, my loved ones for a loop. We are working through it but I am still hesitant to say what I am thinking most of the time. From what you said, Austin, it seems like you’re “out” now. If you don’t mind me asking, how were you able to finally speak your mind without fear of the repercussions?

  23. All I’ve offered on Cam Newton is opinion. You’re telling me that my opinion could be wrong? Ummm, no shit.

    As far as rude and dismissive comments, people can say whatever they want. I don’t have to respond kindly (or at all) to people who are rude, just like people don’t have to respond kindly to us whether we’re kind or rude. I’ve never banned anyone or censored anyone, so I’m not sure why I’m receiving this lecture. It’s actually kind of ironic. Were you expecting me to respond a certain way to you and I didn’t?

    As far as our podcast goes, I don’t think it’s much like OL at all, but you’re welcome to your opinion. If you treat it like OL, we probably won’t dialog much.

    Lastly, as far as hypocrisy in “censuring” Cam Newton, I’m happy to admit we’ve had times of immaturity, of arrogance, and times when we could have displayed more class, and people are free to not like our style. My problem is not so much with him acting that way as long as I’m free to not like him for it. My problem is more with him blaming it on racism and all his fans saying, “No, he’s such a great guy. You’re misinterpreting him! You don’t understand his culture! You’re racist! You’re just so white!” Etc. Bullshit. “I’m an African-American quarterback, and that scares a lot of people.” Whatever. If he adds to that statement, “Sometimes I act like an ass and I have some maturing to do,” then we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

  25. “Burning in my bosom”, ugh (“boo-som”, btw? nah dude). At the request of my father-in-law, I am reading “What We Talk About When We Talk About God” by Rob Bell. He refers to that “burning” as a “reverence humming in me” and “we all feel it”. It’s a simple: Make an assertion (everybody deep down knows the god of abraham exists), then make it impossible to falsify by saying it’s impossible to verify the assertion in any natural way.

    Jason, as for atheists being just as bad as fundamentalist christians, in my experience, I have rarely heard any thoughtful atheist call someone who believes in supernatural things an idiot. It’s more that they think the idea that someone can be raised from the dead, or a virgin can have a baby, or someone can walk on water is ridiculous based on what we know about the world at this point in time. Nobody is stupid because they believe in miracles, the idea of it doesn’t make sense. This nuance shouldn’t be touted as personal attacks against the religious and criticism of the ideas should be above reproach.

  26. ” I have rarely heard any thoughtful atheist call someone who believes in supernatural things an idiot.”
    Bwhahahahaha! What?! You can’t be serious.

  27. I like Peyton. But for him to go out with corporate pandering was very off putting. I would much rather have a passionate unreserved response to the big win.

  28. Dude, I expected you to respond like a hyper-defensive ass, which is exactly what has happened. So that is all good. Regarding Newton, I am doing more than raising the logical possibility that your opinion about his end zone celebrations could be wrong. I am raising a specific alternative possibility. You’re just doubling down on your initial assertion and pulpit pounding in response. A little logic and analysis is all I am asking for. Not liking someone is not the same thing as questioning their character. You can have the former without the latter, even as you can like someone of low character. A little reflection should enable you to see the difference; if not, I am happy to explain further. Cam is just an example, the larger point is charting distinctions that exist in reality, considering the relevant facts in particular cases, and not getting caught up in culturally-relative likes and dislikes or reducing everything to opinion. There is a very strong racist element in progressive, hipster culture, and in my opinion it comes through in your podcast. If you want to tell me I could be wrong, then I agree, but if you want to tell that in fact I am wrong, well, that’s a different matter.

  30. Am I considered hipster? That would be pretty funny if so.

    I got your point, and I disagree with your interpretation of what we’ve said, but thanks for your opinion. I think you missed my, but that’s fine. Have a good one.

  31. I am serious. There’s a difference between calling someone an idiot and saying what they believe in is idiotic.

  32. I don’t disagree with the idea. I disagree with the assertion that atheists rarely call religious people idiots. Because my experience is that atheist as a group contain some of the most dismissive, gleefully mocking, insult throwing group that I’ve come across.

    For example, here the leader of the atheist group Freedom From Religion Foundation, which I believe Christian mentioned in the cast, calls for public mockery and ridicule as tactics.

    http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/atheists-call-for-booing-public-mockery-and-ridicule-of-prayer-2/

  33. There is a very strong racist element in progressive, hipster culture, and in my opinion it comes through in your podcast. If you want to tell me I could be wrong, then I agree, but if you want to tell that in fact I am wrong, well, that’s a different matter.

    I’m not racist at all, I dislike anyone who acts like a hip hop artist….

  34. It is a mixed bag as Kenneth points out. But I definitely think that for all the Church’s broadness among its theologians, the official/conciliar teachings are way to the conservative side of the spectrum.

  35. We’ve talked about rotating between “Pagan Repent!” one week and “Christian Recant!” the next. In the latter, he’ll respond to what I said the week prior. Could be a good way to have an ongoing discussion?

  36. Random thoughts:

    • Never go full agnostic-o.

    • Pretty sure I have LAD, Life Affectual Disorder. Being a grown-up can be pretty fucking depressing at times: paying bills, doing housework, working 40+ hours a week, worrying about your future, your health, your kids, your finances.

    • Seriously, if I ever have a Freaky Friday thing going on with my son, I’m not sure I’d want to swap bodies back.

    • What do we want?

    “A cure for ADHD!”

    When do we want it?

    “SQUIRREL!”

    • Cam Newton: still not caring even after the Super Bowl loss.

    • Okay, I’d happily trade Eli Manning for him, but still, ‘meh’.

    • Regardless of your feelings about Cam Newton, I think we can all agree that it’s Obama’s fault, amirite?

    • Call me old school, but you celebrate after you win the game.

    • The problem with God being active in my heart is that I can’t really know if that’s God or if that’s empathy or my conscience. If I move to help someone that could just be my own heart empathizing with their pain, my conscience telling me that it’s the right thing to do to help a fellow human being, or even my own self-interest telling me that if I help people in need, someone will be there to help me if I ever need it, or it could be the Holy Spirit telling me to be more kind and compassionate. There is no way to know if that prompt to help others is divine, human kindness, or self-interest.

    I think that if God exists, his default position is to let human beings work things out on their own. We don’t see miracles of biblical proportions anymore. There aren’t miracle workers like Elijah or Paul or Jesus walking among us. People that speak in tongues always speak in gibberish instead of a verifiable language. Even those who do profess impressive and verifiable miracles will concede that they are a rare occurrence.

    If God is there and he is active in the world, he has chosen, for some reason, to minimize his influence upon us to the degree that we have trouble perceiving if he is there at all.

    • If God deserves the glory for the good things that happen in life because ultimately he’s behind it all, doesn’t he also deserve the condemnation for the evil things that happen as well?

    • Perhaps that is the point of the crucifixion? Christ taking upon himself all of our sins and evil not because he demands blood, but because God accepts the responsibility for all of it. He didn’t commit the acts, but his creatures did and so he bears the condemnation of them to reconcile everyone to each other and to himself.

    • God, this video pissed me off. As I said in the other thread, it took losing a world war, unstable regime change, political instability, a weak central government, economic chaos, then the rise of Hitler, French and British hesitation to start another world war, and vast indifference by major powers to the plight of the Jews for the Holocaust to happen and it took over 20 years to bloom into the noxious fruit of Hitler’s fetid imagination.

    • I’ve been hearing about coming Christian persecution for about 35 years now.

    • President? Christian. Most of Congress? Christian. Most of America? Christian. So we’re to believe that the president and Congress will pass a law to persecute themselves and most of their voters? Sure. Okay. Pass that doobie over here, bro, you’ve had enough. Shit’s making you paranoid.

    • What he means by folks being intolerant is that he wants to be able to call gay people filthy abominations who deserve to be jailed, put to death, and tortured in hell forever without anyone criticizing him or facing any negative repercussions for saying so. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.

    • Burn Notice was cool up until about mid-season 4. Then I only kept watching it because of Bruce Campbell.

    • It’s part of the geek bylaws that you have to watch something if you know Bruce Campbell is in it.

    • If I thought the comment section of a YouTube video was representative of humanity, I’d become a Bond villain and work on a scheme to destroy all of humanity.

    • No one gives a flying fuck what you believe. No one. No one gives a flying fuck if you stand up and scream “Repent” in the town square. The government does not care. Unless you incite violence or a riot, you can scream “Jesus! Jesus! Jesus! Jesus!” all the day long and no one will care. Some people might mock you, but no one cares.

    Where people do start to care is when you try to deny them their rights because of your beliefs and they will push back on you and they have pushed back on you via the courts.

    • Actually, Hitler had to experience failure as an artist, enlisting in World War I, then get wounded, then see Germany’s government overthrown, then see the new German government full of intellectuals negotiate a hated peace with the Allies, then be invited to join a group led by a virulent anti-Semite, then take over the leadership of the group, form a goon squad to beat up communists, have Germany go through a prolonged economic collapse including the Great Depression, ally with the Nationalist party, gain corporate support by suppressing the Communist party, politically maneuver himself into the Chancellorship, consolidate power over his rivals, remobilize Germany into a military power in defiance of treaty, convince the British and the French that his intentions were peaceful, win back German territory, before he could convince everyone to go ahead and ship the Jews off to the camps. But, you know, minor details.

    • What rights have you lost? How, in any way, in the last eight years, has Obama oppressed you like Hitler? Please tell me? What rampant persecution do you face as a Christian? Oh… someone called you a bigot online? Well, that’s just like losing all of your rights!

    • Jesus… what a fucking moron. There, he can say now that I’ve persecuted him.

    • This all started with the Rapture bullshit.

    • If you want to be persecuted for Christ, here’s how: stand with the minority, stand with the refugees, stand with the slandered, stand with those suffering injustice, stand with the poor against the rich that oppress them and defraud them, demand justice, demand that those with power do what is right, stand with the prisoners against the abuses of the system and a legal system that values punishment over rehabilitation and redemption, stand with the working men and women against companies and politicians that see them as resources. Challenge the powerful interests. You’ll get persecuted.

    • Moses asked “Who is on the Lord’s side” right before he gathered an army of Levites and sent them out to kill sinners. I wonder if that is coded language from this dick.

    • Jesus might not be happy with blowing away sinners, but OT God was pretty cool with it on certain occasions.

    • I think with regards to prophesy, we stand at a disadvantage because our upbringing saw bible prophesy as an entirely future oriented thing. God put stuff in the scriptures in order to foretell the future. But most of the prophetic books, I’d even say the vast majority of them don’t tell with future telling at all. The prophets address specific cultural issues. Jewish views of prophesy lean on the idea that the prophetic word was given to the people so they could make course corrections within their society.

    And it’s possible that the writers of the gospels came along and being familiar with scripture started playing mix and match with events of Jesus’ life or even tailoring the story of Jesus to better line up with specific OT verses.

    It’s also possible that it’s all made up, but I want to have faith that a Kingdom of God where justice, peace, compassion, mercy, and love reign will exist one day.

  37. I don’t think I said anyone is “just as bad” as anyone else, but that pop-atheists are often employing a very similar approach to the God question as religious fundamentalists do. Neither can abide or appreciate nuance much of the time.

  38. Hey guys! I’m risking sounding nitpicky here, but I just have one thought. Though even I would love to punch those among us who see stirring up fear of the ignorant as the best way push their views, it seems as though railing against this so called Reverend and playing his entire video on your show is exactly what he wants. Don’t get me wrong, you guys are much better and more qualified to dispute this video than say Bill Marr or many of the other liberal media demons that Lucifer has so graciously gifted this world with. Only I don’t believe that the people who actually need to be convinced this video is bullshit listen to your show first of all, and second, they aren’t going to embrace anything a couple of ex pastor liberals have to say. When it comes it comes to fundamentalist belief hinging on the unknowable, effective constructive criticism must come from those you view as a friend, not the enemy. Love you guys! Keep doing what your doing.

  39. I can’t really speak for pop-atheists, but for me I have a hard time equating “Listen to me, my particular God is the Truth and you’ll never change my mind no matter what you say or show me” with “I have no good rational reason to believe in any god(s), but if you show me something substantive I’ll change my mind”.

  40. Maybe I should clarify and qualify my assertion. Hardly any former believers that I know (including myself) who are now atheists think christians are idiots. At least for me, christianity and the church was a huge part of my spiritual, social and personal life for so long that it would be ridiculous for me to consider my christian friends and family complete idiots for still believing in things that I believed for so long. To be clear, that doesn’t mean I have to accept it or silently fall in line.

    I think a growing number of us (and certainly the ones I associate with) want to show that we’re not bad people and have the same morals as you do. It’s just hard when even the word “atheist” is considered a dirty word or when the religious majority tries to silence dissent in the guise of religious liberty. Hopefully, as it become less taboo to leave christianity behind there will be more open dialogue without resorting to name calling.

  41. I don’t think that there are very many authoritative pronouncements on inerrancy so far is it goes. We know there is definitely inerrant stuff going on but I don’t think Enns view on the old testament is easily dismissed as out of bounds. Especially if you are making the case that the authors intended this to be in the literary genre of nationalistic legend or allegory or midrash or whatever. He coathured a book with a Jew and Harrison (catholic) on how to read the old testament. Its not a settled issue in my opinion. I find it attractive in some respects.

    For the most part though these issues really boil down to relationship. People who are filled with the Holy Spirit, love of neighbor, and put God above all else don’t tend to be as bothered by these kinds of questions. If they are really bothering you, or me, or anyone, the prudent thing to do would be to double down on devotion, prayer, and the pursuit of holiness. No one sees God. But his children learn to trust. Don’t let your heart be rattled by the white noise of the enemy. Hope you’re well.

  42. Yeah, but that line is usually bull shit. I just listened to a talk with Dawkins and Boghossian where both men stated that even if the stars realigned themselves to spell “Jesus is Lord” or even if a voice from heaven boomed across the cosmos proclaiming Christ…. They would still not believe in God. Because, after all, could just be aliens. Could be a hallucination. They don’t want God to exist. Thomas Nagel and Hitchens admit as much plainly in their writings and speeches. This is not a search for truth. Its the advancement of naturalism

  43. I’ve just never been even remotely called hipster before. It amuses me.

    Take a chance and learn from people? I feel like you are arguing against someone else here. Perhaps you haven’t listened to many episodes, or perhaps I just don’t communicate well at all. LOL. Best to you, Andrew.

  45. Well I wouldn’t consider myself an atheist nowadays (although I continue to be called one by fundamentalists lol), I’m more okay with faith now than I was a few years ago. But even now I can’t be too honest with even some of my close friends (who already think I’m on my way to hell in a hand-basket).

    Most of why I kept quiet was for my family, who were uber-fundamentalist at the time; but recently they’ve been moving away from that to a Christianity that’s a lot more open and not terrified of doubters, so I can be more open without freaking them out.
    So mostly it’s just the changing situation of myself and my family. Were my family still as uptight as they once were, I certainly wouldn’t be anywhere near as open as I am.
    I’ve actually noticed the positive effect it’s had on my mental health and perception of myself, which is why I feel bad for people who don’t have that (especially in one’s personal life with their loved ones), because it really does tear you up even if you don’t realize it.

  47. Honestly, its not an obvious call between the “Cam is a self-serving jerk” and “Cam is putting on a show for the fans” paradigms. I like shows better than jerks, so I choose the big-show make the kids happy interpretation. Anyways, this seemed like a good window into larger cultural issues, beyond the “Carolina fans vs. everyone else” dichotomy. My little foray here mainly shows that I am not as good as you guys at dissing your social-cultural enemies. Plus, I can’t sustain the faux-hostility. Thanks for the good wishes, Christian. Back at you. I will keep listening.

  48. I heard one commentator describe liberal Christianity in this way:

    From the time of Gallelio, to Darwin, to higher criticism of scripture, the christian ball of yarn began to unravel down the hill of modernity. Further and further down the hill its gone. Liberal Christianity is an attempt to stop the ball where its at and find peace with what’s left.

    My attitude is that Christianity Is just fine, its the hill that’s fucked up. My ball of yarn is exactly as it always has been pretty on a pedestal. Modernity is garbage.

    Different strokes for different folks

  49. Well If one or both of those phenomena happened, I do not think it is unreasonable to investigate them to rule out other possibilities. Our subjective perception of things must be constantly tested and the knee jerk reaction of “God did it” shouldn’t be assumed, regardless. Hallucinations and alien intervention are still more probable than God’s existence. We have to take everything into account based on what we can observe and not assume some supernatural cause that you know to be true based on personal theology and bias alone.

    I don’t think that it’s fair to say that they don’t want God to exist. I don’t think they care either way.

    I don’t think that it’s ever been about the search for one particular “truth” as some sort of philosophical pursuit. I also do not think it is trying to advance any sort of “-ism”. It’s more like, “hey, this is what we know and this is what we don’t know. let’s work off what we know to figure out what we don’t know and if we’re wrong, let’s adjust and try again”.

  50. Add a little bit of absolutism there, and you are hunky-dory with Pope Pius X. Seriously, the Catholic Church tried to stop modernism in its tracks, only to let it in the back door (gay pun intended). We gained some things in the process (egalitarianism is good in moderation), but lost a lot, the liturgy being the primary tragedy. Liberal Catholicism, like mainline Protestantism, sucks balls. Neo-Catholicism sucks one ball.

  51. Inerrancy follows from divine inspiration. Peter Enns is a silly person. He needs a course in logic way more than he needs to keep up his sophomoric attempts to interpret the bible.

  53. Thanks Austin. I think there’s a lot to be said for liberal Christianity and how it interacts with atheists. There’s a certain lack of certainty/dogmatism that is appealing and not as confrontational. I think it allows people to really talk.

    I’ve actually noticed the positive effect it’s had on my mental health and perception of myself, which is why I feel bad for people who don’t have that (especially in one’s personal life with their loved ones), because it really does tear you up even if you don’t realize it.

    I hear you. There are times where I feel like I should just give up and re-enter the fold but a part of me says hell no. Not to sound melodramatic, but it is exhausting and as a natural people-pleaser, frustrating.

  57. I was pushing back against the idea that liberals are just a bunch of hippies. But I can point to lots of stuff. How about Che Guevara? He was a liberal.

  60. Sigh. Jason is the one who usually makes this point, so he can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe in the context, we’re referring the extreme right and extreme left in America. (And just in case you miss the context there, I’m referring to the country, not the continents! ;))

  62. How early did you guys record episode 84? I felt like you’ve been referring to it right around, if not before, 83 came out.

  63. Hallucinations and alien intervention are still more probable than God’s existence. We have to take everything into account based on what we can observe and not assume some supernatural cause that you know to be true based on personal theology and bias alone.

    This is why I’m so unimpressed with the chorus of voices demanding evidence for Christianity. If hallucination or alien intervention is more probable than God existing and rearranging the stars there is fundamentally nothing that will satisfy you. What argument for the resurrection can possibly penetrate that level of skepticism? You’re basically saying you won’t believe no matter what the hell happens. Its an a prioiri dismissal of God based on a loaded theory of knowledge.

    In just a few moments of questioning we could find things that you believe with far less evidence than what you demand from religion. Its a bias. Not a search for truth.

  66. Well it hard to argue when one group seems to own all the people that are completely obsessed with guns in our country. So they seem more violent right from the get go. But liberals can be just as vile, if not more so, as conservatives in normal interactions.

  68. Peter would say that your syllogism is the problem. You put together an expectation of what inspiration must entail and then force scripture to fit into an uncomfortable space that it struggles to fullfill.

    That’s his argument BTW not mine.

    I think Peter has some good thoughts to put into the discussion. But its not going to help evangelize anyone. Most objections from apostates are intellectual smokescreens added after the fact. A cover up. A fraud. The truth is usually that the persons relationship with God was severed over time and they followed their sin. O know people here think this view is “uncharitable”. But they will just have to get over it because that’s what I think lol

  69. Oh okay, I thought I remember you saying something was addressed in 84, but you probably meant was going to be addressed in 84.

  71. Right, but we’re not talking about “normal interactions” (if we were, I’m sure we could come up with crazies on both sides). Our specific point is that the extreme right wants to kill people and the extreme left doesn’t. They may vandalize, or draw mustaches on people, or even spit on someone, but they’re not carrying an AR-15 around threatening to shoot at law enforcement or anyone who gets in their way generally.

  74. That may be because communism is extremely stigmatized in our country. You step out side our country to Europe or South America, and the extreme left is very scary. Most of the extreme left in our country seem to live in universities with cushy jobs.

  76. On a slightly different point. I just became interested in why there is no extreme left in America. Here is a guy from Sweden that says that the American left maps to the moderate side of the right wing there.

    Looking at the presidential candidates, I am frankly appalled. None of them would be a viable politician in Sweden. They all support the death penalty, none advocates strict gun control and all make frequent mention of their religious beliefs in public. These are extremist stances. Not even the tiny Christian Democrat party mentions God publicly in Sweden, for fear of alienating the pragmatic rationalist majority.

    Sounds like your wet dream of a political system. =)

    http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/2008/02/03/us-politics-have-no-left-wing/

  80. It doesn’t happen often for sure. People generally don’t convert from arguments and syllogisms and they usually don’t leave because of counter evidence. They sin, they stop trusting God, their relationship becomes nonexistent and they walk. The intellectual smokescreens come after the fact not before

  82. I agree that it’s more difficult to get a clear head when you’re continually indoctrinating yourself through singing, church, sermons, books, fellowship, devotions, etc. I disagree with you that most people who leave Christianity don’t have any good arguments against Christianity, that they just want to sin. You know this though.

  83. If I remember most of your issues had to do with not trusting that God was good. There is a possibility that hell is a just punishment but you don’t trust Gods goodness. There is a possibility God has good reasons for allowing pain and suffering, but you don’t trust His goodness. There is a possibility that God commanding the slaughter of Canaanites was just but you don’t trust His judgement. You stop trusting someone when your relationship with said person sucks. Notice how these doubts didn’t really bother you while you were on fire for God and had an active/fruitful prayer life? That’s the way it goes man.

  84. Supernatural hypotheticals logically fail. Just because I (I guess Dawkins in this case) can throw out seemingly ridiculous responses to supernatural hypotheticals doesn’t mean I’ve already made up my mind. I’m just doing what we always do when something in our world happens: try and figure it out instead of assuming it was supernatural.

    There is no scientific argument for the resurrection.

    I”m really not sure of any claim or “believe” that I hold that is as extraordinary as claiming the Christian God alone exists, that he created everything, that he’s omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent, that because of some bad thing my common ancestor did that I am now responsible for, he decided to take on human form then sacrifice himself for the bad things I am responsible for, then raise himself up from the dead. Oh, and this is all true because it says so in a book that was inspired by said God.

  86. I was responding to your link. The term “liberal” in that article refers to classical liberalism, that is probably closer to Libertarianism in this country, not liberal as in the left here.

  88. Yes, my point is that there is not a one-to-one correspondence between the extremists on the right and the ones on the left in this country. There simply is no leftist version of Timothy McVeigh or the Bundy family. The closest you get is Occupy Wall Street, and their only crime was disorganization and body odor.

  91. They may have arguments but IMO the primary issue is sin. Although, to be clear, I’m not trying to communicate anything so wooden as “you just wanted to commit sin x and thus you left the faith”. Sin works like undercurrents at the beach. You know when you look up and never realized how far you drifted? Pretty soon you get tired of marching back to where you started. Choked out by those thorns!

  92. Okay. I will concede your point. The extreme left does exist, with its violent analogs, but I’m not sure why they don’t exist here.

  96. Probably. He also didn’t like it when I agreed that maybe he didn’t deconvert to sin, but pointed out that it is still a fringe benefit!

  97. Yeah, already done. Ha ha.

    I’ve said this before, but there’s really not much about my life I’d need to change to be a Christian. I’d need to marry my girl friend…or go to confession a lot. It’s not like I’m out enjoying the fact that I can commit murder now.

  98. Because you said you could find things that I “believe with far less evidence than what I demand from religion”. You probably could, depending on what we’re talking about. That doesn’t mean I’m bias against religion, it’s just that when you claim that your god is the only one that exists and that I’m such a bad person that I made him kill himself, I need a little more explaining/proof than I would probably need for the theory of Gravity. I guess I’m bias towards gravity.

  99. But you have to unravel the ball to make a quilt! Or mittens! It’s getting cold up here; a hat would be way better than a silly ball. 😉

  100. Let me use an illustration: While there are Catholics who are individualists, individualism is more prominent in Protestant evangelical contexts (I assume you agree here).

    Why is this? Because Protestantism by its nature is more individualistic than Catholicism. Therefore when Protestants set themselves up as the supreme arbiters of what the Bible says, they are being consistent with their ethic, whereas when Catholics do this they are being inconsistent with their ethic.

    Likewise, the American left has traditionally been about things like the peace movement, the anti-war movement, equal rights for workers, women, minorities, etc. Meanwhile the right has been characterized by fighting civil rights, feminism, and immigration reform.

    This being the case, it makes perfect sense for extremists on the right to be naturally more prone to violence (since their ethic is pro-gun, anti-immigration, etc.), while if leftists are violent or xenophobic they are acting out of accord with their principles.

    This is why we see violent extremists overwhelmingly more on the right in this country than on the left.

  101. Yes, but what I’m wondering is why? Why does and not extraordinary claim need extraordinary evidence? The claim that a squash is my distant evolutionary cousin is extraordinary. But there isn’t extraordinary evidence that this is the case. There is just evidence. Same with carbon dating, general relativity, the big bang, the cosmos being 16 billion years old, plate tectonics, the existence of other minds, etc etc

    We don’t have EXTRAORDINARY evidence that this is all true. We just have evidence. Evidence is all that is required for a reasonable person. But in your case the stars realigning, and voices booming through the cosmos would STILL not make it probable that God exists. That’s a bias bud. Plain and simple.

  102. “It’s not like I’m out enjoying the fact that I can commit murder now.”

    Yeah, murder is the one sin most non-Christians are proud about not committing. But you ARE enjoying the fact that you think you can commit such sins as adultery/fornication, masterbation, drunkenness, skipping out on keeping the Lord’s day holy, blasphemy, and so forth.

    By the way I find this exchange extra amusing since today is Ash Wednesday, the first day of lent, and a day of fasting. So nope, you wouldn’t have to change much! =)

  105. I challenge the idea that an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. It goes against bayesian probability that also takes into account the probability of the evidence given that the claim is false among other things. Here is a brief quote from WLC:

    1. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    This sounds so commonsensical, doesn’t it? But in fact it is demonstrably false. Probability theorists studying what sort of evidence it would take to establish a highly improbable event came to realize that if you just weigh the improbability of the event against the reliability of the testimony, we’d have to be sceptical of many commonly accepted claims. Rather what’s crucial is the probability that we should have the evidence we do if the extraordinary event had not occurred.3 This can easily offset any improbability of the event itself. In the case of the resurrection of Jesus, for example, this means that we must also ask, “What is the probability of the facts of the empty tomb, the post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection, if the resurrection had not occurred?” It is highly, highly, highly, improbable that we should have that evidence if the resurrection had not occurred.

  106. I find this line of reasoning to be a little self-righteous. So you don’t lust? You always keep the Lord’s Day holy? You never drink a little too much?

    I almost never get drunk. I actually don’t like being drunk. Marrying my girl friend would take care of the “fornication”. I’m not exactly running around blaspheming all the time either.

    I think you think there’s a much bigger difference between you and me than there is.

  109. It’s funny because as a Christian, your attitude is supposed to be, “I’m the chief of sinners saved by grace,” but as an arguer, you want to tell me how much worse I am than you and how much I’d have to change to be like you.

  110. Not self-righteous, but there is a bit of difference between how you live your life than how I attempt to live mine based on religion.

    BTW, getting high is considered getting drunk. I have temptations toward all sorts of stuff, but I attempt to not act on them. I attempt to maintain a repentant demeanor and I work on cultivating devotion toward God. As a Catholic, there are lot more practical prohibitions than typical protestantism, such as various fasts, days of obligation, and contraception. I know you want to minimize these differences, but they are large.

  111. Yes exactly. Extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence. No one can even define what the hell extraordinary evidence would be if we saw it!

  112. You minimize your sin. You’re like “I don’t commit murder, so I’m good. My life is basically the same as someone trying to faithfully live as a Catholic.”

  113. “you want to tell me how much worse I am than you and how much I’d have to change to be like you.”

    I’m not the standard. But the very fact that I’m trying to reach the standard, and very aware of how I fail to reach it, makes our lives different. If you were faithfully attempting to live the way you should, you would have a much different life. Is what I’m saying. Right now, you say there isn’t much you would need to change. I’m saying that is a very dangerous lie.

  114. I find it an extraordinary claim to believe the material universe exists unnecessarily with no cause outside itself.

  115. If I was married, went to church, and called myself a Christian, you’d have very little reason to think I wasn’t.

    I left Christianity because it seemed completely fake and made up, and it stopped making sense the less I conditioned myself to believe it. You can continue saying whatever you want about people who leave Christianity, but I’m not sure what it accomplishes. It sure isn’t going to make us want to talk to you.

  116. “If I was married, went to church, and called myself a Christian, you’d have very little reason to think I wasn’t.”

    It doesn’t matter what I believe about you. It doesn’t matter if someone can pass as a Christian. I’m sure you are a reasonably decent person, like a lot of people. But that isn’t the goal. Striving to be a Saint with the help of God, to be free from all sin is the ultimate goal. That goal for me very well might not be achieved until I’m the last one turning off the light in Purgatory at the end of the world.

    “I left Christianity because it seemed completely fake and made up, and it stopped making sense the less I conditioned myself to believe it.”

    You can believe what you want as well, obviously. But just as Kenneth pointed out above, we agree on the second part of the sentence but it is interpreted differently.

    I believe everyone is given sufficient Grace to believe, yet we have to work with that Grace. The more we work with that Grace, embracing it, by shunning sin and temptation, cultivating virtue and devotion to God, the more we will receive. If we constantly turn away from the Grace and actively chose sin instead, over time less and less we will receive – because you are telling God what you really want. Just like Kenneth said this happens slowly over time. Of course you believe that you simply stopped conditioning yourself, what else could you possibly believe? And of course I believe what I believe.

    Do I believe you are particularly sinful person? No, not on the horizontal plane. Do I believe that someone is sinning who stops attending church, stops praying, stops having a devotion to God, and who openly mocks God is particularly sinful on the vertical plane? Of course. Is that surprising?

    I’m not trying to make you angry, I just telling you what I believe. Just like people, especially apostates, sitting on the outside of Christianity looking in, tend to believe unflattering things about Christians: deceived, brainwashed, idiots. I assume you believe something like that about me.

    “You can continue saying whatever you want about people who leave Christianity, but I’m not sure what it accomplishes. It sure isn’t going to make us want to talk to you.”

    You’re probably right, maybe it won’t accomplish anything but making you frustrated with me and to not want to talk to me. I just want you to honestly reflect. And to repent. I want this because I care about you.

  117. I guess I’m having a hard time figuring out how wanting to figure something out that, on its face, doesn’t make sense is a bias. I also think you are conflating “faith” with “believe”. I do not have faith in evolution, carbon dating, plate tectonics, the big bang. I believe these things happened based the way we know the universe works at this particular point in time. Is it perfect knowledge? No. It never claims to be. It just makes more sense at this point in time.

  118. Yes, the objection would be placed at the ambiguity of the phrases “word of God” and “inerrant”. Peter would say that conservatives, a priori, load a definition of those words into the argument and then make sure scripture meets the expectation. Which, he would argue, leads to a kind of cognitive dissonance and/or apostacy

  120. St. Thomas demanded proof of the resurrection and was not condemned for doing so. Rather Christ went out of his way to show the skeptical disciple the truth.

    And while I do believe in the resurrection, I cannot fault another man for echoing the saint’s request.

  121. So, God exists and raised Jesus from the dead doesn’t make sense on its face….. But a watermelon being my cousin is par for the course. All we need are some abstract formulas, which may or may not allign with reality, and that’s good enough to show multivetses, big bangs, the ages of the earth, the birthday of the cosmos, etc etc….. But even if the stars realigned and a voice from heaven proclaimed Christianity that wouldn’t make Gods existence probable.

    If you can’t see the bias in that your indoctrination has become bullet proof.

  124. Its not the request for evidence that I’m finding fault with. Its the disingenuous request for evidence that I find fault with. Its like if I asked you:

    I would like evidence for evolution….. But really I won’t settle for anything less than a complete history of all life forms to have ever lived, a thorough explanation of life’s origins, and a complete account of the human mind.

    That’s a totally stacked BS deck.

  125. Why do you assume it’s a disingenuous request? What makes Thomas’ request to see the risen Christ any less disingenuous than mine to see him? God has indulged humans on several occasions when they asked for proof of His existence directly (see Moses, Gideon, Elijah, Thomas). They each asked for specific things and God did them. Why did that all of the sudden go away and why am I disingenuous for asking for the same?

    I think scientists would be on board with your rigorous pursuit of knowledge. Get down in the dirt with them and let’s figure it out.

    Just to be clear, no one has faith in evolution and evolution never claims to know the origin of life or have a complete history of all life forms, or have a complete account of the human mind. It’s not a belief system. It’s the best explanation we have right now for the ways things are based on our observable universe.

  126. I do not see the difference between our ancient ancestors believing the rising and setting of the sun was Apollo riding his chariot across the sky and everyone assuming the stars realigning or a cosmic voice was God. Both are inexpiable at their respective points in time. Yet, we figured one out, why can’t we try to figure these other phenomena out? Why is that so bad? It’s nothing personal against God. Let’s just not be too hasty.

  127. I don’t think the terms are ambiguous. In the case at hand, “word of God” refers to the canonical scriptures, and although it is inherently mysterious for some human writings to be divine in the sense meant by the Christian community from the beginning (anyone with even moderate google skills can get a good sense of the Church’s thinking about “the word of God”), and “inerrant” of course means without error. The meaning or application of the text is sometimes difficult to discern, for a lot of reasons. In my experience, the traditional doctrine of inspiration is more exegetically enlightening than stupefying–it opens up interpretive vistas that are closed to moderns such as Enns. Also, the existence, power, and goodness of God in itself creates possibilities for harmonization and hope at the very points where the text sometimes seems incompatible with one or more of those things. In a theistic and Christian worldview there are possibilities for resolving the problem of the canaanite genocide that are closed to atheists and skeptics. Of course if you bring an atheistical and agnostic paradigm to the problem, you get atheistical and agnostic results, and theistic harmonizations and apologetics will seem weak and far-fetched by contrast. Theists need not be impressed or dismayed at that truism.

    On a related point, folks suffer from cognitive dissonance and apostatize for any number of reasons, including reading the works of authors like Peter Enns. But that is no argument against reading his stuff or even adopting his views. Anyways, there are a lot of scholars, Evangelical and otherwise, doing good exegetical work appropriating exactly the same data and using similar methods (comparative reading of ANE literature, etc) to Enns. You don’t need to drink his bathwater to coddle the exegetical baby of HC, etc. Besides, Enns’ specific arguments for his own overall view of scripture are pretty weak, as has been pointed out here, among other places:

    http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/september-web-only/bible-is-more-than-mystery.html?start=1

    And for those who dig satire, Peter Leithart’s rhetorical flaying of Peter Enns is delightful:

    http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2015/07/the-abraham-myth

    Folks are free to enjoy a liberal view of scripture, but saddle yourself with Christianity in the process? Its analogous to CCM–the real thing is way better.

  130. Im not assuming your request is disingenuous I’m inferring that it is from your earlier statement that the rearrangement of stars and a booming voice from heaven wouldn’t make God probable. From what I gather from your earlier comments if Jesus did appear miraculously before you, according to your theory of knowledge, of would be more probable that you were hallucinating or insane.

    Evolution is an extraordinary claim that you believe on ordinary evidence.

    Most of the greatest scientists in history are theists. That’s why so many of the moons craters are named after Jesuit priests. In fact, most of the scientists in the world today are religious. Its not scientists I have a problem with. Its naturalism.

  131. There isn’t much of a difference in that both instances call for design. But the stars realliging miraculously to spell “John 3:16” NOT making it probable that God exists is insanely biased.

  132. Thanks for those links!

    Im with you all the way. Bit I do think that Peter brings value to the conversation when he reminds conservatives that BOTH liberals and trads can have a incorrect notion of “what must be true” of scripture that makes them unable to read the bible for how it actually is. It was a helpful idea for my own studies, and opened the door a bit for varying hermenuetics. Especially in the OT.

  133. Well I can’t contradict your bio, nor do I presume to know what you mean bu trads.” John Henry Newman? St Thomas Aquinas? Pope St. Leo? King David? Gilgamesh? Jesus? They are all people.

  134. You are a catholic aren’t you? I know you know what a traditionalist is 🙂

    Its a distinction that is necessary these days like it or not

  135. ikewise, the American left has traditionally been about things like the peace movement, the anti-war movement, equal rights for workers, women, minorities, etc. Meanwhile the right has been characterized by fighting civil rights, feminism, and immigration reform.

    Wtf?!? I can’t believe lane agreed to this. Every single sentence here is bullshit. The left is characterized as taking a pass on fighting evil (continuously), completely missing the greatest moral failings of each generation (see communism, abortion, gay marriage, etc), affirmative action, destroying the family, crushing character development, growing government, shrinking freedom, and pioneering politically correct bull shit.

    Ask the citizens of Baltimore and Missouri if liberals don’t have extremists. Pretty sure those riots werent pitched by conservatives. Pretty sure conservatives aren’t chopping up children and selling their body parts. Does that count as violent or xenophobic? Envirogroups have cost us hundreds of millions of dollars in riots. Same with unions, liberal college groups, etc.

    Delusional.

  136. You’re probably right, maybe it won’t accomplish anything but making you frustrated with me and to not want to talk to me.

    This is how leftism classically operates.

    Step one play the offended card.

    Step two make sure to question the character of the conservative in whatever way possible (hmmmm a little self righteous?)

    Step three refuse to speak with people who persistantly disagree with you. Label them on the way out if possible.

    This is the great tradition of secularism.

  138. Lol its one of those things. Election year brings out the crazy in everyone. Its an important vote this time around. Big question:

    Do you want to be like Denmark or no?

    Wouldn’t have even been a question a few years ago. Now its a real possibility

  140. Bishop Barron….. Weird right? If we ever get an american Pope…. Boy it would be cool to have his name in the hat.

  142. Its hard for me to see how we could adopt only a few of them. Socializing medicine almost demands a socialization of universities… Otherwise the cost benefit analysis of becoming a doctor goes way into the negative. The taxes needed to pull off both would be staggering and not even that would pay for these benefits. We would need to cut military spending by ALOT to pull it off, which is what most of western Europe has done. What exactly would we keep? Its hard to see.

  143. I would love for you to watch this when you get a chance. Prager really took me off the fence when considering socialism. Its long…. 44 minutes… But its entertaining and I think would add value to your understanding of conservatism. I’ll be happy to read or watch a recommendation of yours in return.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=intent://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DUj9qvBwOeMA%23Intent%3Bscheme%3Dhttp%3Bpackage%3Dcom.google.android.youtube%3BS.browser_fallback_url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fm.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253DUj9qvBwOeMA%3BS.android.intent.extra.REFERRER_NAME%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%3BlaunchFlags%3D0x8080000%3Bend&ved=0ahUKEwj8mPPK8_fKAhUGNiYKHVxlC5cQjjgIJDAC&usg=AFQjCNFZRnmxfd8E759mQ94yk0II_I2kXQ&sig2=nwmMR7YWFrqJGPcYU9LplQ

  145. That’s a conservative wet dream, but has no chance. Pope Francis has essentially shamed him beyond repair. Maybe Pope Pell though. Not bad. Or Pope Sara from Africa. All of those sound amazing.

  149. Hey guys, I am behind a week and just now listening to #83. Jason is talking about ignoring parts of the Bible because of the context or time when it was written (old testament angry God). I totally get it, but how do you go about reconciling things Jesus said (that we quote straight from his mouth) when all of the gospels were written well after his death. I’m pretty sure if I had to quote someone from 30 years ago, I would miss quite a few words here and there as well as the intended meaning. And if you can just throw out large parts of the Old Testament why couldn’t you do the same with the New Testament?

    I agree that most of the Old Testament is not God speaking to the Israelites, but I can’t turn around and say then that the New Testament is 100% ok because Roman Jews weren’t as crazy as Babylonian Jews or that because things were written sooner makes them more inspired by God than older stuff. I’m just curious on how to square those thoughts.

  150. No, little fella, that is not the argument. Its more like the Bible cannot be wrong because it is the word of God, who cannot be wrong. But you get a gold star for trying.

  151. I don’t really follow how making basic health care a human right necessitates education through college for all, but I’m for both of them anyway, so. As far as your assumptions that “the taxes needed to pull off both would be staggering and not even pay for these benefits” and “we would need to cut military spending by ALOT to pull it off”, where do you get that from? Are you saying the following numbers are just completely made up and false? A lot of economists have backed Bernie’s plan saying that it will actually generate jobs and revenue:

    Actual facts on how he will pay for his proposals:
    https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

    There are hundreds of economists that back Bernie’s plans, but here is one, for example:
    http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/08/news/economy/sanders-income-jobs/index.html

  153. You sure have a gift for spinning things and turning them around. Let me give it a try:

    Your post above is how rightism classically operates.

    Step one: be offensive.

    Step two: act like you are being unfairly judged when your argument is turned around on you.

    Step three: continue to be offensive and then be offended when “leftist” realizes they’re wasting their time and have better things to do than to continue talking to you. (Which is a Biblical principle, by the way.) Make it look as if this is a complete failure to cooperate and “reach across the aisle” on the part of the “leftist”.

    This is some great tradition or something blah blah blah.

  154. Do I believe you are particularly sinful person? No, not on the horizontal plane. Do I believe that someone is sinning who stops attending church, stops praying, stops having a devotion to God, and who openly mocks God is particularly sinful on the vertical plane? Of course. Is that surprising?

    Lane, the “vertical” sins you accuse me of being guilty of are a result of me not being a Christian, not the cause. They would be rectified if I became a Christian. That’s part of what being a Christian is. (Devotion to “God”, love for “God”, etc.)

    I feel like you’re confusing the original issue.

  155. Cool! And like I said if you have a recommendation I’ll do the same. That electric car video was crap. Prager is better at explaining conservatism in general as a philosophy. He is in the tank hardcore as anti global warming… So I just generally ignore those videos lol

Related Posts