This argument to have all candidates for public office pass a competency test, Republican Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene, has today graced us with the following piece of absolute trash.

The government making people wear masks is like the Nazis who made the Jews wear signs and put them on railroads to send them to gas chambers and kill them.

Yeah, I paraphrased and shortened it slightly, but that's the meat of it.

Yes incrediable indeed

Why won't Madam Mim rescind the mask mandate ? Is it her way of saying the vaccines don't work ?

Herd Immunity?

Why won't Madam Mim rescind the mask mandate ? Is it her way of saying the vaccines don't work ?
Variants are out and about. This pandemic is far from being over. It's still to be determined which vaccines do the best job of giving total protection.

No ;the power hungry Dems are using the pandemic as an excuse to flex their muscles . In fact they hope the pandemic is with us forever .

The Dems have been comparing the Repubs to Nazi's for years . Now they have selective outrage .

No ;the power hungry Dems are using the pandemic as an excuse to flex their muscles . In fact they hope the pandemic is with us forever .

The Dems have been comparing the Repubs to Nazi's for years . Now they have selective outrage .
Naw. You're thinking of the trumpsters and trumpettes. If the Republicans would behave, no more problem! We could even picnic together this summer. I'll bring the prime rib steaks to grill.

Marjorie Taylor GreeneShe's the one repub semi-crazy to balance out AOC, Tlaib, Omar, Pressley, et al. Funny you didn't mention them. Wonder why not???

lot of crazy about these days, it's popular so you get noticed

lot of crazy about these days, it's popular so you get noticed

The crazies are getting into the higher echelons of the Republican Party.

Minority Leader McCarthy has become a type apparently unaware that his insanity is recorded on camera almost on a daily basis.

Then there's the nutcase Republican Rep Clyde who claimed (also on camera for all the world to see) that the Jan 6 insurrection was nothing more than the usual tourist activity visiting and taking pictures. Even when the video showed the moron helping to stem the onslaught by pushing furniture against an entrance door for protection against those "tourists taking pictures".

Republican Senator Hawley making the most outrageous lies about the election and, of course, Giulani, long known to be on the brink of madness along with his fellow attorneys Sidney Powell who admitted before a judge she was "exaggerating" when screaming about fraud and, lest we forget, the truly insane Lin Wood who is caught on camera raging about the "illuminati" - a notorious cabal behind the Democrats and Biden.

When they make the movie about this bizarre Trumpian era in American history, it would be hard to believe such goings-on really occurred, but the film is always there for all to see that it is the truth, strange as it seems.

There are extremists on both sides of the aisle. We have a Pres who can’t speak without a teleprompter or answer impromptu questions and a VP in charge of the catastrophe at the southern border who won’t go there and won’t talk about.

There are extremists on both sides of the aisle. We have a Pres who can’t speak without a teleprompter or answer impromptu questions and a VP in charge of the catastrophe at the southern border who won’t go there and won’t talk about.

Oh, you're back!

Biden and Harris are remotely far from my post re Republicans. They are normal people. Like Trump making fun of a paraplegic, you find fault in Biden's speaking with a teleprompter. Trump could barely speak with one. Without one, he was all over the lot, unable to hold a thought more than a moment without sliding into another. Biden has often spoke extemporaneously with great clarity. You're just not seeing.

You need to understand the meaning of false equivalence. Then you won't post such nonsense as you did here. Google it.

“At a time when the Socialist Democrats and the Jihad Squad are supporting terrorist Hamas,....
Will Dems Rebuke the Squad for Parroting Hamas Talking Points? | Opinion (newsweek.com) (https://www.newsweek.com/will-dems-rebuke-squad-parroting-hamas-talking-points-opinion-1592176)
....and their supporters are attacking Jewish people on the streets of America,..........
Officials Say Hate Crimes Against Jews Are Growing In The Aftermath Of Gaza Violence : NPR (https://www.npr.org/2021/05/24/999790233/officials-say-hate-crimes-against-jews-are-growing-in-the-aftermath-of-gaza-viol)
..........it's never been more important than now to stand up against forced vaccinations and mask mandates that the Left is using to discriminate against Americans who refuse to comply”.

“Their attempts to shame, ostracize, and brand Americans who choose not to get vaccinated or wear a mask are reminiscent of the great tyrants of history who did the same to those who would not comply.”


"The Democrats are the party of division, hate, critical race theory (pure racism), discrimination, totalitarianism, socialism, globalism, gender destruction, BDS, defunding our police, and ANTIFA / BLM terrorists."

MTG

.........it's never been more important than now to stand up against forced vaccinations and mask mandates that the Left is using to discriminate against Americans who refuse to comply”

Huh?


“Their attempts to shame, ostracize, and brand Americans who choose not to get vaccinated or wear a mask are reminiscent of the great tyrants of history who did the same to those who would not comply.” MTG

Tom, Tom, Tom ......... you're losing it. Even your Repub heroes in Congress are denouncing Greene as a nutcase. Please don't get trapped into the web she's weaving. She's a crazy lady.

Wearing masks is not the same as the Nazis forcing people into gas chambers in extermination camps. Good grief!! Like I told your partner in crime, look up false equivalence. Stop posting nonsense. It ain't helping your cause.

MTJ and her comrade Matt 'pedo' Gaetz are the darlings of the right and talking crazy raises a lot of money.

My "Repub heroes "????????? Who would that be ? Not McCarthy . All he does is bow to pressure .


Wearing masks is not the same as the Nazis forcing people into gas chambers in extermination camps.

The presumption is that Nazi abuse began with extermination camps . They did not . They began by instituting legal measure to strip Jews of their rights while simultaneously waging a campaign to socially ostracize them .
Germans were told that Jews were 'the other' .The Nuremberg laws defined who was a Jew and who was not a Jew.

Jews were then separated from the rest of society . Laws against hiring ,attending schools ,other public places were initiated . (do you have your vax papers ? What about a vax passport ? )

I don't know how far the country will take this . We already have experienced lock downs with little resistance . Can ghettoization (forced quarantine ) of non-vaccinated people happen ?

I don't know how far the country will take this . We already have experienced lock downs with little resistance . Can ghettoization (forced quarantine ) of non-vaccinated people happen ?
If you were in charge, what would you say and do?

Oh, you're back!Been here everyday.


Biden and Harris are remotely far from my post re Republicans. They are normal people.I'm sure they are to you. They are perfectly normal liberal dems. Can't talk without prepared notes. Can't answer impromptu questions. Sleeps with the political boss to get a promotion. In charge of a border you haven't seen. Afraid of press conferences. Yep. Pretty normal.

Yep. Pretty normal.
Yeah, like Trump who excitedly traveled to Alamo, Texas, and thought he was at the Alamo....

Why do right wingers defend their certified loons by attacking? This is about specific nut cases based on public behavior. If you don't think MJG isn't off her rocker just be brave enough to say so.

Or be a coward...

I don't mind your critical remarks about Trump, though I would say he built a major business empire which Biden/Harris never did. Still, he is worthy of criticism. It is your abysmal support and defense of Biden/Harris that is incredible.

I agree with the Governors who have lifted mask mandates . Madam Mim is just being power hungry . She is also a hypocrite as she has been seen numerous times in gatherings without a mask on.

It's the same thing she pulled making legislators go through metal detectors ;and pay a fine if not . Even IF there was a REAL threat about visitors in the Capitol ,there was NEVER a threat that would justify requiring an elected Rep to pass through special security measures .

Tal I agree . MJG isn't off her rocker .

I agree with the Governors who have lifted mask mandates .
Then please list the rules and release from rules you would set as public policy.

I agree with the Governors who have lifted mask mandates . Madam Mim is just being power hungry . She is also a hypocrite as she has been seen numerous times in gatherings without a mask on.

It's the same thing she pulled making legislators go through metal detectors ;and pay a fine if not . Even IF there was a REAL threat about visitors in the Capitol ,there was NEVER a threat that would justify requiring an elected Rep to pass through special security measures .

I don't know about that since certain wingers have tried to carry a gun into the chambers before and a lot of old people in the halls of congress. I think it may be okay for Governors to lift mask mandates, but banning localities that discretion if warranted is simply irresponsible.

WG ;the one and only rule that applies is that there will no longer be a governmental requirement to wear masks in public .

Tal ;if you think there is a risk from a lawmaker that justifies ridiculous measures then either your paranoia is showing ,or perhaps you think we are in the late 1850s on the verge of a civil war .

I can understand since the Dems are ginning up all types of exaggerations about what happened Jan 6 like Schmucky comparing it to the Pearl Harbor attack and trying to set up a 9-11 type commission ...... with people being arrested and held in solitary confinement without any due process.
Jan. 6 defendants win unlikely Dem champions as they face harsh detainment - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/19/capitol-riot-defendants-warren-483125)

Germans were told that Jews were 'the other' .The Nuremberg laws defined who was a Jew and who was not a Jew. Jews were then separated from the rest of society . Laws against hiring ,attending schools ,other public places were initiated . (do you have your vax papers ? What about a vax passport ? )

I don't know how far the country will take this

Tom, it's not like you to join the nutcase category - I'm trying my best to keep you out it, but you're not helping.


Can ghettoization (forced quarantine ) of non-vaccinated people happen ?

Quarantine is not "ghettoization". It does not lead to cattle cars full of people om their way to be gassed to death.

Can't talk without prepared notes. Can't answer impromptu questions.

Of course they can, and have. It is Trump that could never talk coherently without a script. Speaking impromptu, he was incoherent, and often resorted to being a raging lunatic.


Sleeps with the political boss to get a promotion.

Wow - you are really hitting rock bottom. Maybe you should stick to telling all of us about your wonderful bible. I'm sure you can find filthy stories there to regale us with.

WG ;the one and only rule that applies is that there will no longer be a governmental requirement to wear masks in public .
Who or what will require mask wearing?

Of course they can, and have. It is well known that Biden wants the questions in advance for press conferences.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-white-house-asking-reporters-share-questions-advance



Sleeps with the political boss to get a promotion.


Wow - you are really hitting rock bottom. Maybe you should stick to telling all of us about your wonderful bible. I'm sure you can find filthy stories there to regale us with.She dated Willie Brown extensively when he was thirty or forty years older than her. I no doubt went too far is saying they slept together, but they dated extensively and he promoted her. Why would a sixty year old man date a 30 year old woman? You do the math. But yes, it cannot be stated for certain. You know, sort of like the many accusations you make against Trump. Lot's of smoke but a lack of certain fire.

Yes, the Bible is wonderful.

It is well known that Biden wants the questions in advance for press conferences.
And Trump should have had them ahead of time so he'd stay on topic and not walk off stage when one didn't suit him.

At least you are acknowledging that your hero cannot think fast enough to answer questions on the spot. Real genius.

At least you are acknowledging that your hero cannot think fast enough to answer questions on the spot. Real genius.
A true disciple...please fix your brackets.

Nope, didn't acknowledge that at all. You're reading ghost words.

And Trump should have had them ahead of timeThe "And" is your acknowledgment.

I don't know why those brackets appear. I have tired of fixing them. I'm just going to come to love them.

She dated Willie Brown extensively when he was thirty or forty years older than her. I no doubt went too far is saying they slept together, but they dated extensively and he promoted her. Why would a sixty year old man date a 30 year old woman? You do the math. But yes, it cannot be stated for certain. You know, sort of like the many accusations you make against Trump. Lot's of smoke but a lack of certain fire.

At least you admit your mind is in the gutter and you don't know what you're talking about. Somewhat anyway

Who or what will require mask wearing?

still practicing the Socratic method ?

This is what I think .... my body /my choice. Private entities can set rules as they choose. 'No mask ;no service" . But I would not permit the government to mandate it again.
The evidence is in :Mask mandates did NOT prevent the end of the year surge . Of the 100 counties with the most confirmed cases during this period, 97 had either a county-level mask mandate, a state-level mandate, or both. Of the 25 counties with the highest new case totals, all 25 had a mask mandate.

Better than mask mandates would be to protect the elderly in nursing homes and those most vulnerable . Then let the rest of the country go on with their lives .

Better than mask mandates would be to protect the elderly in nursing homes and those most vulnerable . Then let the rest of the country go on with their lives .Absolutely correct.

This is what I think .... my body /my choice. Private entities can set rules as they choose. 'No mask ;no service" . But I would not permit the government to mandate it again.

You two are two peas in a pod. Your private choice is more important than the attempt to stop the spread of a deadly virus. Your knee-jerk reaction to anything the government does is ridiculous. Like your fellow crazy person, Greene, wearing a mask is one step away from gas chambers.

The elderly should just die if masks are mandated for nursery homes. Who needs them anyway, their being a drain on the all-important economy. Why don't we just kill all the non-productive members of society. The unborn don't make money, so abortion is good. Moloch and Mammon are your true gods.

Anyone reading these pages has a good insight into the wacky white evangelicals supporting an evil character like Trump. HIM as government, you like! Right?


The evidence is in :Mask mandates did NOT prevent the end of the year surge . Of the 100 counties with the most confirmed cases during this period, 97 had either a county-level mask mandate, a state-level mandate, or both. Of the 25 counties with the highest new case totals, all 25 had a mask mandate.

Tomder, you have been wrong in so many claims of yours that I won't even ask you for a link. You wouldn't answer anyway. Three times you couldn't answer for yourself as to what programs are "socialistic".

Sometimes you write fact-based posts, but too often your posts are not fact-based, just some nonsense from whatever website you get the stuff from - or your own imagination. I can predict your reply (both of you) to this post, so can the others here.

Stick to the facts Tom and get your creds back. (Calm down, Tom's little helper. We know you're frothing at the bit to jump in here.)

Took about a minute to find a link.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/13/mask-mandate-options-may-control-covid-19-better/


Stick to the factsLike you?

yawn your ad hominins are boring .Perhaps you missed this
"Better than mask mandates would be to protect the elderly in nursing homes and those most vulnerable . Then let the rest of the country go on with their lives"
Mask mandates had no effect in the Autumn surge . 8.8 million new cases mostly in the areas where mask mandates were the most prevalent . Providing links is a waste of time . Most of the garbage you write you do not provide verifying links to either .

Mask mandates had no effect in the Autumn surge

Wearing masks is SCIENCE.


Most of the garbage you write you do not provide verifying links to either .

My posts are based on logic, common sense, and what is already in effect. When links are needed, I provide them. For example, not being an expert on climate science, I provided two excellent links for you - which I doubt you read since they go against your (false) ideas.

You did not provide a link for your Aquinas fairy tale. Afterwards it was obvious why you did not do so.

You did not provide a link for your Aquinas fairy tale. Afterwards it was obvious why you did not do so.

We've been waiting for you to provide a link for your hideous belief that billions of humans are being sent to hell for eternal punishment. As fairy tales go, yours takes the cake.

The necessary link is not a quote from a book, but in YOUR words like mine is.

My link has a valid explanation. Your explanation is non-existent since down deep you don't really believe it. It's just a means of you getting back at all those you dislike.

You strain at the gnat of Aquinas and swallow the camel of hell. Control your hatred.

If the words of Christ do not satisfy you then why would I believe that my words would?

If the words of Christ do not satisfy you then why would I believe that my words would?
You have no idea what they mean nor can you put them in your own words. Bash that Bible on Athos' head, why doncha!

You don’t accept them either. It’s not an issue of understanding. It’s an issue of obstinance.

You don’t accept them either. It’s not an issue of understanding. It’s an issue of obstinance.
I did not say you don't accept them. More sentence twisting???

I'm just wondering how a discussion about MTG's comments became another biblical discussion.

I'm just wondering how a discussion about MTG's comments became another biblical discussion.
Hmm, guess why. Okay, I'll behave!

Post 42.

Post 42.
Nope. Post 41.

Nothing about the Bible in 41.

If the words of Christ do not satisfy you then why would I believe that my words would?

Wow - you'll do or say anything to get out of it, even equating the words of Jesus with your words.

Of course, you have not the slightest idea what the words of Christ were. You take the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke.

even equating the words of Jesus with your words.I haven't done that.


Of course, you have not the slightest idea what the words of Christ were. You take the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke.First of all that is not even close to being true. The general consensus of scholarship now is that the Gospels were written 35 to 60 years after the resurrection and quite possibly sooner. In addition, a large portion of the NT has manuscript evidence dating in the second century. "Over 43% of all the verses in the NT are already found in MSS within 100 years of the completion of the NT". But if you believe the words of Christ cannot be established, then what on earth do you say about the words of Plato, Homer, or Aristotle for which there is far, far less manuscript support and manuscripts dating hundreds of years after the autographs?

But if what you said was true, then no one, including you, would know what Christ said. The truth is, you don't like what He said, so you are looking for the back door.

https://bible.org/article/second-century-papyri

The general consensus of scholarship now is .....

"Scholars" who examined the Bible with pre-conceived notions are hardly scholarly. In any case, the general consensus is no longer what you say. For the last 200 years objective scholars (Christian and non-Christian) have shown many difficulties with the traditional acceptance of the Bible. Easy enough to research the issue - try Google.


the Gospels were written 35 to 60 years after the resurrection and quite possibly sooner.

Even if true, 35-60 years later is more than enough time for handed down stories to be changed. Try passing a simple sentence from one person to another and see what the 30th or 25th or whatever person comes up with.

The far more complex Gospel stories are subject to this difficulty. The gist of the story may remain but the details of the same events do not. That is one explanation of the differences in the Gospels when describing the same events. Why would Mark omit the all-important event of the resurrection?


a large portion of the NT has manuscript evidence dating in the second century. "Over 43% of all the verses in the NT are already found in MSS within 100 years of the completion of the NT".

That means 57% (!) is NOT found in MSS within 100 years. Your own words.


But if you believe the words of Christ cannot be established, then what on earth do you say about the words of Plato, Homer, or Aristotle for which there is far, far less manuscript support and manuscripts dating hundreds of years after the autographs?

This is a common argument comparing the New Testament with other ancient writings. It's a false comparison since the Gospels do not affect the acceptance of other ancient writings - and vice versa.


But if what you said was true, then no one, including you, would know what Christ said.

Of course, we would. The message of Christ is easily determined by the narratives and stories about him.


The truth is, you don't like what He said, so you are looking for the back door.

Of course, I like what Christ said. You're putting words in my mouth - AGAIN! Please stop doing that.


https://bible.org/article/second-century-papyri

This link supports my point. He defines "MSS" (manuscripts) as including fragments, the earliest of which are not more than a few words, hardly what is understood today by "manuscript"

43% within a hundred years is incredible for ancient documents. You plainly have not studied this. Your absolutely silly statement about passing a sentence around a room shows you know nothing of the treatment by the ancients of oral tradition. Do your homework and come back later.


This link supports my point. He defines "MSS" (manuscripts) as including fragments,Again, your ignorance is showing. Everyone describes fragments as manuscripts because THEY ARE. Early manuscripts are scarcely ever complete and frequently are fragmental.


The message of Christ is easily determined by the narratives and stories about him.You mean the unreliable stories and narratives from the unreliable NT? How could anything be determined from that? You're confused.

43% within a hundred years is incredible for ancient documents. You plainly have not studied this. Your absolutely silly statement about passing a sentence around a room shows you know nothing of the treatment by the ancients of oral tradition. Do your homework and come back later.

Again, your ignorance is showing. Everyone describes fragments as manuscripts because THEY ARE. Early manuscripts are scarcely ever complete and frequently are fragmental.

You mean the unreliable stories and narratives from the unreliable NT? How could anything be determined from that? You're confused.


Jl - your whole reply here is a good example of how you do not or cannot give an articulate or thoughtful answer. You were unable to answer what I wrote except by calling me "ignorant, silly, not studious, confused, knowing nothing about oral tradition", etc., - that is the perfect giveaway about you. It shows a lot of pent-up frustration and anger instead of an intelligent reply.

What you call my ignorance re ancient MSS reflects your own inability to get my point about calling a "fragment" a manuscript. Then you write that "43% within a hundred years is incredible for ancient documents". What is truly incredible is your making such a claim. How many ancient documents have you studied? Which ones? Isn't 57% not included greater than 43%?

Calling me confused because of you again putting words into my mouth that I never said or even implied is so weird I can't find a name for it. All I can think of is you yelling at your own reflection in a mirror. Not a perfect analogy, but it will have to do.

Perhaps you can show that the NT is perfectly reliable? I don't want to put words in your mouth, so if I'm wrong about your position on that, let me know.

The problem is clear. You don't know what you are talking about. You claim, for instance, the NT is unreliable. "Of course, you have not the slightest idea what the words of Christ were. You take the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke." When I point out that your "several hundred years" is wildly inaccurate, you have no reply. 35 to 60 years is not "several hundred years" in any place in the universe. A hundred years for 43% of the NT is not "several hundred years" anywhere at any time. And the significance of the 43% figure is that it established clearly that the NT existed and was being actively copied and spread about in the second century.

Even worse, you then proceed to say, "The message of Christ is easily determined by the narratives and stories about him." How can you know what the message of Christ is when, according to you, the NT is not reliable? Please explain how the stories and narratives can be accurate when the words of which the stories and narratives are composed are unreliable. Wouldn't you be taking, "...the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke?" How does that work if what you say is true? And if what you say is true, then why are you violating your own standard? Now don't dodge this. Answer the question. How can you know what the message of Christ is when, according to you, the NT is not reliable? You said it could be "easily determined". How can it be if, as you say, the words of the NT are not reliable? How???


your own inability to get my point about calling a "fragment" a manuscript
No one can get your point because it is 100% wrong. Ancient handwritten copies, as anyone knows who has studied this for more than ten minutes, are manuscripts. Many, many ancient manuscripts are fragmentary due to the age of the documents. It is common and your lack of knowledge concerning that tells us all we need to know.

The problem is clear. You don't know what you are talking about.

Here we go again. Sometimes I wonder why I bother. You begin and end as you always do - with insults. Read the following carefully.


You claim, for instance, the NT is unreliable.

I NEVER claimed that. YOU say I said it, not me. Keep reading.


"Of course, you have not the slightest idea what the words of Christ were. You take the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke."

These are my words and they are quoted correctly. The clear meaning is that the exact WORDS Christ spoke are unknown unless one believes they are written down perfectly as he spoke them after the lapse of two centuries. (It's a stretch to call "two" several so I'll give you that. Mea culpa.) Then one has to explain why the Gospels each record Christ's words differently. They are obviously written from the vagaries and inexactitude of passed-down memory to fit in to the context or the lesson he is teaching.


When I point out that your "several hundred years" is wildly inaccurate, you have no reply.

I just replied. It's such a minor point (although I'm technically correct), I felt no need to make an issue of it, as you have. "Wildly inaccurate" is a wild exaggeration. Nitpick is more like it.


35 to 60 years is not "several hundred years" in any place in the universe. A hundred years for 43% of the NT is not "several hundred years" anywhere at any time.

You're extrapolating. You got that bone of two vs several and you won't stop chewing on it. Ok, chew on, but keep reading.


And the significance of the 43% figure is that it established clearly that the NT existed and was being actively copied and spread about in the second century.

I never denied the NT was being copied from the second century. If you're saying the NT was complete and accepted in the second century as it has come down to us, you're wrong. But I don't want to put words in your mouth. Maybe you're not claiming that.


Even worse, you then proceed to say, "The message of Christ is easily determined by the narratives and stories about him." How can you know what the message of Christ is when, according to you, the NT is not reliable?

Calm down. You're screaming. As I explained above, I never said the NT was not reliable. The message of Christ is easily discerned by the Gospel narratives even though his exact words are less than precise. Totally understandable even under your 35-60 years before being written down.


Please explain how the stories and narratives can be accurate when the words of which the stories and narratives are composed are unreliable.

I hope by now, if you've been reading along here, that is no longer a difficulty for you. To repeat, I never said "the words of which the stories and narratives are composed are unreliable". Read again if you still don't understand.


Wouldn't you be taking, "...the word of a book several hundred years after Jesus spoke?" How does that work if what you say is true? And if what you say is true, then why are you violating your own standard?

In your excitement, you have managed to make this a little jumbled. But I think I get what you're trying to say. Read on to the next answer.


Now don't dodge this.

Lol - "dodging" you is never necessary.


Answer the question. How can you know what the message of Christ is when, according to you, the NT is not reliable? You said it could be "easily determined". How can it be, if, as you say, the NT is not reliable? How???Be glad to. For the 4th (?) time in this very post, I never said the NT is unreliable. Re-read above for details. (With the bolding and underlining, you really thought you had me there, didn't you? Lol.)


Ancient handwritten copies, as anyone knows who has studied this for more than ten minutes, are manuscripts. Many, many ancient manuscripts are fragmentary due to the age of the documents. It is common and your lack of knowledge concerning that tells us all we need to know.

That's not even a "nice try". As explained, I noted the term "fragment" - IN TODAY'S MEANING - implies , well, a fragment - never an entire manuscript. This is an argument over semantics and I tried to point out that the use of the word in Biblical studies is misleading when suggesting a fragment is more than it is - a very small portion of a greater whole.


It is common and your lack of knowledge ...... tells us all we need to know.

I am happy to let others here determine just who has the "lack of knowledge, telling us all we need to know". They can easily do this by examining what each of us has written on this issue.

These are my words and they are quoted correctly. The clear meaning is that the exact WORDS Christ spoke are unknown unless one believes they are written down perfectly as he spoke them after the lapse of two centuries. It was not two centuries. It was 35 to 60 years, and there are good reasons to believe that the Synoptic Gospels could not have been after 65 A.D. which is thirty years or so. But you are still in a box. If it the "exact" words of Christ are unknown, then how can you know the stories and narratives are accurate? Wouldn't those words be questionable as well?

As least you have had to admit, in a sort, that the NT is reliable, I guess.


Then one has to explain why the Gospels each record Christ's words differently.Give an example that even approaches being meaningful.


They are obviously written from the vagaries and inexactitude of passed-down memory to fit in to the context or the lesson he is teaching.First of all that is not true according to Luke. "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." Luke would not care for your characterization. Neither would John. "This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true." He later wrote, "1 John 1:1, NIV: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched--this we proclaim concerning the Word of life."

But even if it was true, it certainly destroys your contention that you could "easily determine the message of Christ." You cannot determine anything from a text that is filled with errors based upon "vagaries and inexactitude".

Well, you cannot have it both ways. You claim you are not saying the NT is unreliable, and yet you say it is written from "vagaries and inexactitude". Either the words of the NT are reliable or they are not. You need to decide which camp you live in. Living in the middle is not going to work. You claim, " I never said "the words of which the stories and narratives are composed are unreliable." Well, if the words are reliable, then we can not only know what Christ did, we can even know what He said. To allege otherwise is simply foolish and is born from your resentment of what He said.

You seem to be saying that the stories and narratives you appeal to are sort of, kind of, a little bit accurate. If that is the case, then you have no idea what Jesus either taught or did. You are attempting to live in the middle. You don't discount the Bible, but neither do you believe it unless, of course, it agrees with you.

You have employed a losing strategy. At first you tried to say that the NT made no mentions of hell. When that turned out to be plainly wrong, and even worse, for your view, that Jesus Himself spoke repeatedly of hell, then you have employed the strategy that the NT is not reliable in the sense of knowing what Jesus said, but then is mystically reliable to know what He DID. It's just nonsense.

Well, if the words are reliable, then we can not only know what Christ did, we can even know what He said.
Thank goodness Mary Magdalene was always at Jesus' side with her steno notebook, and faithfully and accurately recorded His every word.

You can't have it both ways. Just a few weeks ago you made a big deal about Jesus making John the son and caretaker of Mary. You used His words then, but now you join the crowd that considers them unreliable. They are, in your view, only reliable when they suit you. So when you are trying to make the ridiculous claim that John and Jesus were homosexual lovers, you are only too happy to believe them. What a sick approach.

BTW, study some about oral tradition among the ancients. Learn a little. Luke and John do not agree with you. I think I'll go with them.

You don't have one humerus bone in your body, do you, JL.

.He wants tibia honest . Butr sometimes he does have a bone to pick .

But why are those bones he wants to pick only fibulas???

Got me . Maybe he's trying to sternum up controversy .

I must admit those are funny comments.

I have a passion for the truth, so inconsistencies aggravate me. So to say that the words of the NT are reliable in what Jesus did, but unreliable for what He said is just ridiculous.

All of these discussions are pointless anyway. Have you noticed that no one's mind is changed at any time?

That's because you're much, much too sternum and obsessed by what you consider sacrum.

You're getting better. Perhaps you'll rank up there with Trump someday!! But you will kneed to become much better for that to happen.

Kneed??? It's a patella!!!

The absolutely LAST thing I ever want to be part of is Trump's phalanges!

Our current VP from a couple of years ago. "Are you aware of the perception of many about how the power and the discretion at ICE is being used to enforce the laws and do you see any parallels [with the KKK]?"

That bumps MTG to second in line, and more likely third behind AOC as well.

I think you spend too much time talking out of your gluteus maximus

Wow. What an intelligent comment. Is that a topic you are an expert on?

Wow. What an intelligent comment. Is that a topic you are an expert on?
Apparently, you haven't read recent posts on this thread. You were a teacher. Put your pupils to work!

I've been keeping up. The original post is about MTG. It took a side road for a while so I'm trying to redirect.

I've been keeping up. The original post is about MTG. It took a side road for a while so I'm trying to redirect.
With insults?

Did you shout out a "Happy Birthday!" to MTG on the 27th?

And yet again, your biased application of the rules of civility appears.

I guess I didn't even know it was her birthday. I don't keep up with her. She, KH, and AOC are on the same level to me.

And yet again, your biased application of the rules of civility appears.
Biased?

I guess I didn't even know it was her birthday. I don't keep up with her. She, KH, and AOC are on the same level to me.
Speaking of biased, only women? What about Cancun Cruz?

Biased?Absolutely. Want proof?

Only women? Good point. I should have put JB in the mix as well, but the list could become cumbersome at some point. There are many possibilities. Anyone who votes in favor of Biden's upcoming six trillion dollar budget should be shamed and marched out of D.C. with tar and feathers.

Anyone who votes in favor of Biden's upcoming six trillion dollar budget should be shamed and marched out of D.C. with tar and feathers.
Why? If not that, what's your plan?

Absolutely. Want proof?I guess you don't.

My plan? Hold on to your hat! Get ready for this!! HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET.

Spending has been out of control since 2000 . Successive administrations have devalued the currency . The inflation that everyone seems to be noticing today and that the Fed calls "temporary " has been ongoing since .
Consider the price of oil . 1999 the price was a little over$16/bb Today it is over $50 .Was that increase not inflation ? Keep on printing more monopoly money and see where prices go .

My plan? Hold on to your hat! Get ready for this!! HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET.
Not possible, not after 18 months of CV-19.

That’s what they want you to believe. When in the last twenty years has there not been some excuse to justify deficit spending? At thirty trillion dollars our debt is approaching a hundred thousand dollars for every person in the country. It’s disaster approaching.

That’s what they want you to believe.
People out of work, businesses closed temporarily and forever, no schools in session ... no money flowing in or out.

and the sky is falling

and the sky is falling
There was no foot or vehicle traffic in Chicago. The sky had plenty of open space to fall onto.

I think you spend too much time talking out of your gluteus maximus

Sometimes you make me laugh, parac - lol.

Ok here is another one

https://scontent.fsyd3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/186999016_527210651969454_4704784144880415773_n.jp g?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=QrZvtfQyWH8AX8w3hZQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fsyd3-1.fna&oh=40fb6060d2da0d1baf20967685aab050&oe=60D6F869

People out of work, businesses closed temporarily and forever, no schools in session ... no money flowing in or out.That's been true for the past twenty years? Wow. I didn't know that. And what about the 2 or 3 tril that was allocated specifically for the purpose of CV relief. Was that not enough?

As Tom says, "sheeple". A day is coming.

People out of work, businesses closed temporarily and forever, no schools in session ... no money flowing in or out.

. That is the narrative that il duce Cuomo ,and Mayor Beetlejuice want you to believe . There are towns here in South Carolina where few if any businesses closed due to covid. Oh they did not have the best year ever . But they survived .

The difference is the level of freedom and liberty . I am considering going to an Atlanta Braves game against the Yanks in August. Atlanta opened up their stadium to full attendance already . In NY there is a convoluted formula that determines how many seats can be sold. I kid you not .
The new rules allow vaccinated fans to sit in special seating sections at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, Citi Field in Flushing and Sahlen Field in Buffalo, as well as minor league stadiums across the state. The fans would still be required to wear face coverings.Attendees under the age of 16 who are not yet eligible for the vaccine may accompany and be seated with a vaccinated adult in the special sections.
Unvaccinated fans attending the games will be seated in sections with a 33% occupancy limit and a 6-foot social distance rule, as well as mandatory face coverings.


NY lifting COVID occupancy limits for vaccinated Mets, Yankees, Blue Jays fans (lohud.com) (https://www.lohud.com/story/news/coronavirus/2021/05/05/mets-yankees-tickets-covid-capacity-lifted-new-york/4955820001/)

So in one populated city the team can fill a stadium to capacity . In the one run by the the egotistical madman Cuomo the rules are still arbitrary at his whim .Tomorrow he could put out a whole new set of rules that would make no more sense than this .


When politicians start running around like 'chicken little' yelling crisis it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy .

Everyone thinks all the steps the pols took last year was a given. But think about it . Had the virus hit in 2000 would they have reacted the same ? No way ! Back in 2000 it was impossible to go to your job virtually or to do things like teach virtually . You had to show up at your work . Could you sit home and order groceries back then and have someone deliver them to your home ? . Not in your life. The dotcom Webvan was an early attempt at that business model and it failed miserably . No one communicated by zoom . The net was in it's infancy . There was no Amazon except for books . People would've weighed the risks and then if told they had to lock down there would've been a revolt.

. That is the narrative that il duce Cuomo ,and Mayor Beetlejuice want you to believe .
I saw it with my own eyes!