Palin’s tortured theology

Mrs. Palin just can’t seem to get things right. She apologizes when she shouldn’t, and remains silent when she should.

A few months ago, Palin called Pope Francis “liberal” (gasp!), and she was pilloried by the press. In a very PC minuet, she quickly spun and apologized. It was a joke. Pope Frank is influenced by Liberation Theology which is in fact Marxist, despite proclaiming, in a suspiciously timely fashion, that Marxist ideology is wrong.

Never mind the fact that one of his first papal actions was to invite Gustavo Gutierrez—father of Liberation Theology—to dine with him in Rome. Never mind the fact that the very “apostolic proclamation” in question calls “politics . . . one of the highest forms of charity,” and prays for “politicians” as well as “government leaders and financial leaders” who will “broaden their horizons, working to ensure that all citizens have dignified work, education and healthcare.”

Government . . . charity . . . health care? Nah, not liberal at all.

Palin should have gone into attack mode and exposed the leftism inherent in the Roman Catholic Church’s forays into social theory. Instead, she caved.

Now she’s not only caving to PC pressures, but cheapening her own conservative evangelical tradition further than it has been. The latest is reported by The New American as “part of a long harangue about lily-livered liberals, delivered in such a way that makes Archie Bunker sound like Cicero.” She’s now being blasted from several angles for saying this:

Oh, but you can’t offend them, can’t make them feel uncomfortable, not even a smidgen. Well, if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists.

Wow. No matter how bad Islam may be, what Christian would stoop so low as to cheapen and denigrate the faith in order to advocate torturing them? TNA’s comments are apropos:

OK, stop. Not only is this woman, putatively a Christian, praising torture, but she is comparing it to a holy sacrament of the Christian faith. It’s disgusting — but even more disgusting, those NRA members, many of whom are no doubt Christians, cheered wildly for her.

I agree, as the author goes on to say, that Palin and all those who ignorantly cheered her comments ought to be ashamed of themselves. What they really do in comments like this is to show, despite all their packed-out megachurches, swayin’ with the music, and lovin’ Jeeesus, how theologically shallow they are.

Repentance, not celebration, is in order.

Moreover, this is why the wedding between political conservatism and the religious right in general can be so dangerous: the political powers-that-be end up shaping the religious ethos and not vice versa. Waterboarding becomes a greater value that new birth and baptism: the prior becomes policy, the latter a mere useful metaphor for the policy.

Instead of the Bible shaping culture, culture begins contorting the meanings of biblical values. Instead of biblical law shaping policy, even the most controversial of policies has the power to metastasize into biblical values.

Our city on a hill is transformed into Palin Nation instead of Christian America.

I never bought into the Palin hype or myth. But this latest nonsense is indicative of the deep sickness in the heart of American conservatism. Unhinged from biblical law, and indeed frightful of it, it has produced little but thoughtlessness and tyranny. This is the long-term result of the religious right running from the most important distinctive of Christian Reconstruction for forty years.

It’s so bad that Evangelicalism ends up bowing to a liberal Pope and praising torture. What’s next for Palin Nation?

Print Friendly

Consider partnering with us

237 comments
Arrow
Arrow

Here's an interesting bit for all the Palin supporters: "Walter Jones is a great congressman, refusing to fund the government without a balanced budget agreement, and one of the few brave enough to not vote for Boehner for speaker. Very dissapointed at Sarah for endorsing his opponent, a Karl Rove supported Bush hack. I understand Sarah has a soft spot for people that stick up for her, but like her support for McCain it hurts the American people, and that must come first." From the comments section of this article: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/06/Jones-Griffin

aculturewarrior
aculturewarrior

Dr. McD writes: "Wow. No matter how bad Islam may be, what Christian would stoop so low as to cheapen and denigrate the faith in order to advocate torturing them?" I like Ann Coulter's idea better: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." You have no idea how "bad" Islam is Dr. McD.

Sabrina Daniel
Sabrina Daniel

Am Bible-believing,Evangelical Christian woman.Conservative Politically.Baby Boomer.Teacher/School Administrator.Seems to me that a Conservative Political candidate that claimed to be a Christian would have to be perfect in their theology that they espoused to please you.My tradition is PCA/Southern Baptist.Am 3-pt. Calvinist which I am sure will seem totally inconsistent to you.Seems from the git-go that you do not like Sarah Palin.Don't know a lot about Liberation Theology,but I do know that it's not good,according to what I believe.I will cut the Pope slack in that I believe he is trying to be compasssionate.Mrs. Palin is extremely outspoken.Must remember that standing up for the faith/trying to be electable are 2 extremely difficult things to do@the same time.Spoke Truth/ Cath.Backlash..

Arrow
Arrow

So, what do you think about her comment equating Christian baptism to torturing people with water?

harmon
harmon

“Must remember that standing up for the faith/trying to be electable are 2 extremely difficult things to do@the same time.” Exactly. That’s why you’re stuck with this dirty fact: Sarah Palin’s mission to get “electable” produced a venomous, ungodly joke (“waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists”). It profaned baptism and poured contempt on her “standing up for the faith.”

John. J
John. J

" The media is driving this trumped up “outrage” to shut down Palin’s comments on waterboarding and many Christians who were probably never offended in the first place feel they need to be offended. The truth is 95% of the Christian community are not offended by these statements just like they are not offended by the common phrase, “baptism by fire” or Brooks and Dunn’s Brand New Man who uses Baptism an a metaphor to something else. " http://www.redstate.com/diary/willstauff/2014/04/29/faux-outrage-palin-baptism-waterboarding-comments/

Arrow
Arrow

95% of `Christians in Germany were not offended when Hitler began stomping on the rights of certain groups. They were driven by blind political loyalty, just like you. You are really stretching when you compare Palin's remark to the phrase "Baptism by fire". Surely you can see that....or if you can't, you prove my first statement.

David Van Lant
David Van Lant

"Waterboarding becomes a greater value that new birth and baptism: the prior becomes policy, the latter a mere useful metaphor for the policy." She should repent, but I've read an article or two from you wherein you call people to repent--in one case, I think, it was for economic policies--without mentioning Jesus. That's not as bad as Mrs. Palin, but it's bad enough.

harmon
harmon

Richard wrote, “I never like it when a joke is turned into an opportunity for pious, sanctimonious, condemnation…,” and, “I joke all the time about Baptism with my Baptist friends…” Presumably, he and his non-sanctimonious, non-Pharisaical “Baptist friends” can also joke about Communion (and its recall of the suffering and crucifixion of the Lord Jesus). Humorizing spiritual stuff, after all, will eliminate the nasty piousness that condemns Sarah Palin—the mother of jocular baptism. If Palin’s ‘baptism-waterboarding analogy’ is, in fact, a hilarious mixing of new life in Christ with repeated near-drownings in water, then Richard's Bible is, for him, nothing more than a source of anti-terrorist gags.

TIA
TIA

Don't forget Matt. 7:6.

Richard
Richard

You are so wrong Harmon. I would never joke about communion with Baptists. I joke about communion with my Catholic friends.

Arrow
Arrow

Congratulations, Richard, you have earned the Prov. 26:4 award. Adios. May God have mercy on you.

Richard
Richard

It was either that or the Proverbs 26:5 award -- I chose to Answer the foolishness -- and thank you for hoping God will extend me mercy but no need to hope or wish on my account -- nothing can separate me from his love nor you if you are His. I am a child of the King of creation who has poured out His abundant mercy and blessings on me since before the beginning of time and will for all eternity and for all that I contributed nothing -- even worse -- I was the chief of sinners. That is why sanctimony in all it's forms punches all my buttons. In Him, Richard.

harmon
harmon

Brother Richard, if “sanctimony in all it’s forms punches all my buttons,” you’re simply acknowledging that your own array of sanctimonies has been violated. As you know, Sarah Palin’s ‘joking’ (but brutal) trivializing of baptism into the Lord Jesus, punched the buttons of other Christians—not all of whom are smug Pharisees. Please, consider the possibility that the “buttons” on your unit are sometimes connected to patriotic-political outrage, and not to scripture. Which is to say, _all_ of us need to heed this scripture: “Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.”

Richard
Richard

Harmon, your comment is indicative of what's wrong with Joel's article and most of the comments in this entire thread including yours. You have wrongly assumed that I worship Palin to the point of idolatry and that's behind my objections. What have I said that would give you that judgmental impression? The answer is nothing. It would not matter to me who said it. It was a joke and does not deserve the level of condemnation no matter if Bill Mahrer said it, but it is true that Palin is a Christian sister and deserves to be given the benefit of Christian charity instead of being used for an unoriginal cheap shot like Joel has done here. Most times Joel hits the nail on the head but sometimes he misses badly. This is one of those times.

harmon
harmon

You failed to notice, Richard, that the 1 John 5:21 caution against idolatry was intended for _all_ of us. Nobody said you worship Palin. It's your fulsome, scripture-free defence of her statement, "waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists,” that conveys an “Immoderate attachment to or veneration for any person or thing (OED).” Your bottom line is that a 'political Christian' who advocates torture by repeated near-drowning, is merely ‘joking’ by referring to the brutal act as “how we baptize.” This bizarre acceptance of a perverted “baptism” mocks your testimony about “the King of creation who has poured out His abundant mercy and blessings on me.” It becomes the same pious sanctimony that ‘punched all your buttons’.

A. Christopher
A. Christopher

"...coming to Christ…as we all must do." We ALL must do this? Where is that truth revealed? We ALL do not do what we must do, dead in our transgressions, we only do what we must do when we're called and chosen by God. We don't do the "choosing," God does; by grace, through faith a new birth takes place. Write about that one, Joel. The "love of Christ" indeed. When Christ returns, those who were given to Christ, will be rejoicing, as he judges the earth? Then we will truly know a Heavenly Father's "love." "What they really do in comments like this is to show, despite all their packed-out megachurches, swayin’ with the music, and lovin’ Jeeesus, how theologically shallow they are." Joel, are you including yourself in this statement? Nice to know we have something in...

TIA
TIA

Since Richard thinks joking about baptism and torture are trivial things, there's going to be a little get together to have some fun at his place. Nothing too serious, you know, just waterboarding Richard a little bit. I won't be taking part, of course, since I believe torture is wrong, but any of the rest of you Christ followers who agree with Richard, feel free to come on over for a good time. Richard will be replying to this comment to give his address.

Richard
Richard

Make sure you have your philacteries straight and find a crowded corner when you do.

TIA
TIA

Not to be trite, I really mean it. I'll pray for you, Richard.

Richard
Richard

I'm not getting anywhere close to you since you threatened to douse me with gas and burn me alive and you equated killing me and burning me alive with the sacrament of baptism. TIA -- "I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire."

TIA
TIA

Richard, Richard, Richard, I never said anything about dousing you with gas, let alone burning you alive or killing you. Don't you know that many people believe "baptism by fire" refers to an outpouring of the Holy Spirit? I think you could really use one. I wouldn't want to get near you either, since you think torture is okay (and you probably think I'm a terrorist for disagreeing with you). But there are still some people waiting for your address for the waterboarding party. Please provide it at your earliest convenience. Or have you changed your mind about waterboarding?

Richard
Richard

Hahahaha! You poor thing. Yes, you said it TIA. Here it is again, "I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire." That clearly means you endorse killing Christians who disagree with you by burning them alive and you equated this evil with the holy sacrament of baptism. Sic em, Arrow, Joel. No, TIA, you didn't say anything about the Holy Spirit there. Only killing me by fire, so like Sarah Palin, we can't excuse your evil words. As far as my party you want me to come to so you can kill me, if I have a choice, I choose water boarding over being burned alive.

Ilya Zaretsky
Ilya Zaretsky

Why the Fu*ck is this on my Facebook page? Get thus Libtard BS off of here!

Adam Todd
Adam Todd

This author seems quite dim witted and/or dishonest and lacking a sense of humor. One, water boarding isn't torture. Many of our own service men get water boarded as a part of training. Two, she was making a joke about how overly concerned we are about offending Islamic terrorists. I have a feeling no matter what Palin does this guy would have something negative to say about her.

Doug McAdams
Doug McAdams

First I get a "Have you injured yourself with a table saw" ad for some lawyer and now this crap............what am I doing wrong????????/

Jonathan Philbeck
Jonathan Philbeck

“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27). “Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors [basanistais, torturers], till he should pay all that was due unto him” (Matt. 18:32-34). “And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain” (Rev. 16:10). “Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 22:13).

Jonathan Philbeck
Jonathan Philbeck

The version of waterboarding the CIA did on 3 terrorist isnt Torture. The version of waterboarding of the WW2 Japanese or Spanish Inquisition was.

Jesus Guerrero
Jesus Guerrero

Incase these liberals didn't study their history, our founding fathers based out constitution on Judeo-Christian values

Eulisesjesu Montero
Eulisesjesu Montero

Just wait to see what happens when the system will fall and it will be free trade all politicians in jail for life for there inhuman acts as it will happen all over the world freedom will finally come to the citizens of earth no more oil electricity bills free energy but all oppose this BC they are scared I rather be free then to be a paid slave to a corrupt and evil system ran by religion even tho they say its separate open your eyes

Eulisesjesu Montero
Eulisesjesu Montero

Its not the so called Christians but Catholic Jesuits the Nazis ,IBM ,corperations laws everyone is being miss led

Anthony Sinecoff
Anthony Sinecoff

I'm more concerned about conservatives after reading these comments than I was after reading the article. The lady compared a holy sacrament to water boarding.

Richard
Richard

I never like it when a joke is turned into an opportunity for pious, sanctimonious, condemnation even when the joke is coming from the Left. This level of sanctimoniousness, to me, is far more offensive and far more damaging to the Kingdom than making a light hearted joke that refers to baptism. Who wants to be a part of group that turns your light hearted joke into an opportunity for a sanctimonious theological dissertation? Not me, because the Lord knows that I stick my foot in my mouth all the time and always appreciate it when I'm given the benefit of the doubt and not condemned by my brothers in Christ who are supposed to be my friends. This kind of attack destroys the freedom to be oneself in a group of Christians. You must be sanctimonious and pious, don't you know? I hate that...

Richard
Richard

Awh, now that your scripture was shown not applicable, you resort to irrationality. Nice! Palin was not attempting to deceive anyone -- that was the point of your bible verse which you apparently didn't bother to read yourself. She was making a joke. Your pompous, pious, sanctimonious, self righteousness if far more damaging to the Kingdom of God than Palin's joke. Good job.

TIA
TIA

Richard, Does this mean you're not going to repent and apologize to God and me for your slanderous comments? That's okay. No one should be held to your Pharisaical standards. BTW, you never did answer my questions. No, just wait, you did. You said that torturing terrorists is okay. Do you have the same praise for Iraqis and Afghans who capture American "terrorist" soldiers and torture them?

Richard
Richard

Palin only said she would water board terrorists. You have threatened to kill a fellow Christian by burning me alive. Who is the real hypocrite here? "I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire," TIA.

Richard
Richard

No, you said it. It's in black and white, TIA, for everyone to see. You said, "I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire." 1. You wished death upon me 2. You wished me to be burned alive. 3. You equated burning me to death with the sacrament of baptism Gasp! I am shocked -- shocked I tell you -- at such heathenism coming from the mouth of a professed Christian. Ok Joel, Arrow, et al -- where is the outrage? Oh, so you say you were just joking? I see. Are you saying, TIA, that I should not be so sanctimonious about words meant as a joke? Hmmm? Where have I heard that?

Richard
Richard

That's the spirit, TIA. Stay in the fight -- even when you've been battered all over the ring but employ a new tactic -- change the subject. Maybe no one will notice. I certainly won't tell.

TIA
TIA

Richard, Your quotes of my comments don't even reference Palin. You're grasping at straws now. Are you going to repent and apologize or not? BTW, as I said before, I don't really care about getting an apology. I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy. You come here accusing others of "pious sanctimony" and demanding repentance, and yet you're guilty of the same thing. Ironically, the rest of us are actually trying to discuss the issues, and you're the one playing the Pharisee.

TIA
TIA

I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire.

Richard
Richard

Equivocation to maintain your point, if you even know what that is, is just another form of deception. So far, you have been dishonest at least 3 times in this thread.

Arrow
Arrow

Richard, You sniveling, rat-faced bas...uh...ahem...sorry, I was starting to sound like a Palin supporter...my apology. Anyway, what do you think her comments look like to a Muslim...either a violent Muslim who wishes to kill people, or a moderate Muslim who generally wants to be peaceful...in the context of how they see Christianity?

Arrow
Arrow

Richard, It's not about me. I'm not so hot anyway. The article was about Palin's comments. I'm not interested in talking about myself, positive or negative. You win.

TIA
TIA

If joking about torture and killing "enemies" is okay, why are people upset when Muslims do it? "Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows and death, So is the man who deceives his neighbor, And says, 'Was I not joking?'" Proverbs 26:18-19

TIA
TIA

Richard wrote: "She said she would water board terrorists and so would I." This is the heart of the problem. You and Palin are both wrong on exactly that point. Whether the "terrorists" are Muslim or not is kind of a side issue. Please don't come crying to me when the government declares you to be a terrorist (without any trial or evidence) and uses waterboarding on you. And for the record, I never said Palin joked about killing Muslims. I'm expecting your apology for your slander of me regarding that statement posthaste, Richard. Normally I would let something like that go, but you seem to have a real log problem that you need to deal with (Matt. 7:1-5).

Arrow
Arrow

Making "light-hearted jokes" about the actual practice of torturing human beings is just the point. Equating it to baptism worsens it further. When done publicly by a public official or politician it needs to be addressed publicly. At least people can then see that not all Christians think this way, and hopefully that true Christianity is not this way. It seems that those who rail the loudest about the evils of Islam (which is a false religion) are the fastest to want Christianity to mimic its worst deeds.

Richard
Richard

Palin was not deceiving anyone and to claim that she was is slander. Will you now repent and ask for God's and Sarah Palin's forgiveness?

Richard
Richard

You are a sanctimonious Pharisee just looking for something to demonstrate your self-righteousness. I joke all the time about Baptism with my Baptist friends and the Baptism is used in different contexts all the time -- even in the Bible -- Baptism by fire, Christ's baptism by torture on the cross, water baptism, Noah's flood -- and in everyday language. So, how do you know Palin was using it sacrilegiously? Do you know her heart?

TIA
TIA

If "Palin was not deceiving anyone" and she really meant " that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists", she is the one who needs to repent and ask God's forgiveness. Is it only Muslims who are wrong when they joke about wanting to kill and torture their enemies? Or maybe you think killing and torturing people is okay? Many people think that. They think terrorism is okay when Americans do it. But they are wrong. That's the point of this article and discussion.

Arrow
Arrow

Richard, You are not debating any logical point, you are simply trying to win an argument on a technicality. The principle in the verse is clearly applicable. You simply parsed words to "win" on a mis-isunderstanding of what was intended. You'll have to do better than that...how about addressing the actual points that TIA has raised? Or can't you?

Richard
Richard

The verse is not applicable. You are twisting scripture to justify slandering Palin. The verse is about deception. Palin was not attempting to deceive and to say that she was defies all logic and demonstrates your own willingness to deceive to make your point.

Richard
Richard

Let me see if I understand. It's OK for you to condemn and slander Palin for a joke but its not ok for me to condemn you for your sanctimonious self righteousness? Is that about right? Double standard anyone? Now, which one did Jesus have the biggest problem with -- an off color joke or pompous sanctimony? And, for you to retreat to "what would Muslim's think," just proves your desperation.

TIA
TIA

Richard, My argument doesn't depend on that verse. Are you going to actually address the arguments or not? When Muslims "joke" about wanting to kill Americans, is that okay?

Richard
Richard

Ha! If your point does not depend on that verse, why did you use it? Are you willing to admit that you misused it? Or, as I suspect, will continue in your deception of yourself and others? To your question, where did Palin joke of killing Muslims?

Arrow
Arrow

He got you. She was talking about torturing them, not killing them. You lose.

TIA
TIA

Richard, Palin may not have specifically said "Muslims" in this speech. She used the word "terrorists." What terrorists is she talking about? Certainly not the "Tea Party terrorists" who are her fan base. Who are the people who have been waterboarded? Muslims. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty clear who she's talking about. But I guess that technically you're right. Palin doesn't joke about killing Muslims. She's dead serious about that.

Arrow
Arrow

And by the way, yes, it is ok to condemn what she said. Not to slander her, but to condemn what she said.

TIA
TIA

Arrow, Yes, we never should have gone up against a master debater like Richard. Who cares about defending innocent people? Let's just torture and kill them all. We're Americans, so we must be right.

Richard
Richard

She did not mention Muslims. She said she would water board terrorists and so would I. Now, when will I hear your confession of repentance in misstating the Bible and dishonestly putting words into Palin's mouth that she did not say which is outright slander and lying?

Richard
Richard

No it's not ok to condemn her. That's the whole point. Who wants to be a part of a group that tears you apart for an offhand comment? This destroys the Church. Palin is a sister in Christ and that demands that we give her the benefit of the doubt about something for which we cannot know her heart. We destroy ourselves and Christ's Church when we attack each other like this over something trivial -- and yes this was trivial even though she mentioned Baptism. Come on! Sanctimony is a lot uglier than an off color joke as evidenced by Jesus attitude toward the Pharisees who Joel joined with this piece. This whole brouhaha was a mistake -- even if what Palin said was wrong -- which personally I don't think it was.

Arrow
Arrow

1. I said it's ok to condemn what she said, not to condemn her as a person. 2. The Bible does say that we are to speak against error. It also says that we are to admonish others and offer correction. 3. Palin is a public figure and made these statements in a public forum. Correction or refutation then also needs to be done publicly. 4. I am glad that Christians have spoken against what she said. I think what she said was very unbiblical and did not at all reflect the love of Christ. The world needs to see the Biblical side. 5. Sometimes...rarely...it is necessary to kill in self defense. But this is out of regrettable necessity, not simple hatred. Her comments tied hatred to baptism to torture.

Richard
Richard

1. Semantics don't help you. To condemn her words is to condemn her and Joel's article essentially calls her stupid (wow, that's original). 2.The Bible does not support condemning a fellow Christian for trivial comments that were not pointed at them and are not even very controversial. The fact that you stand by your comments just proves that you are a Pharisee first and a follower of Christ second. And this is the main problem with the church today. We tear each other apart for fun and profit. 3. No correction needed except in the minds of self appointed Pharisees. 4. Keep silent and give a sister in Christ the benefit of the doubt. Love covers a multitude of sins. 5. Already addressed -- Objections are examples of pompous sanctimony. Not helpful to the Church at all.

Dr. Joel McDurmon
Dr. Joel McDurmon

"I stick my foot in my mouth all the time." ---Richard If I had this problem, I would be slow to speak, and speak sparingly.

Richard
Richard

Personally, I've never known a human being that didn't, Joel. The fact that you apparently believe you don't says a lot. How many Biblical figures can you name that did not misspeak? Now how many that did? I wonder why the Bible is honest about it but apparently your brand of Christianity is not? This is a real problem in the church. The only way to prevent it is not to speak, but I thought that Christians were supposed to give each other the benefit of the doubt. I guess I was wrong. Admitting one's failings is the opposite of dishonest sanctimony. When we are honest about our failings we attract unbelievers. When we are dishonest in our sanctimony, it stinks like a poot in church. You might want to think about it if honesty is something you value.

Richard
Richard

Oh, and BTW, you do have that problem Joel and it hasn't slowed you down.

Richard
Richard

It's actually pretty amazing to see the level of deception on this thread -- and all in the name of defending pious sanctimony. TIA – “Is it only Muslims who are wrong when they joke about wanting to kill and torture their enemies? “ TIA – “When Muslims “joke” about wanting to kill Americans, is that okay?” How much deeper will you go in your own deception, TIA?

TIA
TIA

1. If the shoe fits... 2. Trivial comments? I never knew torture was trivial. Can I please get your address Richard? Some people would like to come over to your place to torture you. Just for a little fun, you know, nothing too serious. Don't worry, it would only be some "Christ followers". 3. Right, no correction needed. Just give us your address, Richard. 4. Are you giving this same advice to Palin? Let's have some silence from her! The irony and hypocrisy of quoting, "Love covers a multitude of sins", in approval of torture is obviously lost on you. 5. Yeah, I hear you, Richard. You're right. I always thought that Ten Commandments was too many. We can certainly get rid of that one about murder, and probably a few others too.

Richard
Richard

Irrational rambling isn't help you, TIA. I would advise you to stop while you're behind but you don't strike me as someone who would listen to reason. You've dug yourself a hole and now you're trying to talk your way out of it by a multitude of psychobable. Sorry but you've been caught slandering (accusing Palin of wanting to kill Muslims) and lying about it and then equivocating (look it up). In your case retreat would be the better part of valor.

TIA
TIA

"You have threatened to kill a fellow Christian by burning me alive." Richard, I did no such thing! Please stop making such slanderous accusations against me. For one thing, as you yourself pointed out, "baptism" has many different meanings. For another thing, you have quite clearly established the fact that anything goes when someone is joking, which clearly I was. I've even gone so far as to try to arrange a party for you (see my new comment at the top), and this is the thanks I get? If you keep this up, I don't think I can be your friend anymore.

Arrow
Arrow

He got you on another technicality, TIA. You lose. And I like the old "nobody's perfect so I can do whatever I want, I'm automatically forgiven, and nobody can call me on it" routine. Richard, OF COURSE people in the Bible sinned. What the heck does that prove, in defense of your rambling illogical accusations? You have hardly dealt with the issues at all, you have simply picked arguments over technicalities. "He said she said" school child stuff.

Richard
Richard

Quit telling TIA he's lost, Arrow. Im really enjoying him much like a cat enjoys playing with a mouse. He unwittingly made my point when he said, "I think Richard needs to be baptized by fire." Baptism equated with murder -- if that's the way one wishes to see it -- but unlike Joel and you with Palin, I will give TIA the benefit of the doubt. I will assume that one, he really doesn't want to burn me to death and two, that he isn't equating burning me to death with the holy sacrament of baptism just because he used the word baptism. Not a perfect analogy I know to Palin's comments but the point is that I extend Christian charity to TIA and assume the best about him instead of the worst. That should have been the response to Palin. That's all.

Richard
Richard

Oh and it wasn't a technicality that I got him on. It was a straight contradiction to his own position. He said exactly what he condemned. Then, ironically, he asked to be excused from his contradiction because he was joking which is the Christian charity I expect for Palin and myself and Joel and you.

TIA
TIA

Okay Richard. You got me. To settle up, I guess we just need the following: You and Palin must make clear that torturing terrorists is wrong and you never intended to convey such an idea (just as I have done regarding my statement about baptism by fire). Surely you are willing to make such a statement so that people wouldn't mistakenly get the impression that torturing terrorists is okay, right? Analogy is like analogy does, Richard. And just a heads up, this is more like chess than cat and mouse. It seems that I'm quite a few moves ahead of you. Did you really think I made that baptism comment by chance? I was setting you up the whole time. Okay, maybe it is cat and mouse after all--you were just wrong about who's who.

DrewJ
DrewJ

I don't really like Palin's comment, but I agree with you that this criticism is over-the-top. If we really want to have a discussion about waterboarding, let's do that. And let's cite to the Bible when we do it. But let's not ignite a firestorm over one stupid joke.