Pope and Netanyahu Spar over Jesus's language

[jem]

Piezoe, you stated:

What was real, what wasn't, How many surviving tales are apocrypha, what does it matter? I suppose it matters to the Religion Industry. The truth, were it recognized, would be ruinous.
---
I love your commercials so I am sorry I called out your so seemingly illogical, offensive and bigoted statement.
Clearly I was talking to the one man alive who might have the knowledge to make such a statement. Piezoe apparently does not always drink beer but when he does he prefers Dos Equis.
I can't wait for you to tell us the truth since you are the only one who could recognize it.

I know you must have watched the history channel or read a Dan Brown novel.... making you the expert on metaphysical truth.

Why does it matter? The Bible is tripe in any case. This is like debating whether Snow White sounded like Prince Charles, as though her mouth were full of mashed potatoes, or a Cockney street urchin. Obviously if Jesus was born in a stable among cattle ("lowing" cattle at that!) then wouldn't he have been rather "low class". [I'm hard pressed to think of any Rockefellers bedded down with Cattle in recent years.] No doubt then Mr. Jesus' native tongue was gutter Hebrew. Oh, I forgot, he was God, so he could speak any language he felt like speaking!

 

[Ricter]

Once again... the issue is targeting. You have been trying to argue how to interpret the law. Arguendo, as long as your attempts at enforcement do not target your political opponents but are applied evenly... you are not targeting. here... the IRS admitted they were targeting conservatives... and you have been Sorosing this jackbooted application of the law ever since.

You realize you are pre-fascist and arguing in support of fascism ?

New Records Show IRS Targeted Liberal Groups More Than Tea Party
April 23, 2014 |

<img src="http://i1.wp.com/www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/irs_foia-65.jpg?resize=620%2C470">

"Think Progress obtained a series of IRS documents via the Freedom of Information Act that contradict Republican claims that the IRS targeted only conservative Tea Party groups for scrutiny because of their political beliefs.

"The 22 “Be On the Look Out” keywords lists, distributed to staff reviewing applications between August 12, 2010 and April 19, 2013, included more explicit references to progressive groups, ACORN successors, and medical marijuana organizations than to Tea Party entities.

"The IRS provided the heavily-redacted lists to ThinkProgress, after nearly a year-long search. From the earliest lists through 2012, the “historical” section of the lists encouraged reviewers to watch out for “progressive” groups with names like “blue,” as their requests for 501(c)(3) charitable status might be inappropriate. Their inclusion in this section suggests that the concern predates the initial 2010 list.

"Explicit references to “Tea Party,” included in the “emerging issues” section of the lists, also began in August 2010 — but stopped appearing after the May 10, 2011 list. From that point on, the lists instructed agents to flag all political advocacy groups of any stripe. The documents instructed the agents to forward any “organization involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy” applying for 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) status be forwarded to “group 7822″ for additional review. Groups under both categories are limited in the amount of of lobbying and political activity each can undertake."

 

[jem]

that is an interesting counter... if true.
If true... it may indicate that overall the IRS was not not be jackbooted...
but that there may be only some bad actors acting under bad orders and pressure from Carl Levin and those directing Lerner.

And frankly... if true it is not as disturbing... I will go enjoy my workout more.

New Records Show IRS Targeted Liberal Groups More Than Tea Party
April 23, 2014 |

<img src="http://i1.wp.com/www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/irs_foia-65.jpg?resize=620%2C470">

"Think Progress obtained a series of IRS documents via the Freedom of Information Act that contradict Republican claims that the IRS targeted only conservative Tea Party groups for scrutiny because of their political beliefs.

"The 22 “Be On the Look Out” keywords lists, distributed to staff reviewing applications between August 12, 2010 and April 19, 2013, included more explicit references to progressive groups, ACORN successors, and medical marijuana organizations than to Tea Party entities.

"The IRS provided the heavily-redacted lists to ThinkProgress, after nearly a year-long search. From the earliest lists through 2012, the “historical” section of the lists encouraged reviewers to watch out for “progressive” groups with names like “blue,” as their requests for 501(c)(3) charitable status might be inappropriate. Their inclusion in this section suggests that the concern predates the initial 2010 list.

"Explicit references to “Tea Party,” included in the “emerging issues” section of the lists, also began in August 2010 — but stopped appearing after the May 10, 2011 list. From that point on, the lists instructed agents to flag all political advocacy groups of any stripe. The documents instructed the agents to forward any “organization involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy” applying for 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) status be forwarded to “group 7822″ for additional review. Groups under both categories are limited in the amount of of lobbying and political activity each can undertake."

 

[piezoe]

Piezoe, you stated:

What was real, what wasn't, How many surviving tales are apocrypha, what does it matter? I suppose it matters to the Religion Industry. The truth, were it recognized, would be ruinous.
---
I love your commercials so I am sorry I called out your so seemingly illogical, offensive and bigoted statement.
Clearly I was talking to the one man alive who might have the knowledge to make such a statement. Piezoe apparently does not always drink beer but when he does he prefers Dos Equis.
I can't wait for you to tell us the truth since you are the only one who could recognize it.

I know you must have watched the history channel or read a Dan Brown novel.... making you the expert on metaphysical truth.

Jem, It seems I noted some time ago that your posts were evolving, albeit slowly, from the nonsensical and absurd to reason and logic. It is almost as though through the auspices of "Elite Trader" you were slowly becoming educated. (Ghastly to think of it, I know.) Nevertheless it seems you have now reached the state in your education where it is safe to lodge this question with you: "Can Truth ever be 'bigoted'?" I'll grant you that it can be offensive to some, disheartening certainly, and damaging to one's ego too and even on rare occasion seem illogical --though it can never be illogical. But, can it be bigoted?

 

[fhl]

"Can Truth ever be 'bigoted'?"

No, the truth can never be bigoted.

And that is why your statement about religion is bigoted and my statements about the utter deviancy of homosexuality should not be considered bigoted.

I'm glad you asked.

 

[jem]

that is excellent comedy... its almost some sort of self deprecating flip the script irony.
I have challenged you on all your slate.com and propublica lies. Your arguments and beliefs have been weighed and found wanting... everytime.

And yet, you allow your glaring inferiority complex to spew that detritus. Don't worry your ego should be assuaged, as it is not your brain that is causing the problem it is your belief in leftist lies.

Jem, It seems I noted some time ago that your posts were evolving, albeit slowly, from the nonsensical and absurd to reason and logic. It is almost as though through the auspices of "Elite Trader" you were slowly becoming educated. (Ghastly to think of it, I know.) Nevertheless it seems you have now reached the state in your education where it is safe to lodge this question with you: "Can Truth ever be 'bigoted'?" I'll grant you that it can be offensive to some, disheartening certainly, and damaging to one's ego too and even on rare occasion seem illogical --though it can never be illogical. But, can it be bigoted?

 

[jem]

to answer your question... we have to qualify the context. we are speaking about metaphysical truth. our lack of knowledge about whether there is a Creator and if there is a Creator what the Creator is like.

Background - Some do not have an IQ high enough to think in systems.
For those people, thinking they know the answer to metaphysical questions and expecting others to think the same way, may not be bigoted. They may really believe they are correct. They may mistake faith or their limited reason for metaphysical knowledge. They may just not be able to comprehend their ignorance. For instance thinking you know some sort of ruinous "truth"... that others do not. Being stuck in that mode... someone may think truth can not be bigoted because they think they know the truth.

But, hypothetically speaking, if your IQ is higher than about 120 and you like to imply you have some sort of ruinous knowledge of the answers to metaphysical questions. That seems to make you a bigot and a fool.

In reality... almost every thinking person who is a believer understands the difference between faith and metaphysical truth.
Unfortunately, many of the rabid atheists we see posting on et... do not know the difference between faith and metaphysical truth.
I have noted a pattern... most really strong thinkers who deny the existence of God but are not trying to sell books or be public figures.... state they are agnostics.


If we are talking about non metaphysical truth... but things which can be measured... then at the moment, I can't think of any questions when stating the real truth would be bigoted. But how you applied it could be.

that is excellent comedy... its almost some sort of self deprecating flip the script irony.
I have challenged you on all your slate.com and propublica lies. Your arguments and beliefs have been weighed and found wanting... everytime.

And yet, you allow your glaring inferiority complex to spew that detritus. Don't worry your ego should be assuaged, as it is not your brain that is causing the problem it is your belief in leftist lies.

 

[jem]

about 10 days ago the IRS said they will be releasing new rules.

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/na...litical-nonprofit-groups/stories/201405230092


WASHINGTON -- The Internal Revenue Service said Thursday that it will revise proposed rules governing nonprofit groups' involvement in politics.

The rules, released last year, were an attempt to provide guidance for how much political activity groups organized under section 501(c)(4) of the U.S. tax code could engage in without risking loss of their tax exemption or being forced to reveal their donors.

The IRS disclosed in May 2013 that it gave some Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status extra scrutiny because of their names, not their activities. President Barack Obama forced out acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller, and several other senior executives left their jobs, including Lois Lerner, who was the agency's director of exempt organizations.

The rules, designed to provide clearer guidelines for IRS employees, were part of the government's response to the issue. Some actions would be considered political involvement, including advertising, voter guides, voter-registration drives, get-out-the-vote campaigns, Internet references to candidates and some appearances by candidates at groups' events. Under the proposed rules, a group would risk losing its tax-exempt status by engaging in too many of those activities, though the rules didn't define what would be considered too much.

After the IRS released the new rules, groups across the political spectrum objected with more than 150,000 comments, calling them too broad and an attack on free speech.

Opponents included the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Family Association.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/news/na...fit-groups/stories/201405230092#ixzz33zH1hVnz

 

[piezoe]

metaphysics? What does the metaphysical have to do with truth? Any truth incorporated within the realm of metaphysics is accidental. Metaphysics can incorporate both truth and fiction, but there is no way to know what is truth and what is fiction without venturing outside the realm of metaphysics. Religion is metaphysical in nature, i.e., it incorporates the supernatural as easily as the natural world. One must go outside of religion to know what is true and what isn't. Religion cannot, by its nature, supply an answer to what is true and what isn't. Why? Because religion is metaphysical in nature.

 

[jem]

OK if you are going to play cat and mouse... lets get back to it.
What is this ruinous truth that you are aware of that is not a metaphysical truth.

metaphysics? What does the metaphysical have to do with truth? Any truth incorporated within the realm of metaphysics is accidental. Metaphysics can incorporate both truth and fiction, but there is no way to know what is truth and what is fiction without venturing outside the realm of metaphysics. Religion is metaphysical in nature, i.e., it incorporates the supernatural as easily as the natural world. One must go outside of religion to know what is true and what isn't. Religion cannot, by its nature, supply an answer to what is true and what isn't. Why? Because religion is metaphysical in nature.