Tuesday, October 02, 2012

Perilous Times - Obama must not win a second term


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have heard rumours that Obama cannot be confident in supporting Israel because High Ranking staff in the Military are growing suspicious and may not be prepared to go along with anymore Jew Wars

2 October 2012 at 23:21  
Blogger John Magee said...

Excellent ad and it tells the truth about one aspect of President Obama which should have already been know by the 80% of American Jews before they voted for him in 2008. What I am talking about was his membership in a "church" for over 17 years in Chicago where the pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, preached on a regular basis his hatred of Jews, Israel, whites, the USA, capitalism, and spewed rubbish called "Black Liberation Theology" to his congregation. All this while the Obama's sat in the pews of Wright's "church" listening to this racist filth. How could American Jews ignore this aspect of Obama's past which was all over conservative news and talk radio in 2008 and imagine he would be a friend of Israel?

The reason for this was American Jews largely ignored conservative news and radio talk show warnings about Obama's association with Wright's "church" and his anti-Semitism. Now American Jews are complaining about Obama's negative Israeli policies and his open sympathy for the Muslim world. Didn't they know this in 2008? It was out there for them to hear and read about. Why did they ignore it then?

It's an easy guess that 95% of Israeli Jews today "get" Obama as weak and quite possibly pro Muslim and a danger to Israel while American Jews will probably vote overwhelmingly for him once again because of his smile and because he is a minority and for some their sympathy for his radical left wing political agenda for the USA.

As an American I am more concerned about my own nation's survival. Obama the Marxist with his Islamic sympathies and his views on redistribution of wealth has already set in place over the past 4 years his plans to slowly but carefully to dismantle our Republic, our Justice System, our Military, our Constutution and our role as a super power in a very dangerous world.

If Obama wins it is quite possibly the end of the American experiment in freedom. At the very least his "victory" means a USA changed beyond anything my parents generation would have recognized and fought for over the past 250 years. If Obama wins the change will be revolutionary and not good for those who love freedom and the free enterprise system.

This is the REAL change he talked about in 2008 and fools cheered him.

Anyone who doesn't believe my discription of the Rev Wright please look him up on your search or view one of his many videos on Youtube. The most "famous" being: Rev Wright God damn America.

3 October 2012 at 04:23  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

Occupying the West Bank is not a bright idea and pretending you can set your state's boundaries where you like is not going to get you to peace.

The Vatican and every other state in the world considers Tel Aviv to be Israel's capital, because it is.

Jerusalem is not any more Jewish than it is Christian or Muslim.

3 October 2012 at 08:22  
Blogger Naomi King said...

God bless you Archbishop for making this betrayal of Israel by the muslim President Obama public.

Of course Jerusalem is Israel's capital.

3 October 2012 at 08:25  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Obama's father was a muslim and he was brought up in indonesia (muslim Country) by a muslim stepfather. Why would he be anything other than a muslim ?

Its all here on

Barack Obama Dossier - aka Barry Soetoro - The Video They Don't Want You To See!


3 October 2012 at 08:40  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

I fail to see the relevance of whether Obama's father was a Muslim or not.

My father was a bigotted, rabble rousing, bullying old heretic with an ego the size of the moon but that does not make me a Presbyterian. Far from it, I am a Papist, to the bone.

3 October 2012 at 08:45  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Thank you John Magee for your excellent piece on the so called Rev Jeremiah Wright. Rev Jeremiah Wright was a muslim, who claimed to have converted to christianity but his platform was anti jew, anti white and anti america. President Obama calls Rev Wright his "friend and mentor". I pray to God that Mr Obama is defeated this fall.

3 October 2012 at 08:59  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Naomi King:

Why would it matter if he was a Muslim? It's not forbidden for the US to have a Muslim President?

Or is it that you think that his being a Muslim would somehow make him a threat to US interests? I assure you, he's quite capable of that without involving anything of his putative religious beliefs. I suppose Osama Bin Laden was just a big bit of overcompensation - a kind of "look how big my dead international terrorist is"?

3 October 2012 at 09:03  
Blogger Naomi King said...

If for no other reason AnonymousinBelfast, I would oppose President Obama on his platform of destroying the true, God given covenant of marriage.

3 October 2012 at 09:18  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

Well I would oppose him on those grounds as well, Naomi.

What I find interesting is the idea that a candidate should be opposed because, so the argument goes, he is insufficiently solicitous of the interests of a foreign state and /or will not endorse that state's policy of territorial aggrandisement

Now America is the leading world power and bears responsibilities others do not have but I think that is pushing things somewhat.

3 October 2012 at 09:26  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Naomi King:

Fair enough, but I'm just a little at a loss as to why we then need to bring in the pretty shaky accusations of his being a Muslim. If he is, he's certainly not a devout one - how many times have we observed here that Muslims are not too keen on (how did you put it?) "destroying the true, God given covenant of marriage"?

John Chater:

I was under the impression that foreign policy isn't as important to those who can vote in US Presidential Elections as it is to those who can't (i.e. us). Maybe he's going after the "Jewish vote". Oooh, spooky. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell us how the Elders of Zion are up to their elbows in all this - and in the same week that they're running a false-flag nuclear programme in Iran, as well as necromantically raising Jimmy Savile. I don't know where they find the time.

I'm off for some tea.

3 October 2012 at 09:55  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Sorry I meant John Knox. I had Chater's infernal gargoyle face lurking in my forebrain for some reason.

3 October 2012 at 09:58  
Blogger Preacher said...

So either Obama lied when he stated quite clearly that Jerusalem was, is & would remain the capital of Israel, or the squirming guy who was trying to avoid the question of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem as the Capital knew the goal posts had been intentionally moved to facilitate Obama's policies on the Middle East.
Obama has a short memory or he is bottling out. Remember the culprits of the Twin Towers outrage Mr O?.

3 October 2012 at 10:01  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...


I have no doubt that anti semitic bampots hide behind anti Israeli positions but this does not mean that all those who oppose Israeli occupation of the West Bank etc are anti semitic bampots. Conspiracy theorists find this kind of distinction hurts their brains.


Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel and Obama can say what he likes, but his saying it is so does not make it so.

3 October 2012 at 10:21  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

John Knox:

You're quite right. It's also possible to levy criticism without necessarily moving to a position of outright hostility of one side or the other. What interests me with most commentators' positions is the tipping point: at what stage does a group or a national body lose its moral authority through its actions (if ever)? Its when one lot get licensed to blow the other up, that I get concerned.

3 October 2012 at 10:43  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

AIB and JK's Lovechild

Isn't a big part of the problem that of millions of evangeligal Christians subscribe to the following belief system - (posted by len on a thread below:

"Israel especially Jerusalem is being used by God to draw all his enemies into one place.This is apparent to anyone with the slightest knowledge of Scripture ...

God`s end time agenda is focused on Israel and Satan[ the adversary]also has an end time plan for Israel ...

So what it come down to' bottom line' as they say is which side are you on in this spiritual battle?"

Dodgy theology, based on a partial reading of scripture, and then attempts to force God's Hand through unconditional support of another country, is surely a recipe for disaster?

3 October 2012 at 12:16  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 October 2012 at 12:19  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

A - Rabbinical Judaism has no Temple, no priesthood and no sacrifice, therefore it has no substance;

B - All these things were transferred into the Catholic Church at its foundation ("You are Peter and on this rock...")

C - This is because the Covenant was fulfilled with Christ and rejected by most of the Jews; those few who accepted it were joined by an increasing number of Gentiles to carry the Covenant forward;

D - Catholics genuflect before a tabernacle because that is the Holy of Holies; their priesthood is The Priesthood and the sacrifice is performed daily at the Mass;

E - Many Protestants, and almost all Evangelicals, do not understand this because they are theologically illiterate;

F - They consequently support a sham state because it appears to fulfill a heretical and utterly theologically unsound doctrine of "end-times", although in reality they don't care tuppence for the state of Israel itself;

G - All of the above and the fact that Obama is black.

3 October 2012 at 12:36  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...


Yes, that kind of nonsense does not help.

I attended a lecture a couple of years ago at Harvard's Catholic chaplaincy where some doddery old Jesuit ( physically doddery, sharp as a stanley knife) spoke about prospects for peace in the mid East. He had been used as an informal intermediary between Israeli and Palestinian reporting to , not sure, State Dept or Vatican or both, not made clear, who made this point.

He said Netanyahu and co. like to hear this stuff but do not say much about the next phase our Protestant cousins foresee, the mass conversion of the Jews.

Wry Jesuit smile.

Forgotten the old boy's name now.

3 October 2012 at 12:43  
Blogger IanCad said...


"Dodgy theology, based on a partial reading of scripture--"

I have to say I agree with you.
Hal Lindsey and his henchemen, inventive and persuasive, have led many down this path.
So much so that US foreign policy is influenced by it.

3 October 2012 at 12:54  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


I think my only problem with the Priesthood path is that I can't see much - no scrub that, any - evidence for early Christianity having priests in the Levitical sense. The Hiereus (ἱερεύς) just isn't that important in the New Testament. I mean - it makes sense within Catholic theology in the way that it developed, and I don't take a len-like view that everything has to be explicitly set out in Scripture (though I do require it to be consonant with it), but I'm not sure you would have got anything more than mild bewilderment out of early Christians, especially the Hellenised Christians who ended up dominating, with the outline you provide.

3 October 2012 at 13:01  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...


''D - Catholics genuflect before a tabernacle because that is the Holy of Holies; their priesthood is The Priesthood and the sacrifice is performed daily at the Mass;

E - Many Protestants, and almost all Evangelicals, do not understand this because they are theologically illiterate;''

After I converted to Biblical Christianity at university (having been raised as a Catholic) I asked my parish 'priest' (no such thing since Calvary when the priesthood was abolished) why the church claimed that Christ was regularly sacrficed in the 'mass' when Hebrews made it abundantly clear that Christ was sacrificed 'once for all'. He blustered, failed to recognise the question, hasd no answer, and blandly assured me that there was no possibility the church could be wrong. He more or less told me off for daring to read the Bible for myself.

HOW DARE YOU as a Romanist accuse Evangelicals of being theologically illiterate!!!

3 October 2012 at 13:57  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

The priest failed to explain - or you failed to comprehend.

Christ is not resacrificed afresh daily. The Mass rejoins the one and timeless sacrifice at Calvalry. It is not a seperate event. Understand this and you begin to understand the priesthood.

3 October 2012 at 14:22  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

Dear Rambling

Catholicism is Biblical Christianity.

But sola scriptura,I have often wondered, where is that in the Bible again?

3 October 2012 at 14:41  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 October 2012 at 14:53  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Corrigan and John Knox's lovechild, you two have done a man's work solving the "Jewish problem." Judaism has no substance, Israel's borders must be based on Jordan's line of advance in an occupation attempt (which doesn't matter either way, because Israel is a "sham" state waiting to be dismantled) and Israel's capital cannot be determined by the Israelis themselves. This only leaves one question: How do you two plan to make us go away this time around?

John Magee, are sure about the 80% Jewish vote for Obama in the US? I think it's too high and I think recent numbers show a 20% drop in support. In any case, it is still high and I frankly don't understand it. That's probably because us Orthodox have more rapport with conservative Christians than with liberal, secular Jews. Two Passovers ago I had the honour of being shouted at by otherwise nice Jews from Baltimore and being called a racist at the Seder table, at some point after the second cup of wine or perhaps over the gefillte fish and horseradish, for saying that Obama is anti-Israel and is an incompetent ideologue who has destroyed the US economy and shattered the American social fabric. I have no idea what goes on on your side of the border, including which way the important Catholic vote will be going after the health insurance fiasco. I'm already beginning to suspect that you might not be voting for Obama

Two things I'm puzzled about: One, why is Obama getting votes from Americans who are not his close friends or immediate members of his family and two, what's the rationale behind the hullaballoo over the voter ID? Here in Canada you must bring at least one piece of ID and to register in your own local riding, and no one's ever complained. I'm thinking that whoever can't manage to get his act together and obtain or bring along an ID is a hopeless cretin who shouldn't vote anyway. Oh yeah, there's a third one: How's Jeremiah Wright telling his congregation to vote after being shoved under the bus by Barry?

3 October 2012 at 14:59  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

I don't plan to make you go away, Avi. I merely point out that you have no more special standing in the world than, say, those Jews who remained in Palestine after the destruction of the Temple, converted to Christianity and most of whom later converted to Islam. I believe they're called "Palestinians" these days, and I reckon they have a much better right to their ancestoral homeland than American settlers from Brooklyn.

3 October 2012 at 16:15  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...


I did not say Judaism had no substance. I believe it has.

Israel should withdraw, will have to withdraw, to its internationally recognised border.

How about if I say Berwick upon Tweed is Scotland's capital and Alex Salmond agrees with me.Would that make Berwick upon Tweed Scotland's capital?

3 October 2012 at 16:31  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

That's pretty fanciful history cobbling, Corrigan. Throw in Pyramid Power, Atlantis and the Hollow Earth and you can make a best seller. Alas your "Palestinians" are recent migrants from Syria...at least if their dialect, culture, clan affiliations and self-identification mean anything to you. My guess is not, because you couldn't give a rat's rectum for your beloved "Palestinians." You haven't made a peep about them getting slaughtered in Syria and having their bodies dragged around and displayed. I'm guessing you're waiting for the "Jewish angle" on that one. So spare us the humanitarian bull, ok?

The sum total of your ramblings from day one is that there's no justification for a Jewish state, a Jewish religion or a Jewish identity of any kind. And yet, here we are, reluctant to self-destruct as always. So, I'm curious about "Plan B."

3 October 2012 at 16:47  
Blogger John Magee said...


I don't have total recall but I seem to remember between 30-40% of USA Jews usually vote Republican (conservative) in Presidential elections. Since the 1970s about 55-60% of Roman Catholics can be counted on to vote for a conservative Republican in those same elections. Something odd happened in 2008 when about 75 -80% of American Jews voted for Obama and 52-54% of RC's also voted for him. He seemed to have an ability to mesmerize many people. Women faited at his rallies just like they did at Hitler's rallies. Of course the 10-15% in all demographic groups who are the so called "swing voters" decide this majority.

Both groups above and many others too are now suffering buyers remorse in 2012 after being bamboozled by Obama's ability to flash that famous smile, read a teleprompter well, and tell enormous lies. People voted for Obama and totally ignored his unsavory past relationships and sympathies with leftists and even Marxists. His Presidential campaign was started in a living room in Chicago of a well know American Marxist named Bill Ayres.

Bill Ayres is another in a long line of WASP traitors who should be in jail for making bombs that killed policemen and civilians yet was found not guilty by a friendly jury and became a mentor for Obama .

Obama's meeting with members of the Musim Brotherhhod a couple months ago at the WH and then refusing to meet with Israeli PM Netanyaho 2 weeks ago were the ultimate insults to Israel and put the icing on Obama's pro Islam cake in my opinion. As if his speech to the Islamic world full of half truth and outright lies from Cairo University in 2009 wasn't enough to enlighten people as to his affinity for Islam.

I know nothing about Jewish life in Toronto AVI but growing up in Pittsburgh with its large Jewish community of around 50,000 for the city and county I noticed that Jews, like other immigrants groups from Europe, voted by assimilation and by nationality. Reformed German and Dutch Jews who's ancestors have lived in the city since before the the great immigration waves after the 1870's vote largely for Republican. Perhaps 30% of them vote Democrat today. Austrian and German Jews who came here during the Hitler era in the 1930's and after WW II also tend to vote largely Republican in Presidential elections too. While among Eastern European Jews, the majority, probably 90% vote for liberal Democrats with Orthodox Jews almost always voting for a conservative Republicans in Presidential elections.

Do you think this an accurate evaluation not just for the USA but for Canada too?

Assimilation, a work ethic, as well as a respect for education and strict family values are usually the deciding factors for all immigrant groups on how they will vote. The USA has two govenors who's parents are from India. Both are conservative Republicans and are govenors of Southern states. Louisiana and South Carolina. Cuban Americans are a group who are totally assimilated, even though they tend to speak Spanish at home, and very prosperous vote 95% for Republicans for obvious reasons.

3 October 2012 at 16:53  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Knox, you really, really don't want to know about the only legally recognized international border. Because it includes the whole Sinai, chunks of Lebanon, Syria and the whole of the invented "kingdom" of Jordan. Look up the San Remo agreement. It has never been abrogated for the very good reason that if it were, and all the borders and nations created from the Ottoman corpse are up for grabs. Imagine that mess. So, forget your "international law." You are confusing it with abject mewlings in the General Assembly which have lost even their entertainment value.

Jerusalem is Israel's capital simply because it's where the seat of its government is and because Israel says so. All nations in the world have the right to determine their capitals and so does Israel.

3 October 2012 at 17:02  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

John Magee, I'll have to check on numbers here in Canada, but Canadian Jews have always been more conservative politically and religiously than their US counterprats. Nevertheless, until the last election, Jews typically voted Liberal, rather than Conservative. The leftie flakes among us will always vote in New Democrats, even when they strut around in kaffiyehs and scream for Israel's destruction.

The demographic here is changing, though, which makes our assimilated liberal types crazy; their numbers are crashing due to low birth rates, the failure of liberal Judaism to attract and high percentage of intermarriage and total loss of affiliation, while the orthodox community is growing and gaining new members from the disillusioned secularists.

The battle between the secular and the observant is very similar to the one among secular and religious Christians, except that ours is far less visible, priobably because everyone tends to assume we're all on the same page. One of my kids, a ten-year old girl, attends a non-religious private school with a high population of nominally Conservative and Reform Jews. She is the only orthodox and observant kid among them. We had to move her to a class with fewer Jewish kids because she was being bullied for keeping kosher, for always dressing elegantly in long skirts and dresses for school, for refusing to dance with boys when they do dance in gym, for not joining cliques, never gossiping, not swooning over the heart-throb of the day with rest, and for doing her blessings before and after every meal. This is all from her; we didn't make her do this. And she refuses to change schools because she likes the art programme and because she is stubborn as a little mule. Soft-spoken, non-aggressive, petite and under-weight, and yet she is stronger then I ever was, because back in my high school days, when I was a hulking and uncouth ruffian as opposed to the refined dandy I'm now, I was too chicken to let people know I'm Jewish.

3 October 2012 at 17:27  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

PS, John Magee, just read that a judge overturned Pennsylvania's voter ID law, which means the dead in Philly will be voting again for Obama. On the positive side, though, the law was deemed constitutional and will be applied by the next election. If there is a US, that is, after Barry and friends have another turn.

3 October 2012 at 18:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Gentlemen, we must not forget that a major contribution to Obama’s election was the mobilisation of types that normally would not have registered to vote. Blacks, immigrants, the ‘dispossessed’ (…or should that be the never possessed…). In other the words, the poor in spirit and material goods.

The Inspector observed all this with a wry grin as the almost hysteria dragged these people into the democratic process, often for the first time. The object - to elect a man who could see things from their point of view, and could do something for them.

Will it happen for him again, with the mass hordes beating a march to the polling stations ? What do you think…

3 October 2012 at 18:41  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Anonymousin Belfast @ 09:03... does the president being a Muslim somehow make him a threat to US interests? Well the short answer is yes and it is a very great threat to the rest of the world as well. If you haven't noticed the so called Prophet is on the march again with sharia law coming to a community near you. Its ultimately forced conversion by the sword you know.

Here is a short piece from the

: Police Instructions - Bedfordshire Police --

UK’s Bedfordshire Police’s rules regarding terrorists and dangerous criminals

If they’re non-Muslim

• Consider the most opportune time of day to be able to arrest suspects with minimum resistance
• Apply all necessary force to enter the premises and arrest suspects accordingly.

If they’re Muslim:

• Community leaders must be consulted before raids into Muslim houses.
• Officers must not search occupied bedrooms and bathrooms before dawn.
• Use of police dogs will be considered serious desecration of the premises.
• Cameras and camcorders should not be used in case of capturing women in inappropriate dress.
• If people are praying at home officers should stand aside and not disrupt the prayer.
They should be allowed the opportunity to finish.
• Officers should take their shoes off before raiding a Muslim house.
• The reasons for pre-dawn raids on Muslim houses needs to be clear and transparent.
• Officers must not touch holy books or religious artefacts without permission.
• Muslim prisoners should be allowed to take additional clothing to the station.

With this continuing appeasement, no wonder it’s now predicted that Britain will become an Islamic state by 2070.

Time to think about our children.

3 October 2012 at 19:33  
Blogger Galant said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 October 2012 at 19:41  
Blogger Galant said...

If you want to boil down the Israel 'situation' in a pragmatic way then, theology aside, here's the indisputable bottom line.

1. The nation of Israel exists. (Unless someone is a few sandwiches short of a picnic and wants to suggest making all Israelis leave.)

2. It has a right to its own security (any suggestion to the contrary is essentially the same as any argument to point 1).

3. There is a powerful and prevailing Muslim belief in the Arab region that Jews must all be killed and Israel must be wiped off the map. (Demonstrated by all the wars immediately following Israel's declaration of nationhood and quite visible in many Arab school maps).

4. There is no prevailing Jewish belief that Arabs or Muslims must all be destroyed. (No really. There isn't. They want a 'homeland' not genocide).

Since all of these are true, in order to uphold number 2, any plan for 'peace' must include a way of dealing with 3 and must permit Israel to maintain 2 as firmly and as long as 3 remains and 4 must be upheld and made clear to all parties involved.

The security issue is primary. If you don't think so then one would assume you would let both sides take the gloves off. Unless you're racist.

3 October 2012 at 19:45  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 October 2012 at 20:17  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Good lord Mrs King at 19:33 !

Does anyone know if the British Union of Fascists are still around. A fellow wants to consider signing up...

After all, it's enough to drive one to extreme measures, is it not !

3 October 2012 at 20:19  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Naomi King:

I'm not going to quibble about the danger of Islam because that wasn't my original point: I simply noted that if Obama is a Muslim, he cannot, surely, be considered to be a particularly devout one given his public views on SSM.

Sure, if it turned out Obama was a paid up member of Al Qaida, I'd be concerned, but as it is, even if we accept the claim that he's a Muslim, it seems difficult to see him as anything other than the tea and whiskey variety. Or is it all simply a terrifically deep form of cover?

3 October 2012 at 21:09  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Help me out here, Avi. I've got a problem which you might be able to solve. Here's the specifics:

On the one side, there's this guy who

* believes himself to be superior to others on account of his race;

* this leads him to claim the property of others and not to class said acquisition as theft because it's different when he does it;

* in order to uphold the myth of his right to do this, he wilfully ignores genetic and DNA evidence which shows there is no significant difference between his, supposedly superior, race and the race from which he is taking, and that said victims can therefore show continuous, unbroken possession of that which he seeks to acquire;

* instead, he peddles a lot of claptrap about them being "recent migrants" in order to cover his acquision;

* is completely shameless in claiming an absolute right to hand out all the verbal abuse he pleases to anyone who challanges his right to act in this way;

* presumably, kisses his children with the same mouth with which he casually roars "worse than Hitler!", unembarrassed by the fact that own fellow Zionists treated the Holocaust victims like rubbish when they first began to arrive in Israel because they did not fit the image of the noble Jewish warrior;

* and finally, is unashamedly part of a movement which did a complete 180 on those same victims when they realized that said victims had squirrelled millions in Swiss banks before the Nazis closed in.

And on the other side, there's me. My question is, who's the git?

3 October 2012 at 21:51  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


I'm not sure who your fellow is, but wouldn't one have to rely on the fact that to occupy the ideological position your chap presently holds is unproblematically identical to that of the Zionists over 60 years ago.

I'm sure you might find it more than a little offensive if somebody suggested that your membership of the Catholic Church was taken as proof of your support and moral complicity in, say, the institutional cover-up of child abusing priests.

If your man has in fact said, or better yet, written things in line with your allegations, or explicitly condoned and agreed with the various points you outline, it might well be a different matter. Personally, I'd be careful though - it's a fine line between identifying other people's "real" beliefs, and confirming a pre-existing notion of those beliefs by simply looking for certain signposts, and not actually engaging with the content of an argument. Not that I'm doubting your ability to do that - it's just a useful "doubt" to keep in mind.

3 October 2012 at 22:15  
Blogger Galant said...

Corrigan1 - just a thought but - isn't that a false dilemma?

Can't you both be gits? Or perhaps, neither one of you?

3 October 2012 at 22:49  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Corrigan ,

My thoughts on each of your A to G.

A -For someone who says he is attacking Israel as a state and not Jews or Judaism, I think this offensive opinion shows us your real motivations. You would cry “anti catholic” if anyone suggested that Catholicism had “no substance”.

B - The theology of Supressionism has been used throughout history to persecute Judaism and Jewish people, so no surprise you are an advocate of it.

C - G-d said to the Jewish people that his covenant was everlasting and never to be added to Exodus 31 vs 16-17, Exodus 12 vs 14-15 , Deuteronomy 4 vs 2 and 13 vs 1

D - No, the remains of a Church and a mosque sits on top of the place of the Holy of Holies.

E - A little bit of an arrogant statement to make.

F – Israel is not a sham state, but a legally recognised sovereign entity FYI The Vatican has diplomatic relations with Israel. "Sham state"- look up Gaza and The PLA controlled parts of the West Bank.

G -Really? Proof on that please, it has nothing to do with what has been "achieved" in office then?

3 October 2012 at 23:42  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...


I see we have moved from the alphabet to stars (next letters were H,I, J,K,L,).

I cannot see where Avi has suggested he is superior to anyone else, except, perhaps in his ability to drive around a 50 tonne articulated Lorry around the Canadian hinterland.

On the other stuff :

Perhaps you'd like to complain to the UN about the Roman Empire reducing the Temple to a cinder, following their illegal occupation of Jewish lands two thousand years ago? And whilst you at it,perhaps the state who has treasures from the Temple, could given them back e.g. The Menorah ?

3 October 2012 at 23:48  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Hi Hannah,

Perhaps Avi also has a superior beard or at least in comparison to myself, who takes inspiration from the more trimmed version of Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks.

4 October 2012 at 00:11  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

I see that the usual arguments against Israel are being turfed out, although Corrigan does add the extra gloss of attacking the Jewish religion as much as the Jewish state.

Well, all I have to say is that Israel is here to stay. Whether you like it or not. To quote American President Kennedy :

"Israel was not created in order to disappear - Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and the home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom"

4 October 2012 at 00:22  
Blogger John Magee said...


The bright side for us conservatives is that The liberals are not breeding.

The downside is that the producers, the tax payers, can't have as many children as they want and keep their present lifestyle. In oher words those who have the potential to raise responsible chidren aren't having them.

I hope my point of view doesn't sound too radical but I think it's an honest observation.

Orthodox Jews, like the Christian Amish and Mennonites here in Pennsylvania who've lived here since the 1690s have large families too. Like the Orthodox Jews they would NEVER think of taking anything from the government.

You are correct. One judge in Pittsburgh got the Voter ID law delayed until the next election. How is it racist to ask people to produce an ID card when they vote? It's the most sacred act a citizen of any country does. Our soldiers and sailors died for that privilidge we now have as free citizens in our democracies. Like you and I am sure people here from the UK we must have a photo ID or birth certificate to get a drivers liscense, a bank account, get a welfare card etc, etc, etc but the liberals claim it's some how "racist" and "dicriminatory" to atcually ask for a photo ID when people vote. You are correct about Philadelphia too. That city must have the same Democrat adage that the most corrupt city in the USA, Chicago, has when voting day arrives: "vote early and vote often".

Your daughter sounds like a wonderful child. She is lucky to have such loving caring parents like you and your wife.

None of us ever should be aplogetic of our roots. I understand the children of immigrants very well and so are you in a very personal too.

When I was a boy I was deeply ashamed of my mother's accent when out in public or when friends from school came to visit our house. Today I am even more ashamed I ever felt that way. She sounded like Ivana Trump but her English grammar was perfection. Still to a kid like me she stood out and you know how kids feel about such things. Children want to fit in and not be different.

@ Inspector

No need to go to the extremes as tempting as that may be. We all must stick together with people of similar values and beliefs in our individual countries if all we believe in is to survive the coming storms.

4 October 2012 at 00:44  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


The biblical passages you cited are potentially provocative to a Christian. Fair enough when your faith is being challenged in a rather crude manner.

Corrigan and Magee do not present Supercessionism (not Suprecessionism!) in a true light. Catholics believe the Jews were chosen by God not as a "superior race" but as a people He seperated and made Holy for a special mission - to demonstrate His power to the world and for the coming of His Son, the Messiah. They were to follow His commands until the appointed time.

We believe the Mosiac Covenant was conditional and, in some sense, impossible to accomplish for fallen man. The history of the Jews as recorded in the Bible and the comments of the prophets point to this. The words of Jesus, which Chrsitians believe to be God, confirm this.

Now, Chapter 13 in the Book of Deuteronomym verses 1-5, is actually a justification for killing a false prophet or anyone attempting to lead Jews from their God.

"And that prophet or forger of dreams shall be slain: because he spoke to draw you away from the Lord your God."

Just think of the implications of this and the other Leviticus laws in a restored Temple and Jewish operative theocracy.

Israel the State and how she acts, and Judaism, the faith, whether the Messiah has come already and future prophecies, cannot be held to be one and the same thing.

4 October 2012 at 01:48  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Galant: Simply superb!

Miss Kavanagh; I think you got it; it's really basic atavistic jealousy of the fact that I'm the un-challenged Road King on this blog here. I bet you all that Jewish and Israel stuff Corrigan sweats over to irritate me with now and again is a cover for his rage that he can't back up his goofy little Euro-car which weighs less than one of my wheels, drives automatic because five measly gears and a clutch scare him and gets his butt honked-off by a mile of traffic behind him as he takes six tries to parallel park.

Mr Kavanagh, all it takes to grow a magnificent beard like mine is benign neglect and a wife who has given up on reforming the unreformable...I think I just created a new word.

John Magee, you missed the first generation immigrant experience, then. I made my entry into Canadian highschool life by trying to speak English with a Prague-Viennese sing-song whine and on my first day at school wore a height-of-fashion Fleetwood Mac-style denim suit with flared pants and a skin-tight pirate shirt, and piled about a cup of sweet relish on my fries in the cafeteria line. Nothing like a great beginning to the life in the New World.

4 October 2012 at 05:09  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4 October 2012 at 08:23  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Dodo,

I got my Bible passages mixed up, it should have been chapter 12 vs 32,from the English Bible I've got in front of my, although I can see why you think the incorrect verse I mentioned would be provocative.

In respect of the difference between Judaism as a faith and Israel as a country,yeah I can see that, given that Israel today is not the same as Biblical times. I was pointing out to Corrigan that his views (bog standard for Guardian Comment is free writers) claim to pertain to modern politics only and not the religion per say.
Although it seems that this was a clumsy reaction to the Christian Zionist theology.

Note I don't think that a faith is above any criticism, but being mindful of where one is coming from is what I have learned from being here, as there are so many people with different religious views. I don't think we have any Mormons, which is a pity because I did watch a thing on the TV yesterday given it is coming up to the election and it is quite a fascinating religion (and so the film said, the only faith to be persecuted in America).

And also, John Magee seems to be supportive of Israel in this discussion, so I don't thing I was arguing with him here, in fact my views on him have changed to being more favorable, now I know where he is "coming from".

4 October 2012 at 08:29  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Was going to show all the nonsense spouted by Corrigan1 @3 October 2012 12:36 and other rc's was nonsense (theology to them is a means of ensuring that any cherished roman myth or fable can be held if you so wish) but as they are biblically blind to scripture and its meaning (it takes a bit of personal time and thought), it appears a complete waste of effort on my part.

Bless you all for persevering with them....'treasure stored in Heaven etc' INDEED..


"Catholics genuflect before a tabernacle because that is the Holy of Holies; their priesthood is The Priesthood and the sacrifice is performed daily at the Mass" Goodness, I thought the churches in the apostolic period spoken of and established by the Apostles were all normal houses and not religious buildings??..Where did the Apostles relate to such things as tabernacles and priestly sacrifices being so in Act's or the epistles and I see no reference to the word 'Pope', is that like sola scriptura??

4 October 2012 at 09:31  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


In Hebrews. Among the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, it seems probable that you would have found a continuation of Jewish observances. Certainly that seems to be the implication regarding Paul's second visit to the Church of Jerusalem under James.

Among the Hellinized Jews, generally not. We derive most of our tradition, and indeed most of the Bible from the Hellenic route.

The important thing, I guess, is that we can't be too confident speaking on behalf of the Jews solely through Christian history, either to affirm the idea of supercessionism (which developed long after Christ, at the height of Christendom, when it must have been apparent that there was a "new Chosen people", aided of course by various expulsions of Jews), or a kind of crude Christian-Zionism of the kind you sometimes see with evangelical groups going to re-establish the Temple.

4 October 2012 at 10:56  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Oh, I don't know...I've found it quite easy to handle macho truck drivers in the past. The key is to recognize that it takes forever for a truck to get up to cruising speed because of all the gears they have to work through. If you've got the nerve to play chicken with these clowns, you just wait for them to come up to within a few inches of your back bumper, (they do this all the time attempting to intimidate other road users) then just gently ease off the accelerator (gently, gently, not too suddenly). They will unconsciously do the same until they find themselves back down in first gear. At that point, step on the gas, accelerate away and flip the finger out the window as you go. If you're really good at this (which I am) you can bring him to a standstill at the foot of a hill and watch him take a seizure as he attempts to get his crate moving again, with a steep hill in front of him and fifteen gears to work back up through. Joy.

4 October 2012 at 11:29  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Dare I say, Corrigan, truckers who play chicken deserve such treatment. Mighty good of you to put your life on the line for their continuing driver ed. Not very bright though; as you might wind up getting burried whilst woven into a radiator grill, with your finger defiantly sticking up through the flower bed.

Me, I keep proper distances, keep out distractions like music and snacking, check mirrors every five seconds and gauges every few minutes, assuming the rollerskates buzzing around me are all driven by incompetent retards with brains of four year-olds and no mater what anyone does, my pulse never goes up and I never lose my cool. A good strategy even for non-professionals in private cars, for as I risk higher insurance rates and a few days in court, they face an eternal date with the Great Beyond. Keep your eyes peeled, hold your cool and stay safe; it's a carnage out there.

4 October 2012 at 13:13  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Well, Avi, with a clean conscience and a good confession, the Great Beyond holds few fears for me; after all, we're all headed there. But then, I can see how you might not see things that way; after all, wasn't Israel founded by atheists?

4 October 2012 at 13:33  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Indeed, Corrigan, we're all headed there, but it's our job to hang on as long as we can and do our duty here. I'm not honoured by being one of Israel's founders and I struggled out of atheism quite a while ago, so I can't help you with your question. Your cavalier attitude makes you good candidate for a made-in-Hamastan MPED, though; a moron-powered explosive device. Not that I'm suggesting you take up that temporary occupation.

4 October 2012 at 14:21  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Okay, so you think Catholics have got their understanding of the Bible about Israel and the Jews wrong.

A question you never answer, and I've asked it repeatedly, is whether you believe the Mosaic Covenant was conditional and if it was fulfilled/replaced/succeeded by Christ's sacrifice? Are all Christians and believers now 'grafted in' as God's chosen people? Is the path to salvation for the Jews via Christ or by still following the Torah?

I look forward to a short and comprehensible answer.

4 October 2012 at 14:42  
Blogger Jon said...

John Magee said "Orthodox Jews, like the Christian Amish and Mennonites here in Pennsylvania who've lived here since the 1690s have large families too. Like the Orthodox Jews they would NEVER think of taking anything from the government."

John - I'm curious - those families in Israel who are paid to read the Bible and are exempt from military service would seem to be a drain on the "liberals without babies" you're so keen to see die out (and incidentally one Israel is apparently reviewing as they are becoming seriously expensive!). Where do they fit in your curious polarity of wealth creating conservatives versus wealth sapping liberals? Could it be that you're grossly oversimplifying? Could it also be that the groups you cite do, in fact, take somethings from the government like clean air and water, roads, law and order and national defence?

4 October 2012 at 14:43  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Jon, John might be making more babies, just to upset you, so let me jump in. The Haredim or "Ultra-Orthodox" in Israel have reached the limits of their political influence on this issue, on the state's ability to pay and the majority's tolerance to their insistence on full-time study. So, they are starting to serve in the army and to train for work. The Orthodox in the US and elsewhere have already pioneered the way for balancing work and business with religious life. The mistake you make is to look at a trend, grab a ruller and draw a straight trajectory into outer space. Reality doesn't work like that; humans are flexible, adapt rapidly and adjust to reality.

4 October 2012 at 16:59  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

PS, Jon, I forgot to cover the obvious: The study-devoted Haredim you seem to fret over so much, are a small fraction of the Orthodox world, a tiny fraction in the Jewish one and a negligible in general society. The point is, religious and conservative people have more children, spend money on their education rather than relying on the crumbling public system and with more intact and connected families, helpful communities to draw on socially and even financially, give their kids a greater advantage in life. Whichever way you cut it and whatever objections you may have to this reality, we're winning demographically, economically and socially and psychologically.

4 October 2012 at 17:11  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Great news - Obama did really badly in the televised debate.

Last night Mitt Romney showed America that he will fight and win. He showed the competence, poise and command needed of a president. Some people are saying this was the best debate performance by a Republican in two decades.

The left-stream media are beside themselves:

Chris Matthews -- “We have our knives out! We go after the people and the facts! What was Obama doing tonight — he went in there disarmed!”

Bill Maher -- "Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter"

Michael Moore -- "This is what happens when you pick John Kerry as your debate coach"

There was and will be no victory lap for Obama.

4 October 2012 at 17:12  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

" Could it also be that the groups you cite do, in fact, take somethings from the government like clean air and water, roads, law and order and national defence? "

Roads, policing and national defence I can understand - water if it's nationalised in Israel (I have no idea if it is or it isn't) but air?! Seriously?

4 October 2012 at 17:38  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Miss King, I just saw the debate on YouTube; Mitt wiped the floor with Barry. I cringed and actually felt bad for him. Then I shook my head and had a good laugh replaying the highlights. Thank for the selection of commentaries!

4 October 2012 at 17:50  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

A question you never answer (Lets give it a bounce then), and I've asked it repeatedly (I have answered your question repeatedly but to no avail...once more unto the breach dear friends, once more..and all that stuff), is whether you believe the Mosaic Covenant was conditional (YES it is but it is based on/within the ETERNAL Covenant with Abraham and his descendants old fruit and relates to obedience NOT is it theirs/jews because God says it is) and if it was fulfilled/replaced/succeeded by Christ's sacrifice? (Thought we were talking about the land..which parts of the Mosaic covenant best suits RC's...Which blood sacrifice ever pardoned sin? It was the promise/atoning of a better sacrifice!)Are all Christians and believers now 'grafted in' as God's chosen people?(Obviously, are there some you can state that are not and is adoption something that you decide, the adopted, or the Person that does the adopting??) Is the path to salvation for the Jews via Christ or by still following the Torah? The Torah was never the means of salvation but the teacher/signpost..Do read St Paul but thoroughly!

It says in Ezekiel that in the future millennial temple there will be blood sacrifices and it will only be open on Sabbaths and new moons even though Christ reigns in person on the throne of David as stated by the Eternal Davidic Covenant given by God Himself. Has Christ not saved us all by his blood once shed then, so why the animal sacrifices??.

The Davidic covenant relates to Jews via Abrahamic Covenant, old sport, not we gentile believers, as we are not descended from them but share in their blessing, Jesus Christ the Son of God Our Saviour and Son of king David!!!
Romans 11:29
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Did you acknowledge your sins first then repent, prior to his seeking you out first and calling you to repentance as He states?

4 October 2012 at 17:56  
Blogger Jon said...

Hi Avi, thank you for your comments. I wasn't fretting about the Haredim (it's not my taxes they're wasting, after all) merely using them as an example to point out to John Magee that his point about the Orthodox religious taking nothing from government was utter tripe!

You also said "Whichever way you cut it and whatever objections you may have to this reality, we're winning demographically, economically and socially and psychologically."

I don't know that this is true. Leaving aside that large numbers of kids tend to coincide with lower disposable incomes and wealth in the west, religious orthodoxy is not an inherited trait as far as I know. Kids think for themselves in most cases, and many of them come to the conclusion (as I did), when exposed to literature, biology, and, maybe an atlas, that they aren't inherently superior to anyone. Equally people can go the opposite way along life's political journey, I suppose.

Incidentally, were your story about religiously large families being wealthy and happy true in the UK (and it may well be) it would be yet another example of the religious being parasites on the state (sorry - couldn't resist, John Magee) claiming all those baby bonds and child benefit!

AIB - I meant clean air. Dealing with the externalities of air pollution has been the concern in the US and EU since the big stink! And I wasn't exclusively talking about Israeli air - I was including the air that the righteous breathe in the UK too!

4 October 2012 at 17:57  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Avi Barzel ... I just saw the debate on YouTube; Mitt wiped the floor with Barry ...

Praise God

4 October 2012 at 18:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


I asked that your answer be comprehensible! It wasn't.

Could you run it past me again- slowly?

I'm not asking about the State of Israel and whether it was promised to the descendants of Abraham for ever. I'm asking about the Mosaic Covenant and whether the Jews are still obliged to follow it?

"It says in Ezekiel that in the future millennial temple there will be blood sacrifices and it will only be open on Sabbaths and new moons even though Christ reigns in person on the throne of David as stated by the Eternal Davidic Covenant given by God Himself. Has Christ not saved us all by his blood once shed then, so why the animal sacrifices??."

And the answer is:

"The Davidic covenant relates to Jews via Abrahamic Covenant, old sport, not we gentile believers, as we are not descended from them but share in their blessing, Jesus Christ the Son of God Our Saviour and Son of king David!!!

I'm still confused about your theology!

4 October 2012 at 22:09  
Blogger John Magee said...


Romney cleaned Obama's clock last night.

Round #2 - They will debate internatonal politics and hot spots. This will be juicy.

Nothing matters to the Obama Zombies. They will still vote for him. After all, from their parasitic point of view, who wants to get rid of the great sugar daddy who gives them all those free goodies paid for by the 53% who work hard and pay their Federal Taxes which keep the welfare offices open?

5 October 2012 at 00:33  
Blogger Jon said...

John Magee, fair enough, you don't like welfare recipients and resent paying taxes which go to them. Rhetorically dehumanising them isn't very Christian though, is it? Do you think Jesus would have approved?

And wasn't it Oliver Wendell Holmes who said that taxes are the price we pay for a civilised society?

5 October 2012 at 09:45  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

That and the 47% thing isn't true - the figure includes people who have retired and spent their entire lives paying taxation, but don't any more. The actual proportion of "non-payers" is substantially smaller.

Anyway Magee, don't fall for the Press' obsession with the 47%. It was one remark in a conversation that wasn't about taxation at all, but how people are no longer engaging with manifesto issues or don't understand basic economics. Nobody wrote about how Romney's subsequent comments about his policies being more likely to produce jobs indicated a concern for the wellbeing of the unemployed.

5 October 2012 at 11:53  
Blogger John Magee said...


There is a mistaken attitude in the UK, the USA, and other countries that taking money form the rich and giving it to the poor in the form of welfare is like our governments being modern day Robin Hood's. What these people forget was that Robin Hood was on the side of the tax payers. He and his Merry Men stood up to the Sheriff of Nottingham and his lackeys and fought these tax collectors who were abusing their powers robbing the people WHO WORKED on their farms or in villages of their measly hard earned income. Life for the peasants in Feudal England was hard enough for the comman without having the Sheriff of Nottingham and his thugs demanding every thing they could get as tribute.

Did I ever say I "didn't like welfare recipients"? No I did not. A wealthy society must take care of it's most vulnerable and helpless individuals as well as offer temporary help to others in need. What I dislike are frauds with who find ways to abuse the welfare systems and milk them for all they are "worth" and think of it as early retirement or a "right". Welfare payments should only be used to help those genuinely qualified to receive it: the elderly, the handicapped, the mentally ill, those temporarily unemployed looking for a job,and other individuals who are helpless and need assistance.

Churches and other institutions such as colleges and universities, pay no taxes. Yet all of the enjoy a tax free status on their small or hudge investments and in the case of college and universities their massive endowments. If liberal churches and the socialists in our great colleges and universities want to show their compassion they can take care of those who of those who have destroyed their lives by using drugs, alcoholism, bad choices, or are by laziness from their own investments and bank accounts books not the tax payers wallets.

One example. Harvard University, one of the great universities in the USA and the world pays no taxes on it's 26 BILLION $$$$ of endowments which get fatter every year. Apply that to every college and university on a smaller scale throughout the USA and your brain becomes numb at the enormous fortune that is tax free and could help the welfare frauds the liberals in those same institutions want people who go to work every day to support.

Where does the Roman Catholic Church in the USA and elsewhere manage to come up with money to pay out to the accusers of abuse by a few of our clergy? Sometimes tens of millions of $$ are involved in these settlements (I call most of them extortion or blackmale payments but that's beside the point)? Where did they hide this money we never heard about before?

Look closely at the lifestyles of our high ranking clergy of all religions. I promise you many examples of their wealth and privilidge might cause you lose your faith if you are not a strong person spiritually.

I said many not all of them.

5 October 2012 at 15:35  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Bird

"I asked that your answer be comprehensible! It wasn't. "
The reason you do not comprehend is that you are flawed in your reasoning in what the Mosaic Covenant is and what it was meant to accomplish!

All biblical covenants were proclaimed by the divine Sovereign on behalf of His subjects and the authority of all the covenants resides in Him and Him alone — He is Lord.

No covenant superseded or nullified any previous covenant (raed Gal 3:17-19). Each covenant advanced the previous without cancelling it. This is part
and parcel of the process of the progressive revelation of the Almighty.
Therefore, when the Mosaic Covenant was established at Mt. Sinai, it did not nullify the Abrahamic Covenant. This is called progressive!

The Mosaic Covenant is not what would vanish — the levitical sacrificial system and the Temple would vanish.) The Book of Hebrews deals with that system as outmoded and would very soon vanish when the Temple itself was destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70, therefore making it impossible for the Jews to keep the mosaic law as they would have no temple or daily sacrifice!!!.

Both Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants were particularistic and related—the former identified an individual and his descendants, the latter identified a national entity composed of those descendants. No passage says it clearer than Psalm 147: “He declares His words to Jacob, His statutes and His ordinances to Israel. He has not dealt thus with any nation”

Crucially for you to understand, no Israelite was ever saved from his or her sins by obedience to any covenant. salvation is by faith alone ALWAYS.

Salvation, however, as then and now was/is obtained only by faith. Unbelievers cannot participate in true worship since they have no relationship to the object of worship, God (read John 4:24).

It is obvious that the covenant was not to be the means of salvation as the participants in the covenant at Sinai were already worshipers of Yahweh.

1.The works specified in the covenant’s stipulations were never designed to bring anyone into a salvific relationship to God.
2.The stipulations were designed to enhance the believer’s worship and service.
3.Obedience to the laws of Moses would bring blessings to God’s people, but not salvation from sin (read Rom 3:20).

Indeed, the worship at Sinai was motivated by a salvation that had already been experienced (The distinctive characteristic of the Mosaic covenant is its setting of God’s laws regulating Israel’s life in the framework of a theology of the ELECTION OF ISRAEL BY GRACE)

Covenantal revelation instructed believers in matters of practical godliness such as how they were to live with each other and how they were to serve

The high point of the mosaic covenant was that disobedience annulled the blessings of God for that individual or generation in his/her/its own time, but disobedience did not invalidate the unconditional terms of the covenant. They are God's chosen people!!

The most important lesson to learn is that the conditionality that can be found in most of the biblical passages passages does not relate to salvation in either the OT or the NT. It has to do with the quality of life lived in the promise and the joy of participating in all the benefits of that promise. This runs throughout as the most common of themes!!!

Lastly, God has ALWAYS demonstrated His faithfulness in spite of His covenanted people’s (Jews or Christians) unfaithfulness.



They are in a a state of unbelief by God for our sake as Paul states but hopefully not for much longer!!!


I'm asking about the Mosaic Covenant and whether the Jews are still obliged to follow it?
They are the only ones it applies to...are you not trying to keep the ten commandments to continue in a sanctified state as stated to me previously...Are you therefore a Jew then, bound by the law??!!!

5 October 2012 at 21:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

I'm beginning to understand your theology - I think.

By the way, I was taught by my father, a convert from Orthodoxy Judaism, that a true Jew is a Christian and vice versa.

So yes, I have a relationship with Christ and I endeavour to keep the commandments through personal effort and with His Grace. A Grace and a relationship that individuals and nations can, and do, loose through unfaithfulness.

5 October 2012 at 23:26  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"By the way, I was taught by my father, a convert from Orthodoxy Judaism, that a true Jew is a Christian and vice versa. " The true Jew was one who when presented with the Messiah would recognise Him and believe and this is what Jesus expected of them and they did but this was not the case for the Jew by and large, was it. What is a true RC and what defines him and stops any RC from being seen as one.

"So yes, I have a relationship with Christ and I endeavour to keep the commandments through personal effort and with His Grace. A Grace and a relationship that individuals and nations can, and do, loose through unfaithfulness. " Which is completely unbiblical as His Grace endures forever but we will be disciplined for unfaithfulness and goes utterly against what Christ achieved for us on the cross and scripture teaches us..You are therefore like the Jews that Paul is referring to in the Book of Hebrews who wanted Christ but also wanted to try to keep the Law and whose words your 1st pope St Peter said was scripture!!! Tetelestai " paid in full"!

The gospel declares all men to be sinners, under the wrath of God and doomed to eternal punishment. The Law saves no one by law-keeping but condemns Jew and Gentile alike. When men are saved, they are saved by faith in Christ, apart from good works. The Jews can claim no merit, they can take no credit, with respect to their salvation, and thus they are no better than Gentile saints. The gospel makes equals of every saint, for the only righteousness which will get a man to heaven is Christ’s righteousness, received by faith, apart from works.

2 peter 3:14-18
14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless,
15 and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16 as also in ALL his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest, being carried away by the error of unprincipled men, you fall from your own steadfastness,
18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.


6 October 2012 at 19:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


I do understand your position but I know I am a sinner and have to make a daily effort to resist temptation. When I fall from Grace, as I do, I believe I fracture my relationship with Christ and, if I persist in grevious sin, risk loosing salvation altogether.

I accept one cannot keep the law without Christ and the gift of Grace, of course. However, I also believe one can break the law through one's own wilful, deliberate choice and rejection of His Grace.

Don't you? Even the passage you cite suggests this as it warns beklievers to be on their guard lest they fall.

7 October 2012 at 15:15  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 20:11  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"I do understand your position but I know I am a sinner and have to make a daily effort to resist temptation. " Aren't we all and all suffer the same if not more grievous trials and tribulations.?
"When I fall from Grace, as I do, I believe I fracture my relationship with Christ and, if I persist in grevious sin, risk loosing salvation altogether. "How can you fall from Grace when Grace is a gift unmerited by what you have done or do? It is God's promise to Justify (You have been saved from sin), Sanctify (You are being saved from sin) and finally glorify (You will be saved from sin) through His Son's work.

"I accept one cannot keep the law without Christ and the gift of Grace, of course. However, I also believe one can break the law through one's own wilful, deliberate choice and rejection of His Grace. " This is impossible..the gifts and calling of God are without repentance (Irrevocable- unable to be repealed or annulled). His Grace and the Law are seperate and cannot be combined in a believers life. One is for salvation the other is impossible to be kept by mortals so YOU WILL FAIL! The RC Dilemna? Salvation by works = You and God did it so you can jointly share His glory??!!

Christ's resurrection is the absolute assurance that all who are "in Him" by faith will be resurrected to life at His second appearance (our blessed hope). It is Christ's righteousness, not our own righteousness, which qualifies us for eternal life. If you receive eternal life by His Grace how can you lose it..It is eternal the moment you are redeemed/purchased !
If He has bought you and all mankind's sins by dying for all our sins on the cross, how can you un-buy yourself as a believer and cast yourself back into the slave market of death. You do not own the bill of debt, He does.

Since believers die the first death like unbelievers, the gospel obviously redeems us only from the second death. This is the joyous message or the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ. But like any gift, it must be received in order to be enjoyed and experienced by the recipient.

John 15:4-8

4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.

8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.

As we learn to live by His life, instead of our own human lives, we truly abide in Him.



The John passage does not relate to salvation being lost but we not producing fruit, for which we are disciplined but NEVER cast out. He is our Father and we are His Sons/Daughters through Christ Jesus.
2 peter 3 is all about this.

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

Are you on your guard against these scoffers or have you joined with them??

7 October 2012 at 20:11  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

I say old bird, like the Inspector, you have zilch chance of paradise, unless we become bible thumping, finger pointing, guilt ridden, Catholic despising protestants, what !

7 October 2012 at 20:23  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


" bible thumping, finger pointing, guilt ridden, Catholic despising protestants, what !"
I say, old fruit, a tad over the top.

RC despising..never. It's just that you don't take Christ and His work and word seriously whereas the mere mention of sacraments, chairs and madonnas sends you into rapturous zeal for holy mother church which is totally unwarranted.


The new icon, is that a nice little gainsborough-ish tribute to Nazi potentate Hermann Goering. Office of Inspector General INDEED!!*Humungous Chortles.

Has Dodo made you his Reichsmarschall des Gross Deutsche Katholiken Reiches fur das Großbritannien. Ja?
Such a mouthful, old boy. Bit like your posticulating pontificating?! *chuckles*

8 October 2012 at 09:24  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Blofeld, dear chap. The Inspector makes no secret of the fact that he feels, of late, like he has been whacked with a protestant bible concealed in a sock (cf. the film ‘Scum’)

Inspector General now appears in colonial uniform. For the empire, of course....

8 October 2012 at 19:32  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Romney reaffirms support for Israel, blasts Obama's foreign policy and is 4% ahead in the Polls !

In his first major foreign policy address, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says President Barack Obama's lack of leadership makes the volatile Middle East more dangerous, vows tough stance on Iran • "The world must never see any daylight between the U.S. and Israel," says Romney.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney delivered a sweeping critique on Monday of U.S. President Barack Obama's handling of threats in the Middle East, as a national poll released Monday showed him four points ahead in the race for the White House.

Speaking before cadets at the Virginia Military Institute on Monday in what his campaign called a major foreign policy address, Romney called for a more assertive use of American influence in the Middle East, saying Obama's lack of leadership had made the volatile region more dangerous.

"The president is fond of saying that 'the tide of war is receding.' And I want to believe him as much as anyone else. But when we look at the Middle East today, with Iran closer than ever to nuclear weapons capability, with the conflict in Syria threatening to destabilize the region and with violent extremists on the march, and with an American ambassador and three others dead — likely at the hands of al-Qaida affiliates — it’s clear that the risk of conflict in the region is higher now than when the president took office," Romney said.

Romney went on to attack Obama's attitude toward Israel, saying that "The relationship between the president of the United States and the prime minister of Israel, for example, our closest ally in the region, has suffered great strains. The president explicitly stated that his goal was to put 'daylight' between the United States and Israel, and he’s succeeded. This is a dangerous situation that has set back the hope of peace in the Middle East and emboldened our mutual adversaries, especially Iran."

According to Romney, "Iran today has never been closer to a nuclear weapons capability. It has never posed a greater danger to our friends, our allies and to us. And it has never acted less deterred by America, as was made clear last year, when Iranian agents plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in our nation’s capital."

Romney's criticism regarding Obama's conduct in the region was decidedly harsh. "It is time to change course in the Middle East," the presidential candidate said. "I know the president hopes for a safer, freer and more prosperous Middle East allied with us. I share this hope. But hope is not a strategy. We can’t support our friends and defeat our enemies in the Middle East when our words are not backed up by deeds, when our defense spending is being arbitrarily and deeply cut, when we have no trade agenda to speak of and the perception of our strategy is not one of partnership, but of passivity."

Cont ...

11 October 2012 at 19:52  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Cont from above ...

"I believe that if America doesn’t lead, others will — others who don’t share our interests and our values — and the world would grow darker, for our friends and for us," Romney explained.

The Republican candidate presented his alternative to Obama's policy, promising that he would inform Iran that the U.S. and its allies will prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons. "I will not hesitate to impose new sanctions on Iran and will — and will tighten the sanctions we currently have," he vowed.

"I will restore the permanent presence of aircraft carrier task forces in both the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf. And I’ll work with Israel to increase our military assistance and coordination. For the sake of peace, we must make clear to Iran through actions, not just words, that their nuclear pursuit will not be tolerated," he said.

Romney added that it was his intention to "reaffirm" the U.S.'s historic ties to Israel. "The world must never see any daylight between our two nations," he insisted.

The Republican candidate also emphasized a different course on Syria, casting the civil war there as a proxy conflict with Iran and saying it's in America's interest to court an opposition likely to play a key role in leading a future Syria.

"Iran is sending arms to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad because they know his downfall would be a strategic defeat for them," Romney said. "We should be working no less vigorously with our international partners to support the many Syrians who would deliver that defeat to Iran — rather than sitting on the sidelines."

The president's re-election campaign dismissed Romney's remarks as "saber-rattling" and accused the Republican of refusing to outline just how his policies would differ from the incumbent's.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday that under Obama's leadership, Iran was facing the most extensive sanctions in history and "unprecedented isolation." He argued further that even Israel's leaders have said that their military and intelligence cooperation with the current administration was unprecedented.

11 October 2012 at 19:53  
Blogger Naomi King said...

For the real truth about the Middle East read



12 October 2012 at 19:32  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older