Elmer's Brother

I had been having what you might call bloggers block until I saw this from my progressive friend, fellow blogger and Moonbat Shalana Millard. She uses a Buddha for her icon (kinda wierd) Anyway here's the quote and then my answer: (italics are her words)

Hey Elmer, Bush said "God speaks through me", that's blasphemy.
What I think is so funny about you self-serving, Jesus Pimping Right-Wing Scum is that the only "life" you do care about in in the womb.
Nevermind that YOU have killed scores of Iraqi Babies in the commission of a crime (I say you because you voted for Bush in '04 while you knew he was a doer of evil. Soldiers have no choice but to fight where they're sent, you had a choice and you chose murder), but you have no problem with the death penalty either.

You're a baby killing murderer, Elmer. Face it.

You're probably going to rot in hell for being a Wolf in Lamb's clothing just like Robertson, Falwell, Asscroft and Bush. While those who practice kindness and The Peace and Love of Christ will watch your spiritual demise from safty.

People like you regularly condemn those who Christ shed his blood on the cross for, sinners. That's Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, you cannot be saved.


Hey Elmer, Bush said "God speaks through me", that's blasphemy. (you claim to be a Christian, has God never spoken to you through the Bible, through other people, your pastor...the Holy Spirit....I guess you don't read your Bible or attend Church very often etc. If your pastor cannot share something the Lord has laid on his heart has he blasphemed?)

What I think is so funny about you self-serving, Jesus Pimping Right-Wing Scum (she often uses the Bible to go on Bush hating diatribes, so who is Jesus pimping) is that the only "life" you do care about in in the womb. Nevermind that YOU have killed scores of Iraqi Babies in the commission of a crime (I say you because you voted for Bush in '04 while you knew he was a doer of evil. Soldiers have no choice but to fight where they're sent, you had a choice and you chose murder), but you have no problem with the death penalty either.

 Somehow Shalana is clairvoyant and knows who I voted for. (The basic difference here is that she assumes I don't care by some reason of very twisted logic that if I voted for Bush I am a baby killer, sounds like Hanoi Jane ) Shalana I do care. One reason why there is a difference here is that abortion is intentional and the killing of innocent Iraqi civilians has never been the policy or the practice of the military. If you can't understand that basic principle than you really need to go back on your meds. Here's the biblical difference between murder and killing, and the death penalty since you brought it up.

  --------------

Consider the following very-well-known translation of Exodus 20:13 (from the famous Ten Commandments) presented in both the [Catholic] Douay-Rheims Version (Published AD 1610) and the [Protestant] King James Version (published AD 1611):

These two versions are cited here because, relative to the argument presented in this narrative, it may clearly be inferred that they have had a profound impact on Biblical thinking and understanding among the English-speaking public over the last four centuries (!) particularly as it applies to the moral implications underlying the concepts of murder and killing. (And be aware, of course, that this issue is certainly NOT unique to English translations of the Bible!)

Exodus 20:13
According to both the King James and
the Douay-Rheims Versions:

"Thou shalt not kill."

By contrast...
Many later translations of the Bible (given the distinct advantage of centuries of semantic hind-sight and linguistic research) tend to be more precise in their rendering of the verb in question as "murder."  viz.,

Hopefully, the reader can discern, even without further discussion, a clear and very important difference in meaning between these renderings. And it should be pointed out emphatically, that lexicographers of Biblical Hebrew routinely confirm that the latter, more granular rendition of the Hebrew verb in question (רצח) is absolutely preferred and intended as "murder."  [ By way of further confirmation of this matter, it may be pointed out here that the Greek Septuagint translators (over 2000 years ago) understood the subtlties of this verse as well in that they too translated the Hebrew verb in question with the corresponding Greek verb for murder: ( foneuw )]

Thus, as can be seen here, due to early imprecise translation of the verb in question as "kill," many have, over the centuries, boldly (and incorrectly) espoused the notion that killing a human being (or in extreme cases, killing any living thing!) is categorically (and biblically) wrong. Such is not the case however, for the following simple reason:

If this view is to be taken, then one must deal with the glaring inconsistency which results when one reads the clear Biblical injunction that murderers themselves (for disobeying the very law being discussed) are to be put to death. (Numbers 35:16-21)

Therefore, the more precise translation indicated above puts a totally different light on this matter and makes it clear to the reader that it is murder which is categorically (and biblically) wrong, AND, according to divine mandate, must be punished by execution (i.e., [sanctioned] killing) under duly appointed civil authority. This, by the way, is why such authority "bears the sword" - by divine decree - according to the apostle Paul. (Romans 13:1-4; cf, Exodus 21:12,14)

Regarding this sensitive subject, it is necessary to bear in mind that civil authority, duly appointed and not-so-duly-appointed, may (and often does) pervert justice. AND it may (and often does) effect miscarriages of justice by simple human error. This does NOT negate the Bible's clear stand on this matter. Perversion of justice and judical error (like murder, corruption and accidents) are human "choice" problems - NOT biblical problems...

And to keep such judicial problems to a minimum...
God's ancient reminder to Israel (and, by extension, to the world at large) regarding the appointment of unbiased and fair judges (and the duty of such judges) is stated at

Deuteronomy 16:18,19   "Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the LORD your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people fairly. Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous." NIV ]

In view of the above, it becomes clear that if one is a staunch and passionate opposer of capital punishment, then one must understand that the rationale for this position is his own, and cannot accurately be founded upon the misconstrued "scriptural" injunction, "Thou shalt not kill."

Here is a Biblical view of capital punishment.

You're a baby killing murderer, Elmer. Face it.

You're probably going to rot in hell for being a Wolf in Lamb's clothing just like Robertson, Falwell, Asscroft and Bush. While those who practice kindness and The Peace and Love of Christ will watch your spiritual demise from safty. People like you regularly condemn those who Christ shed his blood on the cross for, sinners

(Shalana needs to read the Bible because sinners would include all of us, by her logic that would mean the Bible would condemn everyone. So she is ignoring Romans 8:1

[There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

That's Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, you cannot be saved.

(Here she speaks for God and yet He must not talk to her as that would be blasphemy, see her earlier quote..)

Shalana clearly misunderstands the Bible here. Some commentators believe that this sin cannot be committed until you depart this earth. In other words ignoring God's revelation and dying in your sin.

What the Pharisees were doing was suppressing the evidence provided by the Spirit. They continued to do this. It was sin for them to do so. Jesus called this blasphemy of the Spirit. The Hebrew writer called it insulting the Spirit of Grace. One who continually suppresses the truth God sends will not receive saving grace. Thus, he can never be forgiven.

It is therefore very reasonable to say that if a Christian worries that he has blasphemed the Spirit, he probably hasn't. If you are such a person, and you are concerned about this issue, I encourage you to read and accept I John 1:7:

"…but if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin."

She then says to go here for spiritual truth

Attention all Conservoscum....

Here's another Blog you surely would enjoy. Lots of "cussing" and spiritual truth.

Comment by admin4— 2006/01/17 @ 10:26 AM

http://www.abloganation.blogspot.com

Thanks Shalana I think I'll stick to the Bible.

Shalana I am a Christian and I base this on these facts:

1. I am a sinner (Rom. 3:23)
2. Jesus took my place and I have believed that. (John 3:16) (Eph.2:8-9)
3. Because of what Jesus did, I will now spend eternity with Him. (I John 5)

I hope to see you in eternity.