Elections, religion, Rolling Stone, Obama and YOU!


Yesterday, regular LCW reader SAW sent me this article from the NYT about Obama taking the religion horse by the neck and wringing it before the electorate desperately hoping to change his perception before November. He’s kowtowing to the independents who have lost interest in not only him but all democrats.

He’s being sycophantic to me. Little old me. I should get off on it.

The bytes they were playing on NPR were all, I know Jesus died for my sins and that humility is what pushes me forward, or some bull like that. Who cares?

Nonbelievers repeat that it shouldn’t matter in a secular government what religion the president adheres to or if he doesn’t have a religion at all.

It’s all an attempt to kowtow to voters’ emotional heart strings.

Back when George-y boy was in office and he tried appealing to voters, I used to say, “George wants you to think he cares about you. He wants to appeal to you so more people like him. But he doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t have any idea what your miserable life is like.”

The same goes for Obama. He doesn’t care about you and your life. He cares more about the game than your day-to-day welfare. He cares more about popularity, just like ol’ Bushy pants. These guys adults playing childish games.

Rolling Stone magazine published a ball tickler for Obama in this issue. Go check it out. I have to say I enjoyed the article for the most part as I don’t remember ever reading or hearing Bush-daddy’s comments without cringing. Every time Bush tried to make a joke, I would do the teeth-grit-suck-noise face. I’m sure there are people reading this who think the same thing when Obama talks. It’s the nature of the sport.

Josh McDowell on glottogony


Joslin "Josh" McDowell, a Christian ...

Josh McDowell. Image via Wikipedia

In a recent post, I mentioned that I had reread Josh McDowell’s “The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict.” I was flipping through some of my notes, and I wanted to give an example of just how ridiculous McDowell’s research is.

Let me mention that when I was in middle school, I spent many hours watching a video series McDowell sold to churches. I imagine it was something my youth pastor showed us to give himself a little vacation from coming up with “original” material.

This is all to say that my church leaders thought highly enough of McDowell’s academic prowess to use his material in our church.

The Reliability of the Old Testament

In the chapter titled, “Is the Old Testament Historically Reliable,” McDowell explains that, yes, there were creation myths of Babylonia and Sumeria that seem very similar to the biblical story. Only the biblical story is more accurate than those other stories. This ideology falls in line with the Christian idea that the devil tried to confuse believers by having similar creation myths that predate the bible by 1000s of years.

McDowell discredits the gods in those other myths, because they are “evil” and freakishly different than the god of the bible. You know, the different gods … the weird ones … the foreign ones … they are bunk. The regular, run-of-the-mill god in the bible is the much more believable god. He created the heavens and the earth in six days (Genesis 1). He advised his followers to throw babies against rocks to kill them (Psalm 137), and the same one who forced his followers to rape women (Judges 21: 11-12) or rip open the pregnant ones (Hosea 13:16) in villages that they pillaged.

That’s not freakish at all.

Continue reading

Bible tract: 3 reasons why we should be skeptical of the Theory of Evolution


Somewhere, somehow, Ray Comfort, Carl Werner and Ken Hamm are jumping up and down in a vacant room whilst embracing, crying and thanking the ceiling for the spread of their message.

Via Reddit