Muslims have CAIR, and if this was portrayed with Muslims Cair would have this as front page Islamophbia.

This is Christians faults that they take this portraying and say nothing. Christians have been told to go to the corner and stay quite so long that they do it naturally.

Muslims are counting on Christians staying quite. For that matter, so are the Democrats, ACLU, and the Judges, everyone can have an opinion or rights accept Christians.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at October 3, 2007 6:04 PM

(PLEASE POST THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AT OTHER WEBSITES)

The Jihad Awareness Project (to wake up the U.S. Senate and Congress) currently has 104 volunteers in 43 states.

WE ARE STILL SEEKING ADDITIONAL CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS
FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING 7:

Connecticut
Delaware
Mississippi
North Dakota
South Dakota
Vermont
West Virginia

THE PROJECT: We're looking for people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase, from Amazon or any other source, a copy of Robert Spencer's new book Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. We want to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives.

If you'd like to participate (or you just have questions), please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading "Senate," and tell me the state your senator represents, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.

And visit jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.

Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.

Right before each of us mails the book, we’ll issue a press release to media outlets in as many states as possible, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.

One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the Anti-Jihad Caucus in Congress. When we reach the goal of having all 100 senators covered, I'll call Rep. Myrick's office and see if she can help. I've called several congressional offices to get advice on how best to proceed.

Posted by: traeh at October 3, 2007 6:04 PM

Hi Robert,
Your mention of John 7:53-8:11 abrogating the earlier Old Testament verse concerning the stoning of adulterors, brings up an interesting difference between Islam and Christianity.

In Islam we see a tendency where the earlier, more benign verses of the Mecca era are superceded by the more warlike and hostile doctrine of the Medina Period, whereas the opposite occurs in Christianity, with the passage of the jingoistic Old Testament to the Love Thy Neighbor - Turn The Other Cheek homilies of the New Testament.

Posted by: Mister Ghost at October 3, 2007 6:06 PM

Abrogation:

Christianity gets defanged.
Islam goes postal.

Posted by: Mister Ghost at October 3, 2007 6:08 PM

Even without Christianity's abrogation, we don't see Jews stoning anyone, either, and that's because both religions recognize that some rules came from an outdated culture and were not dictated by God to be followed for all time.

The Old Testament also says that rebellious children should be stoned and neither Christians or Jews do that, either.

The media loves to portray Christians as dangerous; it's just ridiculous. Those writers, directors, etc., are still stuck in the '80s, with their well-thumbed paperback copy of "The Handmaid's Tale" tucked under their "I Hate Reagan" pillows.

Posted by: Josephine at October 3, 2007 6:23 PM

I'm sure all of these t.v. producers, writers, directors, actors and promoters would love to say the same about Islam, but they're abject cowards.

I'm surprised they didn't write-in a valient, "pluralistic" Muslim girl to save the life of the "whore".

Or is that the plot twist?

Posted by: profitsbeard at October 3, 2007 6:31 PM

Hi there, Mister Ghost. Where do you pick up your anti-Semitic garbage from?

"Love your neighbor" - I can only wish! By the way, ignoramus, that comes from Leviticus chapter 19 - the "jingoistic Old Testament". I'm so glad you're not my neighbor.

I'm so frickin sick of reading every thread on this site which gets more and more oriented towards Christian triumphalism, as you all trumpet your stupid ignorance.

You can't stand Muslims saying Muhamad is the perfect man - then one of you says "Christ is the perfect man".

You can't stand the condemnation of infidels by Muslims. How do you like this? "He who does not believe shall be condemned!!!"

You think your religious anti-Semitism is ameliorated by your Zionism. Bull! Your scripture is full of libels of Judaism and the Jewish people.

If you knew anything about the Talmud, you would understand that Jesus was a Pharisee - that is, one of the humane good guys who reinterpreted the literalist religion of the Sadduccees. But no. The Jews are your scapegoat.

Who told the Nazis all across Europe where to find Jews? People who had been brought up on this poison: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." Blame it all on "pagans". Right. Europe was just full of pagans in the 1940's, in every village across the continent.

Everything you're so proud of in Jesus's teachings came from the Hebrew Bible, the Hebrew prayerbook, or the Oral Law (later written as the Talmud). If you could only be bothered to learn! The Lord's Prayer, the mote and the beam, the need to violate the Sabbath to save a life, the primacy of "love your neighbor", the need to avoid doing to others what is hurtful to yourself - we had them all, parables galore, etc.

But that would deprive you of that little smirk you can experience commenting condescendingly on what you think you know about the "Old Testament" and its followers. I've seen this nonsense on many threads. I'm going to keep coming back and telling those of you who think that way that you are ignorant bigots. If you knew half as much about the Talmud as I have read in the gospels, you'd realize how ashamed Jesus would be of your attitude of superiority. You do not honor him with your attitude.

Posted by: Surak at October 3, 2007 6:40 PM

"I'm surprised they didn't write-in a valient, 'pluralistic' Muslim girl to save the life of the 'whore'." Posted by: profitsbeard

Good point. I guess they don't watch "24" or "Little Mosque on the Prairie".

Posted by: Josephine at October 3, 2007 6:41 PM

As Christian, I am dumbfounded at the stupidity of this television script. I have never, in my entire life, ever heard of any Christian stoning someone.

Furthermore, such behavior by a youth pastor would get him, or her, suspended and dealing with the cops big time.

There is also the total lack of forgiveness, so central to Christianity, that is lost in this TV show.

Despite being dumbfounded, I am not surprised.

It wouldn't be nearly as outrageous if more people didn't actually take television for the gospel truth. (Excuse the pun.)

Posted by: Monkeywho at October 3, 2007 6:54 PM

Mister Ghost,
That's a good point, but lets not forget that Judaism does not contain a call for open-ended warfare against, and subjugation of, unbelievers. And that's only one of the huge differences between Islam and Judaism.

Another is that in Judaism human beings are thought to be made in the image of God and are considered God's children, and are expected to imitate God's original creativity and work: to be fruitful and multiply, as Genesis puts it. In Judaism God sets the world going at the beginning, and sometimes intervenes by divine providence, but to a large extent leaves human beings free within the field of history. Not so in Islam. In Islam, at the Beginning of the world, Allah does no work that human beings might imitate. In the Qur'an Allah at the Beginning simply commands things to be, and they are. Allah is a God primarily of fiat and command, with second-place emphasis on creative activity. The God of the Old Testament, by contrast, is primarily a God of work, action, creativity, with second-place emphasis on fiat and command.

In Islam, human beings are conceived as slaves of Allah, human creativity is often a risky business verging on blasphemy, and Allah controls all and commands all far more pervasively than in Judaism. Allah is not conceived on the model of a "father," but far more on the model of an ancient near eastern potentate and tyrant.

Most of the statements in the Qur'an about Allah being "merciful" strike me as exactly the kind of verbal deceptions that self-aggrandizing despots use as figleaves to cover their violent and tyrannical abuses. Allah is "merciful" in an Orwellian sense. He is "merciful" in the sense that he sometimes deigns, like some cosmic Nebuchnadnezzar, not to send you to the most horrifying tortures of hell, provided you slavishly crawl on the floor before him and fearfully submit like a worm. On average, about every tenth or eleventh verse in the Qur'an at least alludes to the terrors of hell. Islam is a whip to stay in line, but for whose sake?

Jewish tradition, by contrast, is chock full of Jews arguing with God, complaining to God, struggling with God. As I recall, at one point in the Bible, Moses even reprimands God, and amazingly, the Old Testament God takes the reprimand to heart and agrees to change His behavior! What a huge difference, then, between Islam and Judaism. Christianity, as I understand it, seeks not the submission of slaves, but the love of friends: doing God's will out of love for God, not out of fear and terror of a cosmic Tyrant.

Posted by: traeh at October 3, 2007 7:28 PM

Surak -- Sometimes ignorance is not intentionally malicious.

For most people, if they follow a particular religion, it's because they believe it is the one true religion. Why follow it, otherwise? It's not surprising that Christians believe that Jesus was the perfect man. And it's not surprising that they bring it up when the topic is Mohammed being held up as the perfect man. Of course Christians (and even some non-Christians) would compare the two and find Jesus the more exemplary.

Some people see everything through the prism of their religion. This is normal for a religious person.

You wrote, "You think your religious anti-Semitism is ameliorated by your Zionism."

Are you saying that this is true of all Christians or are you referring to a particular poster? (Although I'm not familiar with "Mister Ghost", I would agree that your statement would apply to one person's posts that I have read.)

At any rate, my bet is that Christians aren't going to stop mentioning their religion anytime soon. If you start insulting them every time they mention Christianity, people will just feel antagonized.

I'm not suggesting that you not correct misinformation. It's just that you seem to be very angry about Christians in general. Maybe you have a good reason to be angry but perhaps it might not be relevant in every case. For example, who was claiming that pagans were the only people who assisted the Nazis?

Also, my college professor's large extended Catholic Polish family was almost completely wiped out by the Nazis. Should I start being sarcastic towards you for not mentioning the number of non-Jews who were murdered by the Nazis? Of course not.

If you care to share more about the origins of Jesus' teachings, I personally would like to read it. (I'm not being sarcastic.) Since that would be going way off topic, have you thought about blogging? Or, when countering what you feel is incorrect or incomplete information, could you refer to a particular verse or chapter or book title?

Posted by: Josephine at October 3, 2007 7:43 PM

Josephine, speaking of "24" and "Little Mosque on the Prairie," I was watching an episode of "The Unit" on DVD the other night. Whenever David Mamet writes the episodes, they are great (though perhaps they have at some point or other misrepresented Islam, I don't recall. I mean only that Mamet's writing in general is very good.)

But this particular episode I was watching was written by a former Delta Force soldier, Eric Haney, and for some reason Haney decided to create an unbearably politically correct script: complete with a Muslim who, fresh out of the deserts of Waziristan or some such place, speaks surprisingly articulate English and offers words one might almost expect from Abraham Lincoln or Socrates (I'm exaggerating), tugging at the conscience of the "Unit" -- the elite time of Delta Force soldiers the story is all about -- and the Muslim asks a series of questions on behalf of justice and argues for high principles and noble abstract sentiments, gently remonstrating with the members of the Unit, seeking to prick their consciences to question the rightness of their mission. It was bad enough that the writer turns some Muslim tribesman in the outback of Waziristan into a Western liberal. But later in the episode, we come upon some American G.I.s who behave like undisciplined slugs and backwoods low I.Q. bigots of the lowest sort, the kind of stereotype that teems in the fevered and idiotic imaginations of certain liberals when they think about anything military. (I'm not against all liberals by any stretch.) I wanted to wretch at the PC nonsense of it. Thankfully, the next episode was by David Mamet, who in my mind always redeems the series.

Posted by: traeh at October 3, 2007 7:57 PM

Surak-

You forgot that Leviticus 20 continues on ("...kill the child who curses his parents... kill the adulturer and adulturess...if a man lies with a male as a woman, kill him..." ad nauseam) and contradicts your point about Leviticus 18's "Love thy neighbor..." (Which, in itself, only says to love the members of your own tribe, not all humanity, since they literally meant "neighbor", not all of your fellow men.)

Jesus was a breakthrough figure in history, even with his flaws (or flaws added by his followers for their own power ends).

One of the first universal human beings who believed the loving sayings of the Old Testament, but not its ancient ("cultural"/"patriarchal") limitations and cruelties.

All tribes had their backward beginnings in the same violence and intolerance and contempt for their fellow beings, with women getting the worst of it until just this century (not gaining the vote in Switzerland until after WW II), and we are all better off for such stupidities and cruelties and limitations being over-ruled.

Jesus was an Ecclesiastes, without the "vanity" rancor.

And a far better model than Mohammad.

As are the Buddha, Lao Tzu and Epictetus.

(Or Henny Youngman and Lenny Bruce, for that matter.)

Posted by: profitsbeard at October 3, 2007 8:14 PM

Surak:

Get a grip. Get the chip off your shoulder.

If you don't like Christians and Jesus or our belief that Christianity is the true faith then you better go hide in a cave somewhere. We're not going to go dhimmi for you.

So grow up.

Posted by: atheling at October 3, 2007 8:27 PM

As a fundamentalist Pantheist, I've come to the belief that public humiliation method such as stocks should be brought back. People who divorce and, as a result, cause kids to be brought up without both parents, should be put into stocks. Adultery--stocks. Public drunkenness--stocks. Dumping motor oil in the nearest storm drain--stocks. You get the idea.

Does this make me as bad as a potential Christian and, therefore, much worse than an actual Muslim enforcing Sharia?

Posted by: Hyman Roth at October 3, 2007 8:36 PM

Jesus abrogated nothing, but fulfilled the commands. All throughout the Old Testament, God berates his children for not showing mercy. God Himself is the perfect example of long-suffering and mercy. Christ is the incarnate manifestation of God's mercy and judgment. Isaiah prophesied, and Christ fulfilled that prophecy.

Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah at October 3, 2007 8:51 PM

It's good for anti-Christians to remind Christians of how ludicrous it is for us to think, speak or act on the concept of "Love your neighbor as yourself" because it is well documented that no Christian in the past two thousand years ever loved their neighbor as themselves.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 3, 2007 9:53 PM

In human terms Jesus's Conception was illegitimate. Yet what did St Joseph do when he found that the Virgin Mary was with child? Did he get his relations out to stone her or run Her parents out of town ?. No when he came to know of it "he was of a mind to put her away... to spare her embarrassment" according to St Luke. This shows that even before the birth of Christ, stoning an adultress was not a universal practice among the Jews. St Joseph was not hung up on Leviticus and there would have been many like him since otherwise the authour would not expect a sympathetic hearing.

Posted by: ivan at October 3, 2007 9:53 PM

This is really simple, and you don't even have to go to the Bible, just compare the historical facts known about the civilisation that evolved from Christianity and the civilisation that evolved from Islam.

Further, where the stench of Islam left it's implant, ie Portugal, Spain, southern Italy, part of France, even on Christian and animist Africans, we can see behaviour unknown in other Christian peoples. (I'm not up on Hindu history, but think it would apply). So we have -

a) the Atlantic slave trade of 28 million (10% of whom died in passage) over 3 centuries vs the Islamic slave trade of 140 million plus (90% of whom died in passage).
b) the Atlantic slave trade emanated within the invasions, attacks, and enslavement of Christians from Islam.
c) we have the history of honour killings in southern Italy unknown anywhere else
d) we have the slave trade today that is still going within the Islamic world.

And, of course, we have the "western" culture of acknowledgement of historical wrongs vs the Islamic culture of "hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil" of a fellow muslim.

Posted by: chrisse at October 3, 2007 10:10 PM

Traeh -- I'm not familiar with "The Unit" (we don't have cable TV). I am familiar with some of Mamet's other work, though, so I know what you mean.

The episode that you describe sounds like it could have been produced by the CBC here in Canada or maybe the BBC in England. I guess Muslims are the media's new "noble savage".

Posted by: Josephine at October 3, 2007 10:11 PM

This is really simple, and you don't even have to go to the Bible, just compare the historical facts known about the civilisation that evolved from Christianity and the civilisation that evolved from Islam.

Further, where the stench of Islam left it's implant, ie Portugal, Spain, southern Italy, part of France, even on Christian and animist Africans, we can see behaviour unknown in other Christian peoples. (I'm not up on Hindu history, but think it would apply). So we have -

a) the Atlantic slave trade of 28 million (10% of whom died in passage) over 3 centuries vs the Islamic slave trade of 140 million plus (90% of whom died in passage).
b) the Atlantic slave trade emanated within the invasions, attacks, and enslavement of Christians from Islam.
c) we have the history of honour killings in southern Italy unknown anywhere else
d) we have the slave trade today that is still going within the Islamic world.

And, of course, we have the "western" culture of acknowledgement of historical wrongs vs the Islamic culture of "hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil" of a fellow muslim.

The brave CBS people would be at the very least in jail in even "moderate" Islamic countries, ie Egypt, and at worst murdered by self-appointed defenders of Mohammed in others, eg Pakistan, for this work.

Posted by: chrisse at October 3, 2007 10:12 PM

Good God almighty, what a firestorm, labeled an anti-Semite because I said the New Testament was less Jingoistic and more tolerant than the Old Testament, as opposed to what occurred with the Quoran. Some of you have your own agendas you like to run with.

Anyways, since I've been researching Iraqi history, I'll tell you something interesting I found out about Iraqi Jews. Hopefully, no one
will blow a gasket here.

This was mentioned in the book, Last Days in Babylon the history of a family, the story of a nation By Marina Benjamin - New York: Free Press, 2006.

Honor killings "occurred from time to time among rural Jewish populations that were ‘Bedouinized.’"

I always found that interesting since generally we don't associate honor killings with Jews, and in Baghdad among the urbanized Jews, honor killings, as the author states, were "unheard of."

Just as we have Islamo-Christians in the Middle East today, back in the early 20th century and before, we had Islamo-Jews in Iraq and the Middle East, who emulated the more negatives aspects of Islamic culture.

Sadly, there are only 7 or 8 Jews left in Iraq,
when at one time -- circa first third of the Twentieth Century -- Jews constituted more than a third of Baghdad's population.

Posted by: Mister Ghost at October 3, 2007 10:42 PM

Mister Ghost, I don't think emulated is the correct word. They were encultured by their surroundings, your local culture is very powerful, to the point of suffering if you do not adhere to its practices.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of thing.

But I agree with you, the impact (or what I call the stench) of Islam on the people's culture has not been a positive improvement, but at least a static force, if not a degrading force.

Posted by: chrisse at October 3, 2007 10:57 PM

"it is well documented that no Christian in the past two thousand years ever loved their neighbor as themselves."

Isabella:

You can't prove a negative.

Speak for yourself. Ever hear of Mother Teresa?

Posted by: atheling at October 3, 2007 11:03 PM

I saw that episode, and the girl was not "stoned".
The other four kids surrounded her, one of them picked up a large rock and hit her on the head. Carrie went down and thre others joined in by kicking her. Not the same thing. Not good, but not the same thing as stoning.

Posted by: lokelau at October 4, 2007 12:05 AM

Speak for yourself. Ever hear of Mother Teresa?
Posted by: atheling at October 3, 2007

If 'mother' Teresa is an example of neighbourly love, I'd rather stay far away. She collected big dollars in donations that she put in the bank and just sat on it, all the while keeping young women with kids in poverty and denied sick people medicine and basic medical care. In the mean time, engaged in a PR campaign to gather even more donations.

Read up,

The Missionary Position - Christopher Hitchens

The Final Verdict - Aroup Chatterjee
http://www.meteorbooks.com/introduction.html

Posted by: desi_singh at October 4, 2007 1:09 AM

Mister Ghost --

Don't let Surak get to you, because the guy is a known "distorter". I'm laughing at what he said to you because he pulled the same number on me two days ago on Jihad Watch, but I didn't let him get to me. All I did was mention Jesus and the Gospels and the guy jumped to all sorts of conclusions about my intellect and called me "ignorant" and other nonsense too. Whatever! He likes to judge people out of thin air by doing verbal drive-bys and then he disappears like a thief in the night.

You didn't say anything that was anti-semetic, so don't believe his vicious lies.

Surak --

You owe this man an apology! You should be ashamed of yourself for accusing him of something so ugly that is clearly untrue. Your accusation that he is anti-semetic is ridiculous and so are you. Someone else suggested that you grow up and I would like to suggest the same; because if you are going to act like a child, then you are going to be scolded like one too.

Posted by: champ at October 4, 2007 2:08 AM

These sort of PC Media projections are a bad joke
at least - agree it is time to show REALITY OF MUSLIM STONING - but TV writers are much too afraid to upset 'peace loving' Muslims ,so much easier [less dangerous] to offend Jews & Christians .
BBC are exactly the same in laughable episodes of
SPOOKS-two weeks ago the villians were CHRISTIAN
EXTREMISTS TARGETING MUSLIMS-last week was the turn of 'demonic Serbs'[favourite with Russians]
although how, not to mention why, Serbs would pay
to turn agents or infiltrate M.I.5 in their damp
little Island is patently ridiculous. Britain lost their Empire a long time ago, unfortunately
the authorities have not realised it...

Posted by: Morgane at October 4, 2007 2:54 AM

I think it would be a good idea to send this article to Lee C. Bollinger at Columbia University

bollinger@columbia.edu

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57944

Posted by: Joe Schmoe USA at October 4, 2007 3:11 AM

I've heard of "stoned teens & whores" but this is beyond illucid.
Surely they must know even someone with a room-temperature IQ will see right through this absurdity.
lol

Posted by: jcom972 at October 4, 2007 5:13 AM

desi_singh blathered:

If 'mother' Teresa is an example of neighbourly love, I'd rather stay far away. She collected big dollars in donations that she put in the bank and just sat on it, all the while keeping young women with kids in poverty and denied sick people medicine and basic medical care. In the mean time, engaged in a PR campaign to gather even more donations.

Thats right desi_singh, now Banerjee or Chaterjee can tell us where Mother Theresa stashed away her millions. From your nick I surmise you are one of those Hindus who show their love for Bharat Matha by picking on the dangerous RC nuns. Taking on assorted Kashmiri militants or Deobandi ideologues would of course require a set of real balls. I don't get the part where you guys are so worked up about Dalits are converting for free rice and cooking oil. Don't you have enough cash to do the same?

Posted by: ivan at October 4, 2007 5:20 AM

Profitsbeard, I'm sure that you understand who helped perpetuate the second class status for women in Christianity. In case you have forgotton it was good ole Paul, who put sexism in Christianity. It's been a struggle to overcome his dislike of women ever since.

The United States was not much better than anybody else; women suffrage wasn't enacted until 1922.

You need to visit this site:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm

100 years ago Christianity was not the same religion it is now, it has been reformed in spite if its teachings.

Posted by: Pelayo at October 4, 2007 5:58 AM

"100 years ago Christianity was not the same religion it is now, it has been reformed in spite if its teachings."

I'm going to revise that sentence:

"100 years ago Christianity in the US was not the same as it is now, it has been reformed in spite if its fundamentalist origins."

Posted by: Pelayo at October 4, 2007 6:16 AM

The next Hollywood movie will be about Christian fundamentalists flying airplanes into skyscrapers while shouting "Hail Mary".

Is'nt it about time the EPA looked at water quality in LA.

Posted by: DP111 at October 4, 2007 6:18 AM

Champ - I agree with you. Surak was wayyyyyyy out of line.

He called "mister ghost" an "ignorant bigot." Hmmm...the dictionary definition of "bigot" is : "One intolerantly devoted to his or her own prejudices or opinions." Key word: "intolerantly"

Seems to me that Surak proved himself to be the bigot. What irony!

Posted by: darcy at October 4, 2007 7:04 AM

ivan huffed and puffed:

Did you read the articles? If yes, can I have your rebuttal/thoughts on the content? Here is another one for you,

Former Catholic Sister Says Mother Teresa Is a Fraud
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/6-Jun-2007.html

Hindu's are not the only one's who have Singh as their surname, Sikhs also do.

Posted by: desi_singh at October 4, 2007 8:14 AM

I saw this particular episode of Cold Case. In fact, I watch the show every week.

Never have I seen the show expose "radical Islam." And I don't expect that to happen. Our media are lost to Western civilization.

Posted by: Always On Watch at October 4, 2007 9:20 AM

desi singh, i read the article and it's obvious that the sister didn't take the vow of poverty seriously enough. This is suppposed to show their true dedication to god by remaining in poverty and not ammassing personel material wealth to live a higher level lifestyle than the poor people you are helping. This is one of those catholic/christian things i and many people don't agree with. I think that a charity if you received donations, the money should go to eleviate the sufferings of those you are helping instead of looking at it as approval from god. all this still doesn't make mother therisa a fake or a fraud in her devotion to god and the poor.

Posted by: desidude at October 4, 2007 9:44 AM

Always_On_Watch:

There have been other episodes of Cold Case, where the psycopathic serial killer turns out to be an evangelical Christian.

Posted by: CTYankee at October 4, 2007 12:50 PM

Hi Darcy! Thanks for writing, and I agree with the "irony" you mentioned!

Posted by: champ at October 4, 2007 12:52 PM

For goodness sake, don't tell the BBC; they'd screen it the next day!

Posted by: Celsius at October 4, 2007 2:00 PM

Sorry, did I accidentally log on to "MotherTheresaWatch.org"? Or "JewsVsChristiansWatch.org"?

It's a given that not all religions of the world can agree on all topics, especially on the topic of which one is the best (or the "real one"). I'd rather not spend my time reading a debate on those topics, nor on how good "conservatives" are compared to "liberals", or "hetrosexuals" vs. "gays", or whatever other divisive arguments you can come up with to split the infidels into a bunch of smaller camps that can be more easily defeated.

You're wasting time and energy.

Posted by: special_guest at October 4, 2007 5:03 PM

special_guest:

"Liberals", or the "Left" are part of the problem. They enable Islamofascism by their dhimmitude. That is relevant.

You have a point regarding the others.

Posted by: atheling at October 4, 2007 6:21 PM

"it is well documented that no Christian in the past two thousand years ever loved their neighbor as themselves."

Isabella

That is BS, but yes it is difficult with Satan on the prowl.

Posted by: ofcourse at October 4, 2007 8:29 PM

To swerve the thread in the proper direction, the activities of the entertainment industry are pointedly self-loathing and self-degrading.

This is what happens when people with no real grounding in real-life and the world around them (also known as the left) define our entertainment. When it comes down to it, it is just the propaganda of the amoral left. I've seen too many movies where the plot is devout Christians who are hypocrites to their values.

Posted by: ofcourse at October 4, 2007 9:07 PM

Pelayo-

I prefer Galatians' (3:28) "There is neither Jew nor Gentile [Greek], neither slave nor free man, neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ" to Paul's more neurotic take, elsewhere, on Jesus's meaning.

(Nietzsche's critique of early "crosstianity" is essentially anti-Pauline, and worth a read.)

I'm an agnostic who appreciates the greatness in all profound predecessors, from Jesus and Bahu Bali to Buddha and Lao Tzu to Mary Wollstonecraft and Tom Paine.

They are all Suns in the human sky.

Posted by: profitsbeard at October 4, 2007 10:53 PM

While it's way off topic, I'd like to address the comments on Paul's attitudes towards women: most scholars now consider the misogynist verses to be later insertions by redactors. In the earliest manuscripts they are either not present, or found in different places within the text. It appears as though some "authority" circulated a letter stating that these comments should be included but as the verse numbering system hadn't been invented yet, early copyists and scribes stuck them in at different points. Hence the illogical dichomtomy of Paul commending women prophesying and praying preceding by a few verses the command that they should remain silent.

Posted by: JO3 at October 5, 2007 1:39 AM

desi dude,
It is incorrect when you say Teresa did not take her vow of poverty seriously enough. Actually, she did. Might sound contradictory but vow of poverty does not prevent the accumulation of wealth (personal wealth is a non-issue). Mantra is simple - Keep the poor, poor and go out begging for more money in their name.

The problem with Teresa is that she is posited as "nun who gave up her life for the poor", but when challenged, the folks hide behind "I believe", "I think", "what did you do" etc. or better still, ivan comes, all guns blazing, with his gauntlets (main apna vishesh tippani pitaara kholunga toh tera kachha aage geela te picche peela ho jayega).

You may continue to believe in Teresa's so called devotion to the poor but it's not the reality. Anytime you assert it in the public domain, it'll be challenged.

My last comment on this.

Posted by: desi_singh at October 5, 2007 5:50 AM

I seem to remember Jesus Christ telling gathered stone throwers who ever does not have sin among you, cast the first stone. Apparently, the Hollywood writers are unfamiliar with the word of God, go figure. After all, it's only fiction, right?

Posted by: CLL1709 at October 7, 2007 8:02 PM

I had never watched "Cold Case" before. After reading this, I decided to watch it tonight. They really seem to be going after Christians. In tonight's episode, young Amish girls go wild and one ends up dead. When the cops think the mother might have done it, one says, "She's not the first Christian to kill".

I would like to see them tackle "honour killings" in a Muslim family.

Posted by: Josephine at October 7, 2007 10:18 PM