A couple of Internet Petitions for G.W. and for the Mayor of Jerusalem. Dubya’s ain’t so bad, just a general call to arms, finishing up with:
Can’t hardly argue with that, an end to senseless violence and bloodshed is always laudable, but then you wonder, “What does he mean by ‘keep Jerusalem free’?”
Prepare to cringe.
Geez, Jerry, enter the real world, willya? :rolleyes: Here’s a quarter, go down to Wal-Mart and BUY YOURSELF A CLUE.
Nobody else in the world has the capacity to make me go, “Hanh?” quite the way Falwell does, with quite the same feelings of rising hysteria. Does he even read his own stuff? Oh, yes, Jerry, that’s right–ever since 4000 B.C., “Jew and Gentile alike” have recognized that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. :rolleyes: Never mind that in 4000 B.C. the entire world was only 4 years old, according to Bishop Ussher. October 23, 4004 B.C., wasn’t it, Jerry? When God said, “Let there be light”?
So how was there even an “Israel”, let alone a city named “Jerusalem” to be its capital?
I don’t think “Archaeology” is on Jerry’s charts. Neither is “History”, for that matter.
Aww, it wasn’t meant as bile… heck, this is the pit. My reaction was fairly mild.
And admit it, given the context of the post, it does sound kinda stupid.
(Even though it was just an innocent mistake. Heck, we’re all prone to an occassional typo. I’m sure Abe is usually a real fart smella.)
4000 BC - ~ 1500 BC: Israel doesn’t exist. Jerusalem either doesn’t exist or is insignificant.
~ 1500 BC - ~ 1100 BC: Jerusalem exists, but isn’t the capital of much of anything.
~ 1100 BC: David conquers Jerusalem, establishes his capital there.
~ 1100 BC - 70 AD: Glossing over the distinction between Israel and Judah, and ignoring the relatively brief Babylonian exile, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
70 AD - 1948 AD: Israel exists only in the hearts and minds of the faithful.
1948 - ? (what, about 10-15 years ago?) Israel’s capital was Tel Aviv.
? - present: Israel’s capital is Jerusalem.
So Falwell’s off by about 4800 years. Only 80% wrong - that’s pretty good for Jerry. :rolleyes:
I suspect Jerry doesn’t really care what Bush or Olmert think of the petitions, but is more concerned with what his followers think of him writing them to begin with.
From this lone incident, with the usual generalities added, Falwell does the usual evangelical pity party:
Yeah, one incident in which the ‘Jesus’ is bleeped out in one fraction of the country, equals ‘banishment’. Sure, Jer.
Not to mention, that sort of “thank you thank you Jesus, I lost five pounds!” isn’t exactly what you’d call religious speech. Falwell should thank ABC for pulling that trivializing bit of fluff from the show, IMHO.
Nice job, RT, except that Jerusalem is nothing of any importance, provincial capital at best and often not even that, for 70 years of Exile (as you note) plus about 150 years of Persian rule and about 100 of Seleucid rule before the Maccabees revolt against the latter.
However, it’s a minor nit as regards your general point: Falwell’s historical sense is fully as well developed as is his theological.
BTW, DDG, do you feel up to a thread in GD defining and explaining fundamentalism as you understand it? Around here, it seems to be the convenient term to drag out and use as a slam against any conservative Christian with whose views you disagree (and I too am guilty of this). Having a vague awareness of the origins of the term and how it’s been perverted by the LaHaye/Falwell brigade of demongogues, I’d be interested in why you feel inclined to hold to it and what it means to you.
Interesting idea, Poly. I was considering starting a GD “Come witness to Duck Duck Goose!” thread. Fundie-ism certainly isn’t very becoming to such a pleasant, rational person, so I figure it’s time for her to explore some alternative theologies. Besides, I’ve even seen her use the f-word once or twice lately, so you know she’s got to be rethinking the whole fundamentalism thing.
But, DDG, I remember when Wildest Bill actually got us all to agree that we shouldn’t use the word “Fundie” because it’s usually meant as a slur, and not as a shortening of fundamentalist.
Which, okay, I’m cool with that. I’m down with members of any group not being addressed by a name they find offensive. That’s good.
The problem, for me, is the word “fundamentalist.” It’s long. And it’s easily misspelled. Which means that any post where I want to address the fundamentalist viewpoint has to be spell-checked, then re-spell-checked, until I finally…ooh, look at the shiny thing.
