He’s aware, too. No need to apologize.
Oh, yeah, glad to have ya, Jake.
lol, thanks guys
tries to think of something thread-relevant to add
Nope, still stuck at “what a dick”.
Hey, you are already getting praised from Elucidator; no need to brag about yourself!
A favor, Shodan. I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt to anyone, but my politics and my theology cramp my attempting to do that here. For the benefit of those of us who are “on the other side,” and considering the context he quoted it in, the man’s politics, and his religious beliefs, would you explicate what you understood him to have meant by the quote?
That’s not intended as snarky – if you’re willing to give him a defense, I’m willing to listen. I admit that I saw it as pretty much a case of “They got what they deserved” in a very Pharisaical tone – but I’m willing to be shown otherwise.
I’m going to play devil’s advocate for a moment. Perhaps he was warning Christians that they must respond with true charity to those in need, or their faith, and the false foundations it rests upon, mean nothing.
Gosh, I hope he wasn’t saying the tsunami was a punishment from God, and that, by implication, our country could be next. If so, he’s an odious fool.
I suspect he used some software that searches Bible text for “water+disaster” and picked what sounded most impressive.
If that were true then just saying something like, “[You] must respond with true charity to those in need, or [your ] faith mean[s] nothing.”
That would get the message across with no possibility of misunderstanding. DeLay is a politician who should be able to say pretty exactly what he means if he wants to.
I think it’s pretty fucking obvious what he meant and it wasn’t about about any fucking charity. He thinks the Tsunami was God’s vengence on heathens. That’s what he meant. That’s all that he meant and everybody knows it.
If it was about Americans being charitable let him say so. Let him say out loud that any suggestion that the tsunami was God’s vengence on heathens is completely asinine and off base. Let him say out loud that the victims were innocent.
Until he does so, we can only assume that his intention was exactly what it appears to be- sanctimonious gloating over a sick perception of Divine wrath.
Gosh, no ‘We don’t have enough information’ when it comes to Delay? I am shocked.
:rolleyes:
We have PLENTY of information when it comes to Delay.
It’s sad that anyone would twist the teaching of Jesus that way, by reading that passage in such a childishly literal manner, as if it might describe current events as God’s punishment. The house built on sand in this parable is obviously a metaphor for those who outwardly profess their religion, but really lack true faith. This “house” might look good, but when the waters test it, its weak, sandy foundation is utterly exposed. As the passage clearly states, it describes those people who listen, but do not act, on the teachings of Jesus.
Since the teachings of Jesus emphasize loving others and showing charity to all, it’s clear that this scriptural passage is targeting precisely those hypocritical “Christians” who would proclaim that the victims of this disaster are being punished by God, and who would likewise justify their lack of charity by this flimsy excuse.
Tell me, how do I get this power to read Tom DeLay’s mind? I want to be able to know that he is talking about the Tsunami and not making a refernece to the importance of following Jesus’ words at a Prayer Service. How do you do this?
I think Mr Babbington pretty much nails what DeLay’s aim is.
For God’s sake. I know the guy might be a jerk in general, but does that mean he can never think or say or do anything worthwhile, even in exceptional circumstances?
I don’t know much about the bible, but the general drift of the passage he chose seems to run against the nasty intent most of you are imputing. It says that doing God’s will (whatever that means) is more important than just flagrantly aligning yourself with Jesus. I know it mentions floods and all, but isn’t it possible that’s only the reason this particular verse popped into his mind?
It seems very rude to interpret what someone says in the worst possible way without clear evidence that this was their actual intention.
Let him say so himself.
Let’s assume for a moment that we have completely misread the Bugman, and his sole intention was to encourage fellow believers to give generously. (It’s a leap, I know.)
Someone would have pointed out to him by now that his words could have been misconstrued to mean that the heathens got what they deserved. This is such a despicable sentiment that he would have been on the airwaves dissuading people of that notion almost immediately.
But not the Bugman. This was one of those moves that is so beautifully thought out that you almost have to admire it. The vagueness of the statement leaves it so that Delay’s more reasonable supporters can interpret it in a less despicable way, but his fellow loonies know exactly what he’s trying to say. Meanwhile, when his opponents object, Delay and his supporters can say, “You’re just offended by hearing someone read from God’s word,” and take the discussion off into why the Democrats want to outlaw the Bible.
I’ve read the pubbie posts here with little less than dismay. I can understand, to an extent, how certain ideological differences manage to persist in a world purportedly inhabited by a preponderance of sane individuals, but…Come. On. Delay is a veritable monster, for the sake of fuck, and it’s not like this particular display of sociopathic religious chauvinism is anything new or out-of-character. Even Newt fucking Gingrich was held accountable for his failures, and Delay makes Newt look like Santa Claus, for Christ’s sake. What the hell is it that makes the Republicans want this bastard on their side? I mean, it’s not like you people would have much to lose by acknowledging the bloody obvious maybe once every few months or so, and see this fucker for the malignant prick he is.
Even if we were to assume for the moment that DeLay was not being a vicious, smug, sanctimonious ass when he chose this quote, he’s still an ass.
If the intended implication was, “the heathens got what they deserve,” he is an ass.
If the implication was something kinder and gentler, and he just failed to take even two minutes to realize how his choice of biblical passages would strike the world outside of his Christian cohort, he is still an ass.
He put the bookmark in the wrong place. Shoulda started reading at the previous chapter, the one where Jesus says, don’t get up in public and make an ass out of yourself so people will see how religious you are.
Read my first post in the thread.
Regards,
Shodan