Recent Comments

1. about 23 hours ago on Clay Jones

   Or when the same “prophet” keeps doing it. He makes a “calculation” from hidden numerical clues in the Bible about the end of the world or the Rapture or something.

   Then he raises a ton of money, and all the followers gather in a field on the designated night and wait to be lifted into heaven.

   Then when it doesn’t happen, he goes back to the drawing board, recalculates from the numbers, finds his mistake, re-sets the Day of Doom to a new date a couple of years hence, raises a ton more money, and the same thing happens.

   Wash, rinse, repeat. All the way to the bank.

2. 2 days ago on Clay Jones

   As with the interpretative reading of any of the great legends from a wide range of mythologies, from Greek to Viking to Mayan, I have no problem with those who read the tales of Bible lore and mythology metaphorically, like fables, morality tales or parables.

   My point is addressed only to those who do, in fact, read the Bible as being literally factual. For those who do not, the point is not directed at them. As I noted in providing the link to my web article on the Bible, I find much of value and inspiration in the Bible, as I do in other compilations of ancient wisdom and lore.

   You are correct that the original tellers of these tales meant them allegorically, not literally, and there are many today who do the same.

   But, sadly, there are good many people, growing in number, who do read the Bible literally, like a book of history or science, and it is them that my point is addressed.

3. 3 days ago on Clay Jones

   Your account is quite good; accurate. Just to add a bit … Yes, the first two chapters of Genesis contain one of the most glaring direct contradictions in the Bible: the sequence of creation.

   In Chapter One, males and females are created together, and animals are created before humans. In Chapter Two, the man, Adam, is created first and, when god observes him to be lonely, creates animals to be his companions. This proves unsatisfactory, so god creates the woman who apparently is much better received.

   As for Lilith, it goes back to the origins of the Bible. The early books were essentially plagiarized with modifications from earlier accounts, which accounts for the hodgepodge of contradictory accounts in the same book.

   While Lilith does not appear in the modern versions of the Bible (there are references to her in some early Hebrew texts of Isaiah), she originated from Sumerian myths that predate the Bible, generally as Adam’s first wife who turned out to be rather free spirited and difficult to control (making her a popular feminist icon) particularly from the Gilgamesh texts, and was popular in Jewish writings and lore around 500 BCE.

   http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/the-blasphemy-of-bibleolatry/

4. 3 days ago on Clay Jones

   The Constitution does not reference marriage, which would leave it to states.

   The Bible does, indeed, have many references to marriage. If you have a digital Bible, you can do a search on terms such as “marry” or “marriage” or “wedding” and find many references throughout both the Old and New Testaments.

   And in fact we see, through the Bible, the evolution of marriage, from a polygamous institution in the Old Testament, with rules for who you can and can’t marry, to a mostly monogamous institution in the New Testament.

5. 3 days ago on Clay Jones

   Traditional marriage?

   For most of recorded human history around the world, and especially the Biblical variety, “traditional marriage” has meant one man with multiple underage prepubescent females of the same ethnic tribe, as a property agreement in arranged marriages in exchange for a dowry (possibly goats, cows and sheep), maintaining “dominion” over these wives in the same way as his herds, flocks and other livestock.

   Marrying a divorced person was definitely out, though marrying your brother’s widow (in addition to the wives you already have) was way cool. (Deuteronomy 25:5-6)

   And if you want to follow strictly the Biblical definition of marriage, it also means that an unmarried rape victim must be forced to marry her rapist after her rapist pays 50 shekels (about $10) to her father (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

   Fortunately, marriage has been EVOLVING and being redefined for millennia.

   Until now, however, there has not been a precedent for a Biblical definition for a woman (a man, maybe, yes, but not a woman) engaging in threesomes, moresomes, pool boys, tantric sex gurus, fitness gym managers and more.

   That would have made even Solomon (and his 700 wives and 300 snuggle buddies, I mean “friends with benefits,” I mean CONCUBINES) blush!

   http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/christianity-and-culture/

6. 3 days ago on Clay Jones

   Only two genders?

   Actually, according to Genesis (for the Bible literalists) — a text written by and for primitive sheep herders and fishermen who didn’t know where the sun went at night — there is only ONE gender: MAN.

   Eve? That was just a man, created from a rib.

   Why would anyone trust a rib creature to lecture us about gender?

   http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/the-blasphemy-of-bibleolatry/

7. 4 days ago on Clay Jones

   They have gotten so used to dealing with low-information, low-IQ voters, that they project too much onto too many, as well as underestimating the impact of obvious voter suppression.

   Other than those on the extreme fringes, voters hate obvious cheating and they can see right through obvious attempts to prevent eligible voters from exercising their lawful franchise.

   The number of voters who can establish their credentials and, especially in the post-pandemic age, are willing to vote in person, will greatly offset the number of those whose ballots are suppressed.

   But in the meantime, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act must be enacted to shore up the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and bring it into compliance with the wrongly-decided cases that gutted so much of that landmark civil rights legislation.

8. 4 days ago on Clay Jones

   The ones who need to be investigated for treason, sedition, domestic terrorism and assassination threats are Ron Johnson, Cancún Cruz and Josh Hawley from the senate, as well as the House members who gave reconnaissance tours to terrorists (lookin’ at you, Louis “Asparagus” (look it up) Gohmert, Gym “Pedophile Protector” Jordan, Matt “drunk driver” Gaetz, Lauren “High School dropout” Boebert, Marjorie Taylor “Jewish Space Lasers” Greene and Paul Gosar, whose brothers and sisters campaigned against him).

   The good news is that the Department of Justice will soon be headed by Merrick Garland, who earned early acclaim as the investigator and prosecutor of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols in the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building domestic terrorist bombing, carried out by alumni of the same domestic terrorist seditionists still trying to overthrow our democratic republic.

   Merrick Garland got ’em before, and he will get ’em again.

   And for once, Garland and Mitch McConnell (not that he is needed in the current confirmation) will be on the same side.

   Merrick Garland hates traitorous domestic terrorists.

   McConnell hates Donald Trump (no matter how delicately he tries to walk the tightrope with Trump’s base), who he rightly blames for costing him his position as senate majority leader by booting two easy Georgia senate runoff seats that would have been easy wins in low-turnout, post-Holiday runoffs, without Trump tantrums, telling voters their votes wouldn’t count and phone calls pressuring election officials to manufacture fake votes out of thin air.

9. 9 days ago on Clay Jones

   There can be no greater irony than what happened in today’s confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland’s nomination to become Attorney General:

   Ted Cruz questioning Merrick Garland about integrity.

10. 13 days ago on Mike Luckovich

    Conservatives lied, people died.

    Their system failed so now they are trying to blame others, even if they have to straight-up lie.

    AOC didn’t cause it.

    Windmills didn’t cause it (also don’t cause cancer).

    What failed was trying to privatize public resources for the purpose of evading appropriate regulatory oversight that worked in other places that have much harsher weather, including other parts of Texas (El Paso and Lubbock) that have the same weather, but which are not included in the Texas system.