Posted on 11/07/2004 4:19:27 AM PST by stockpirate
Edited on 11/07/2004 4:26:32 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
JOHN Kerry's liberalism had something to do with his defeat. Hence so did this: By Jan. 20, 2009, all the elected presidents for 44 consecutive years will have come from three Southern states
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
>>>The media tries to help them by attempting to persuade us that what we are seeing isn't really what it is.<<<
Exactly!
<><
Jesus said to Nicodemus: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God...ye must be born again." ~ John 3:3,5,7
<><
A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic...or else he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either Jesus was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool...or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that option open to us.
~ C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
<><
Could someone refresh my memory: Didn't FDR have 3 terms and, if so, how did he do it? Thanks.
<><
President Bush will be in office until Jan. 20, 2009.
Let us hope so, but it doesn't account for the statement: "By Jan. 20, 2009, all the elected presidents for 44 consecutive years will have come from three Southern states — Texas, Arkansas, Georgia — and Southern California."
44 consecutive (presidential) years, as of 1/20/09, goes back to 1964 and up to 2008. He seems to be anticipating that a Southerner or SoCal native will win in 2008. If he's that prescient, let him narrow it down ;)
He can't do math? It should be 45 consecutive years. 1/20/1964 to 1/20/2009.
Ooops. LBJ was sworn in 1/20/1965 after being elected in '64. Are we counting when he was sworn in 11/22/63?
Actually, he was elected four times to the Presidency, 1932,1936,1940,1944. He died shortly after his inauguration in 1945.
Yes, that's right! Do you know how he did it (and can we do it again)!? Wasn't there some special arrangement made because of WWII...or something?
<><
I believe that was before term limits were put in place.
Prairie
I guess we are just reading differently, not so much counting differently. As I read it, if he goes up to Jan. 20, 2009 to make his point about 44 years, then he needs the winner of 2008 to make his point; and without that winner he's out on a limb. Why not just say that on Election Eve 2008 there will have been 44 years...? If he likes that number so much. It's a quiddity and I kind of wish I hadn't brought it up :)
Oh dadgummital! *SIGH* It was a nice dream, tho short-lived.
<><
"Jesus said to Nicodemus: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God...ye must be born again." ~ John 3:3,5,7"
I suspect a good many of the liberal 'Christians' believe that good works will get them into heaven. You can hear it when they talk about gay marraiges.
>>>I suspect a good many of the liberal 'Christians' believe that good works will get them into heaven.<<<
You said it. I'm also amazed that some think it's Jesus plus [fill in the blank]. As if Christ's work on the cross and the power of His name are not quite enough. It's as if they're hedging their bets or something!
<><
I don't know if I would call it hedging. It's like they want to cherry pick the scriptures, adhering to those they personally agree with and ignoring those they find inconvienient wanting to define good in their own terms. But they fail to realize that they are applying the world's standards to judge goodness.
This goes to the essence of liberalism, they want to re-make the world, including the rules, according to their own preferences, not God's. They don't even realize that this is the same mistake that Adam made thinking that he too could become God.
>>>This goes to the essence of liberalism, they want to re-make the world, including the rules, according to their own preferences, not God's.<<<
Change agents for utopianism.
>>>They don't even realize that this is the same mistake that Adam made thinking that he too could become God.<<<
Some ideas from "His Infernal Majesty: Satan's 10 Most Believable Lies," by Dave Breese, including my 2 cents....
Satan still whispers to us as he did to Eve: "Did God REALLY say?" Casting doubt on the Truth of God's Word. One can almost imagine Satan saying it in a mocking, don't-be-a-silly-goose tone of voice (a tone of voice I've heard from more than one leftie). Satan establishes a foothold in Eve's mind -- i.e. God is a liar. Satan indirectly suggests that, since God's word isn't Truth, then maybe there's another system of Truth. The subtle suggestion is that Truth can be redefined. The question that has haunted us from the beginning "What is Truth?" started here. So did the false idea of an alternative belief system.
Here's the next lure, securing Satan's position in Eve's mind: "God doesn't want you to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He doesn't want your eyes to be opened, knowing good and evil, because then you would be as God." Satan is suggesting that God is holding us back, that Eve can take matters into her own hands and direct her own destiny once she has the knowledge that God is withholding, and that eating the fruit and obtaining its pleasure/knowledge now (instant gratification) is preferable to an eternity with God. These things are implied "benefits" to eating the forbidden fruit.
In the Garden, there was one prohibition against hundreds of permissions, pleasures and positives, but Satan pushes the idea that God is a moral tyrant who cannot be pleased.
Duke, there was a time when I would have thot all this stuff about Satan was complete hogwash, hocus pocus. But, now I look around at literally the same evil tactics and strategies that have the same results as it has from day one and throughout history, and I know that this is Truth. Show me a more plausible explanation.
Thanks for listening, kiddo.
<><
"In the Garden, there was one prohibition against hundreds of permissions, pleasures and positives, but Satan pushes the idea that God is a moral tyrant who cannot be pleased."
I don't think that Satan ever said: "God is a moral tyrant who cannot be pleased." It's more like Satan said that you don't have to please God after you become god yourself. IOW, why bother pleasing God when you can please yourself, satisfying all your whims and desires. It's the belief that you can be the master of the universe and not have to acknowledge that there is one greater than yourself.
"Duke, there was a time when I would have thot all this stuff about Satan was complete hogwash, hocus pocus. But, now I look around at literally the same evil tactics and strategies that have the same results as it has from day one and throughout history, and I know that this is Truth. Show me a more plausible explanation."
I too, was young once. Perhaps that's why I cannot offer a more plausible explanation. I understand that admitting God's sovereignity can be a stumbling block.
"Thanks for listening, kiddo."
Any time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.