Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The "Left Behind" books: How the Christian Right Uses Jews and Israel.
Salon.com (via Alternet) ^ | August 2, 2002 | Michelle Goldberg

Posted on 08/04/2002 8:00:41 AM PDT by Commie Basher

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-217 next last
To: berned
You have FReepmail
81 posted on 08/04/2002 12:04:49 PM PDT by ru4liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: berned
I specifically told you I don't want to go into specific detail. I disagree with the entire premise of the books. Shall I also argue about how much cinnamon to add in a recipe for cyanide cupcakes?

Beginning with the ridiculous depiction of the sudden, silent disappearance rapture in the first book of the series the story just gets sillier from there......

Show me anything in the book that resembles this passage:

1 Thessalonians 4:16,17
"The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
82 posted on 08/04/2002 12:07:21 PM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Commie Basher
If the Palestinians had been the ones with a pivotal endtime role in our holy book rather than the Jews, the Jews would be anathema. That's what's wrong with this picture.

83 posted on 08/04/2002 12:07:43 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
I like your post. I see pagans in a "Mall of the Americas", all wearing sweatshirts that say: "Seething and Derision - it's a Pagan Thing!"
84 posted on 08/04/2002 12:09:19 PM PDT by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
I went to your personal page. So, you're a radical Zionist. That explains your partisan rage, but doesn't explain why you would object to the notion that the Jews have millions of brothers and sisters in the covenant of Abraham. I would think it would give you a sense of security, if nothing else.

Since you obviously haven't done any study on the topic, your reactions must be purely emotional, which usually means the topic threatens you in some way. I'm sorry, I fail to see how it could be threatening, as I said, it would be just the opposite.

What's your problem? Is it possible for you to put into words and communicate it clearly without the emotive baggage? If you can't, then please explain why anyone should take you seriously.

85 posted on 08/04/2002 12:14:51 PM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Aliska
If the Palestinians had been the ones with a pivotal endtime role in our holy book rather than the Jews, the Jews would be anathema. That's what's wrong with this picture.

That doesn't make sense, Aliska. Given that the Jews have such a role doesn't make the Paraguayans anathema.

86 posted on 08/04/2002 12:15:45 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: ValerieUSA
The books don't go into the spiritual mechanics of the Rapture. It takes the EVENT of the Rapture (which will be invisible to those "Left Behind") and starts the story there.

But again, you can't go into the specifics because YOU HAVE NO specific disagreements with the books. (Or else wild horses couldn't stop you from telling me them).

It appears to me that you are just wildly HOPING that the events depicted in the books don't happen (Rapture - Tribulation - Armegeddon) because in some way you FEAR them.

87 posted on 08/04/2002 12:16:17 PM PDT by berned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: berned
THAT was an ad hominem attack. Good going!

The burden of proof lies with anyone who claims the FICTIONAL series, Left Behind, is prophetic.
88 posted on 08/04/2002 12:20:22 PM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Drango
Oh, I almost forgot:

Salon continues to enlarge the subscriber base for its paid subscription offerings, including Salon Premium, as well as Salon's two online communities, Table Talk and The Well. During the June 2002 quarter, Salon added 12,700 new paid subscribers, increasing the total number of paid subscribers to its three subscription services to 47,700, of which 42,300 remain as current subscribers

A lie by omission. They added the new subscribers only because they started offering monthly subscriptions for six bucks; before you had only one choice: to ante up $30 for a full year. Also note that they have already lost a whopping 11.3% of their subscriber base due to nonrenewals. In fact, if I'm interpreting the sentence correctly, what they're actually saying is that the 11.3% drop occurred ENTIRELY in just this one quarter, which means that fully 42.5% of the people that signed up this quarter had already left for good 90 days later.

Also note that they're intentionally conflating the subscription numbers to Table Talk and the Well with the actual Salon subscribers in order to pump up their numbers. This is about as legitimate as if Newsweek included all the subscribers to the Washington Post in its numbers, just because they're both part of the same company.

Compared to the year-ago period, paid subscriptions have grown 130% as a percentage of overall revenues for Salon.

More spin for the purposes of lying. Paid subscriptions have grown 130% from a year ago because in the first quarter last year they had JUST STARTED their paid subscription crap right before the end of the quarter. Going from 10 to 23 subscribers in the course of a year would not be very encouraging, but it would still be a "growth of 130%."

"Paid subscriptions are a major priority for Salon. We're capitalizing on a new trend on the Internet and growing consumer acceptance for paid content," said O'Donnell. "We continue to aggressively promote Salon Premium, The Well and Table Talk to our large base of readers (over 3 million) each quarter."

Stupidity #1: There is no growing consumer acceptance of paid content for paid content's sake. People have always been willing to pay, as long as the content was original, extremely useful stuff that couldn't be obtained anywhere else (example, the Wall Street Journal site). But they are not going to start shelling out $30/yr or more to every single site they visit now for free. At best, they'll pick one or two sites and completely abandon all the others forever. (And almost everyone's going to end up picking their favorites from only 5 or 6 big sites that really offer a lot of bang for their buck.) Salon is not going to be one of those sites. It is a shell of its former self, with only a tiny fraction of their original editorial staff left, and 100% of their truly good writers long gone. And the simple fact is that Salon offers nothing that isn't available elsewhere for free. Ninety percent of the major newspapers and news channel sites offer far more fresh content every day with the same major liberal bias, and there's no charge for any of it. For the true hard core leftists, there's Alternet, the Village Voice, the Nation (well, they charge for some stuff), Mother Jones, tompaine.com, on and on. A lot of the people who currently have subscriptions to Salon are either doing for only because it's "for the cause" (Salon shutting down will be interpreted by the entire country as a total repudiation of their viewpoint), or because they really wanted access to one or two of Salon's really good writers, who have of course all long since left. In either case, these are not situations in which subscribers will continue paying up month after month, year after year. The ones doing it for the cause will get "donor fatigue" eventually, and the ones who were in it for the writing no longer have any reason to stick around even now. In the end, only a sizable amount of extremely high quality content will allow a publication to continue publishing in perpetuity. Salon ain't got that.

Stupidity #2: 42,300 paid subscribers out of 3 million readers? That's 1.5% of their readership who have signed up. Not something to brag about.

"While new signups are important, renewals are key to any successful subscription business. We're experiencing Salon Premium renewal rates of 66%, a vast improvement from traditional print magazines," added O'Donnell. "We believe we can improve those renewal rates to 70% plus going forward."

Without knowing the details, this statement is meaningless. A renewal rate of 66% is a death spiral if you can't generate a large number of new subscribers at the same time. It's actually a loss of fully 1/3 of your subscribers, followed by another 1/3 loss of what's left, another 1/3 loss of what's left after that, etc. Also, we have to know how many of those are the $6 monthly subscriptions and how many are the yearly subscriptions. If a new monthly subscriber decides to stick around for two more months before dumping Salon, that's a hell of a lot less meaningful than a full-year subscriber who re-ups.

89 posted on 08/04/2002 12:33:55 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Alouette; LostTribe
Tribe is a Gene Scott devotee. Have you ever watched Gene Scott on late night TV? He comes right out of the Herbert W. Armstrong World Wide Church of God cult, and the people running around, calling themselves Jews really aren't, the promises in Deuteronomy no longer apply to them, just the Anglos who are the descendents of the lost 10 tribes. Watch or listen to a tape of "Dr." Gene Scott some time and arrive at your own conclusions as to his sanity.

And if you disagree with Lost_Tribes, the name-calling and dancing graphics will start in, because LT can't take any disbelief of his views. He can get very obnoxious.

90 posted on 08/04/2002 12:34:49 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: ValerieUSA
I stand by what I said.

You began this "conversation" by attacking the books without going into one word of WHY.

I called on you to be specific. I did this four seperate times. You could never BE specific no matter how many times I asked you to be.

I conclude from this that you are baselessly attacking the books because you FEAR what is in them.

91 posted on 08/04/2002 12:35:06 PM PDT by berned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: zhabotinsky
Amen! And I don't hold any Jews any more culpable in Christ's death than I hold my self and all the people of the World culpable. Unlike Bill Clinton (regardless of what he said last week) and his Salon dot com buddies, I think it is America and Israel against the world right now. The day we turn our backs on Israel is the day we will face the tribulation.
92 posted on 08/04/2002 12:40:41 PM PDT by AdA$tra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: berned
That is ridiculous. You insist on getting personal. I refuse to debate someone so hysterical.
My criticism of the books is not an "attack." Your continual mischaracterization of my posts is reason enough for me to not bother with any more to you.
93 posted on 08/04/2002 12:41:51 PM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: berned
Berned, I was waiting for you to start spwewing your anti-Catholic venom. I had a dream about you. Actaully about bones, and how one bone doesn't make up the entire body as on book does not make of the word of God. the Word is incomplete if you only read Revelation. Not to mention that your interpretation of Revelation is flawed.
94 posted on 08/04/2002 12:45:03 PM PDT by AdA$tra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AdA$tra
Not to mention that your interpretation of Revelation is flawed.

Specifically, how so?

95 posted on 08/04/2002 12:46:50 PM PDT by berned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ValerieUSA
Your continual mischaracterization of my posts is reason enough for me to not bother with any more to you.

That, and the fact that you have no articulatable ideas.

96 posted on 08/04/2002 12:48:19 PM PDT by berned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: xJones
>...And if you disagree with Lost_Tribes, the name-calling and dancing graphics will start in, because LT can't take any disbelief of his views. He can get very obnoxious.

Uh, oh, here comes another weasel slinking out of the woods!

The answer is the same, put your money where your mouth is.  My position is amply clear.  It's on the table and open for discussion.  If you don't have the intelligence to argue the facts, please don't bother throwing rocks. You have already lost.

But if you wish to engage in intelligent dialogue, please click on my LostTribe Profile below and read the 3-MINUTE HISTORY.  That's where this discussion begins, and ends.
 
 

97 posted on 08/04/2002 12:50:59 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: xJones
He comes right out of the Herbert W. Armstrong World Wide Church of God cult

The Worldwide Church of God has repudiated the "Anglo-Saxons are Israelites" theory. From their website:

"Today, after having carefully researched the tenets and history of its belief that the United States and Britain are the descendants of the ancient Israelite tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, the Worldwide Church of God no longer teaches this doctrine. While it may be an interesting theory, there is simply a lack of credible evidence, either in the biblical account or the historical record, to support a conclusion regarding the modern identity of the lost ten tribes of Israel. We recognize that there were hermeneutical and historical inaccuracies in the Church's past understanding of this issue."

98 posted on 08/04/2002 12:52:59 PM PDT by Alouette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: xJones
You're mixing up historical information that traces the path of the Northern Kindom of Israel, and the implications that they are here and will rediscover themselves, recombining with the Southern Kingdom (Judah+parts), with the so-called "replacement" theory that the lost tribes are the heirs to the covenant and the Jews are not.

Can you please show me where losttribe supports this theory? I've read his personal page, his posts and teh book by Capt, and see none of that.

99 posted on 08/04/2002 12:58:30 PM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

Comment #100 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-217 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson