Ummmm... Geee, Archie. Could it be because he's constantly running his mouth before he even tries to think? I seem to see a lot of that from him!

LOL! A typical tactic when actually following a thread is losing the discussion - try to change the topic! We're not discussing the Romans, or their appointed local government, or anything else in that area: it's not relevant to the point here.

Actually, you are correct in one thing: Jesus did come before the New Testament, since it was (mostly) written about Him. Fair enough.

I am curious, though: your quote: "...these Christ followers ah yes Christians are beginning to be a threat . send spies to see what they plan." Where did that come from? I mean - is it from some version of the Bible? If so, which one? There are apprently dozens of "New, Revised, Modern, Updated," etc. etc. versions out there. Is it from one of those? I can't find that quote in King James. Just wondering.

Yes, AuntiE, you're right. From Wikipedia: " John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton, KCVO, DL (10 January 1834 – 19 June 1902), known as Sir John Dalberg-Acton, 8th Bt from 1837 to 1869 and usually referred to simply as Lord Acton, was an English Catholic historian, politician, and writer. He was the only son of Sir Ferdinand Dalberg-Acton, 7th Baronet[1] and a grandson of the Neapolitan admiral Sir John Acton, 6th Baronet.[2][3] He is famous for his remark, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."[4]

Hmmmm... an interesting insight there.

Lou, my sincere apologies for the mistake. I was too hasty in reading the post, and simply didn't look closely enough. I take full responsibility for it. I should have read the post more closely. Again, please take this as a genuine and true apology.

Now, Mr. Bo. I should have known better. A known rabble-rouser, full of cheap shots and insults, with little of any worth or value. That sort of crack to a lady is pretty typical of his sort of thing. I fully expect him to respond to this post with another of his typical idiocies, therefore I shall ignore him. As a matter of fact, from now on, I will ignore any and all posts I happen to see from Bo, no matter what the subject, no matter what the comment, no matter how tasteless and vile the comment may be. That is all his comments are worth, anyway.

Hmmmm.... and... let me see. Where, exactly, do you get that particular definition? Oh! Wait! I know... the Bible! A book! Imagine that.....

Actually, Lou, I was talking about your rather blatantly rude attempt to make some sort of "move" on Rhonda. Too quote Dustin Hoffman in "Hook", "Poor form, old boy!"

Years ago, there was a series of old Science Fiction books that, among other things, espoused the concept of "Enlightened Capitalism," which was very much like this. (If you're interested, look up books by E.E. "Doc" Smith.) The idea was that, by improving the conditions of the workers, the entire economy would be improved, thereby bringing overall prosperity to the entire system.

Unfortunately, as is so often the case, such altruistic activity does not reflect real human behavior. Few corporate heads are willing to cut into their own income to improve performance levels: their
efforts are geared to improving their own "bottom line." This, then, tends to minimize profits, leading to less money available for wages, and then leading right back to the old minimum wage. Greedy turkeys. Yes, I know that's a "label!"

When did this become a pick-up forum?

Hope you don't mind if I jump in here.

I do not, in any way, shape, or form, agree with the activities of Terry Jones or his - um - "church." The so-called protests in which they partake are done with the most vile and h**eful reasons imaginable: pure hatred in differences of thought. His various rational for these activities is t***sparently false: he simply h**es that anyone could possibly think that any opinion that doesn't agree with his could be anything but wrong. Unfortunately, he seems to be able to convince a number of others that this is right. Sad.

Now - let me see here... my original point. Oh, yes. Calling him a Christian.

No. Hell no. Not even close.

A Christian, by definition in the New Testament of the Bible, espouses love, kindness, and forgiveness for all sins. Does Terry Jones embrace these values? I don't think so. That one, simple premise totally demolishes all of his reasons for his activities. He claims to be acting as a "good Christian" - by definition from the very Book he uses as his primary reference, he is not. Therefore, he is lying. Case done.

Just because someone makes a loud noise and professes to be something doesn't necessarily make it true. Terry Jones makes loud noises about being a Christian. He preaches loud sermons in his church (and elsewhere) about how he is performing Christian work. He intentionally causes cruel, disruptive, and unforgiving disruptions of various ceremonies that he personally disagrees with, not that the Bible says are wrong. He is not a Christian, by definition.

Perhaps I'm not either, by that strictest of definitions. But, then, I'm not claiming to be one, now am I?

Yes, they're "Getting Some" - more so the pity it's something that can't be cured by a simple injection! Still, though, one has to wonder; what else are they getting? What particular form of graft, bribe, or other such corruption is being handed to them, in return for wh**ever political favors are being solicited?

It's all very well to laugh and snort in derision at such activities. Let's not forget, however, what it really means. In case you forgot, it means there is corruption and graft, rampant in the system that operates our government. The people that are supposed to be representing us, that are supposed to be doing the things in government that will allow the government to operate properly; these people are stealing from us, thieving from the system, lying and c***ting from the entire system, all almost entirely to satisfy their own greed and gain.

Now. What are you going to do about it, Laughing Boy?

Well... maybe. I think many politicians, of wh**ever party, go into the arena with high hopes and ideals. However, as time goes by, they become a part of the system, finding it necessary to operate within the system to be able to get anything done, or at least that is the perception. Only a very, very few are strong enough to be able to overcome the destructive tendencies inherent in the political process. Deceptive actions, secrecy, outright lying, and other such activity become "normal", and this is what leads, inevitably, to the corruptive influences in our government.

Thank you. :-)

Okay, this is just the sort of thing I've been talking about in other posts; using negatively-connotated words to describe someone, or "labeling". Such things as "geezers on Medicare" as a descriptor for a group of people, for instance. As it happens, I and my wife both could fit into that group. I am 71, and I'm a cancer patient, living on insurance and Workman's Comp. My wife is 67, and on Social Security Disability.

I have been a licensed Aircraft Maintenance Technician for 40+ years, and I feel insulted that you arbitrarily choose to lump me into your "geezers" group. My wife worked in a large medical center for 18 years, winning Employee of the Month several times, and Employee of the Year once. She feels insulted by you for the same reason.

Why don't you partake of a little thoughtful introspection before you start with the generalized name-calling? It's poor technique in a discussion, and does nothing but make others mad and discount any real and valid points you might try to make.

To everyone else in this forum: it is obvious that Inyourface's purpose here is simply to name-call and, in general, behave like the 2-year old child we have all come to know and abhor. His comments and behavior are obviously designed to get attention by causing irritation and strife.

Therefore, I propose we treat him with the dignity he deserves; i.e., none. Ignore him. Ignore any comments he might make. Do not respond in any way to any comments, insults or otherwise, he might make. Do not comment on anything he says or does. Simply, and completely, pretend he is not there.

It is my hope that, in time, this individual will see that his methods gain him nothing, and he will become a useful and thoughtful member of this forum. Until then, though, I feel osterization is the way to deal with this sort of behavior. My final comment to Inyourface: Grow up.

I repeat - how infantile.