So who’s Full of Baloney?


Faith-Evidence-Unseen

John R. Houk

© August 3, 2014

 

Bryan originally commented to a post on my NCCR blog entitled, “The New Marxist Infiltration.” I originally posted this on April 1, 2013 (yep April Fool’s Day). Commenter Bryan began posting his two cents on July 18, 2014. We have interacted confrontationally through his last comment (as far as of this post) on July 29, 2014. To read all the comments go to the original post. I am responding starting with selected quotes from Bryan’s last comment. Evidently Bryan has grown weary of commenting because the reply button on his last comment is unavailable. So I am actually posting this to appear on his July 24, 2014 comment. If you go to NCCR to see my reply it may seem a bit out of place.

 

 

Bryan:

 

“A true Left-Wing propagandist, you say? Where did you deduce that from? “

 

John:

 

The answer is simple: It is true.

 

Bryan:

 

“I haven’t been writing any propaganda here, nor am I the one with a pseudo-political blog. All I have done is point out that your opinions are simply being rehashed from sources that are biased, prejudiced, and therefore unreliable, and I have expressed how damaging such blind obedience can be. In fact, I haven’t been preaching any specific religion or political ideology. For all you know, I might be a conservative, a Republican and/or a Christian myself, but your blatant and inexcusable ignorance have conditioned you into assuming what I am, and what my motivations are, without checking your facts; the very thing that I accused you of in writing this article.”

 

John:

 

Actually my opinions are my own. What you call “rehashed” I call agreement. If you don’t agree with me I don’t have a problem with that. The 1st Amendment definitely provides you that right. You claim haven’t been “preaching,” yet my so-called “blatant ignorance” is derived from your own words written in your first criticism:

 

“People like you really give Christians and conservative voters a bad name. You’re so preoccupied with trying to frighten the uninformed; using misinterpreted information, taken out of context, in an attempt to “factualize” your opinions and manipulate people into your corner. You, like so many, just want everyone to share your points of view, and any who object or differ in their opinions, are labeled as un-American, Marxist sympathizers, or atheistic, baby-killing, sinners seeking to repress your religious rights–despite the Christian Right’s use of lobbyists and manipulation of the Supreme Court to force everyone to comply with their values whether everyone agrees with them or not. Frankly, I find such blatantly fascist thinking to be far more damaging to society than a few Socialistic programs designed to improve the country as a whole which are not centered around simply pleasing Christians. The Bible is not the only book in the world, and it would behoove you and your readers to rely on more than a religious tome for their opinions.”

 

In your first criticism you displayed your point on the political spectrum the accusation of “… uninformed ; using misinterpreted information” certainly demonstrates you are not a Conservative and not a Bible believing Christian. Such accusations with the claim that if the source is Conservative then it is erroneous, is simply an ad hominem to misdirect readers to believe non-Conservative sources are reliable. Looking at the continuous lies and obfuscation of investigation from Obama simply proves that Conservative data is more reliable just not convenient for Leftist idealists. And trust me if Conservative and Christian Right activists didn’t lobby, that would leave Congress and the Courts to listen to Left Wing lobbyists who desire to transform America away from Constitutional Originalism and the influence of Christianity in America’s history and Founding. If you are a Biblical Christian the Bible is the ONLY book. Yep, that is my opinion; nevertheless there are many in agreement with me. Just like there are Muslims who swear by the Quran or Left Wingers influenced (wittingly or unwittingly) by “Das Kapital”.

 

Bryan:

 

“And additionally, you have evaded backing up your opinions by trying to distract me with personal attacks. In my experience, this is the juvenile and desperate tactic of one who is incapable of articulating their own convictions, because, in truth, they have none. Instead, you have handed over the yoke of your intellect and joined the sheep; relying on being given your opinions instead of ruminating objectively and forming your own conclusions.”

 

John:

 

Hmmm… I find it interesting that you find my initial comment to your first comment as “personal attack”:

 

Spoken like a true Left Wing propagandist that can’t accept reality in favor of the myth of Marxist Utopianism. Never believe the disinformation of Left oriented blogs, atheist pundits, Christian-haters and their ilk. Bryan just because it is Conservative does not mean it is not scholarly.”

 

Although I didn’t use your words, “…un-American, Marxist sympathizers, or atheistic, baby-killing, sinners…” I do concur that critics of American Exceptionalism, political ideologies Left of Center, atheists and baby-killers (i.e. pro-abortion people) represent the opposite of the American Way. Here’s some good old fashioned infantile non-intellectualism for you – think the man of steel: Truth, Justice and the American Way. You can only regard this as a personal attack if you good with anti-Americanism, Marxist-Socialist principle, atheism, abortionists and people that justify a non-Biblical lifestyle. If you are good with that then I guess I personally attacked you. I am a fan of objectivity but I am a larger fan of Grace by Faith. “Grace by Faith” is absolutely subjective and places one’s belief system on what is unseen (not objectively provable) than that which is seen (objective provable evidence). I have formed my conclusions from ruminating on God’s Word in the Holy Bible. I realize objectively you consider that my opinion; nonetheless I consider the Bible Truth and Reality. Here’s some blind faith slavery for you to ruminate on (sorry, can’t help it):

 

8 This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. (Joshua 1: 8 NKJV)

 

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5: 17-19 NKJV)

 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it.

 

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1: 1-5, 14 NKJV)

 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,[a] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.”[b]

 

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1: 16-22 NKJV)

 

16 Therefore we do not lose heart. Even though our outward man is perishing, yet the inward man is being renewed day by day. 17 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, is working for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory, 18 while we do not look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporary, but the things which are not seen are eternal. (2 Corinthians 4: 16-18 NKJV)

 

Bryan if I have handed over the yoke of my intellect and joined the sheep, I am good with that. I am one of the sheep that has chosen to follow the Good Shepherd:

 

 1 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. 2 But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 Yet they will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” 6 Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

 

7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me[a] are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly. (John 10: 1-10 NKJVbut really should read entire chapter)

 

Bryan:

 

“Like your blissful peers, your only recourse, when confronted with dissension, is to lash out in an effort to deviate from the point. Thus, maintiaining [sic] (in your own mind, anyway) that you hold the high ground; that you are right and the other is wrong. This is nothing but a tiresome exercise in futility, and one which I refuse to take any more part in.

 

I hope that one day you will mature and be able to think for yourself, but until then, “baa-baa””

 

John:

 

Come on Bryan … Talk about deviating from the point and presenting a personal attack. This is what I meant by Left Wing propaganda. Your refutation is a futility in disinformation followed by the classic Liberal “… I refuse to take any more part in.” Followed by your closing sentence calling immature because I see more facts in Conservative talking points and more truth in Christ finishing with the classic sheeple pejorative of “baa-baa”.

 

Now if that isn’t the height of Left Wing hypocrisy then I will take the moral high ground and pray for you.

 

JRH 8/3/14

Please Support NCCR

 

 

Author: oneway2day

I am a Neoconservative Christian Right blogger. I also spend a significant amount of time of exposing theopolitical Islam.

5 thoughts on “So who’s Full of Baloney?”

  1. I left the following comment on the article in question as well:

    “Ignoring this circular contest of who is more credible, I’ll give you some of my own conclusions:

    In a church, people donate or tithe money into a collective account for the use and benefit of that church community and for the global community of that particular denomination. Parishioners donate their time in an effort to improve the church and improve the individuals who attend. They work in the surrounding communities for the benefit of the less fortunate. They travel to surrounding areas and other countries to spread their Word so that more church communities will be formed, and the global collective of their Faith will grow. All of this they claim for the benefit of one another, and for mankind, without the expectation of gaining status or accumulating wealth. Seeking to create a Utopia free from the evils of greed, where war no longer exists because the wicked no longer rule. Where everyone shares the same morals and laws, where happiness abounds, and mankind prospers in a humble equilibrium.

    Marxism too expresses this ideal, but when Marx & Engels and Lenin & Trotsky wrote and strove for it, they did so at a time when selfish men corrupted religion (I.e. Rasputin) who manipulated aristocracy who, in turn, ruled by their class and by their selfish interests and ran entire nations into the ground. Marxists of the day singled out religion as the culprit and sought to do away with it entirely; an extreme and unpopular aspiration, perhaps even more in today’s world. This, in part, is why so many are frightened of Marxism. Upper classes too fear losing what they have, what they feel they have earned and deserve. They feel a sense of elitism and superiority in what they have accumulated and think that an equal distribution of resources, and an equal share in labor and responsibility will be the downfall of society because no one can profit more than another.

    But I find too much alike in Christian and Marxist philosophy. They both strive for a global community of equality and mutual effort; of selflessness and collective achievement; of a lack of material accumulation and a focus on universal improvement. Community churches being an example of this idealism.

    However, one cannot fail to see how Christianity has also played a damaging role in the condition of country and the world. There is a staggering amount of selfishness, greed, coercion, hate, spiteful rhetoric, violence, oppression and libel on the part of so-called “Christian interest groups” and on the part of a few churches in the US and elsewhere. Such behavior seems, to me anyway, to be counter to Biblical philosophy and, as you put it, a “biblical lifestyle”.

    And that brings me to another thought, from your “only book”:

    John 13:34-35 New International Version (NIV), [although I think the entire chapter would be appropriate]:

    (34) “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. (35) By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

    I cannot find anywhere in the Bible where Jesus said that Christians must be arrogant and hate and oppress, coerce and use fear to ensure that mankind shares the same morality. After all, how can one claim to live by truth and justice and morality through force. But I suppose that such actions are also similar to early Marxism; believing that change can only be achieved through violence and revolution. If this is the “moral high ground” of which you speak, then I leave you to it, and ask that you not waste your prayers on me, but save them for yourself.”

    John,

    I find it interesting that you should need to post a separate article about our confrontation here. I haven’t disabled any reply button; I do not even see an option to do so. I believe you simply see yourself as a victor with a need to tout your success for validation from your peers Are you hoping to embarrass me by this? At any rate, if you wish to continue in this debate, whether here or on the original article, feel free to do so. But I have seen more than enough commentary in your articles, your “About” page, and from your followers to conclude the following:

    You are not interested in truth, living a biblical lifestyle, or curing American society of its shortcomings. What you are interested in is spouting propaganda for Christian elitism, espousing anti-Christian conspiracy theories, preaching and supporting hate, bigotry, warmongering and religion-based patriotism, disguised as righteous profundity. Your opinions lack credibility, you are incapable of supporting them when confronted, and your remarks are impotent and lacking in any apparent cohesion or mindfulness. All you seem interested in is being heard and getting a pat on the back from your peers. If I am full of baloney for expecting you to be able to support your opinions with more than self-assuredness and a few verses from the Bible, then so be it.

    Bryan

    Like

    1. The reply button to your comment did not work. Frankly I wasn’t sure if you did that or if WordPress designed comments that way. I found it annoying which ever the case. I apologize for any false accusation pertaining to the reply button.

      As to the rest … I am not as interested in spouting propaganda as you put as in defending the Christian faith and the American way as intended by America’s Founding Fathers. I realize it is my opinion but when attempt to discredit that by merely proclaiming the sources are Conservative ergo unreliable is the propaganda.

      Sure I love a pat on a back. I am willing to bet you do as well. Nonetheless engaging in this conversation shows my willingness to confront disagreement just as much as a pat on the back. indeed you are quite civil as opposed to many critics of Conservative and Christians who get lost in being stood up to and begin engaging in moronic profanity.

      At any rate, be blessed Bryan,

      John R. Houk

      Like

      1. I never intended to imply that conservative sources are unreliable merely because they are conservative. However, I don’t consider a blog to be a source of fact without it being backed up or founded from a source which is either unbiased or which is agreed upon by experts within its subject. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Certainly you are as much as I, despite our disagreement. However, just because YOU trust a source based on its political or religious motivation, does not make the opinions contained within it doctrine for which trust should be given without further consideration. For the record, I do not implicitly trust the Left or Right without having considered both sides of the matter and formed my own conclusions. In this case, I do not believe that “stealth Marxism” is an actual issue or threat, and despite your position, nor do I believe that all Marxist philosophy is rooted in evil and exploitation. Historically I realize that this has not been the case, nevertheless I believe that there are positive elements that could be reasonably and beneficially applied.

        I also recognize, and I think you can admit this as well, that misuse and exploitation can occur within any system of government, just as such corruption can occur within religious organizations as well. Human intention affects such things, and sometimes (more often than not) selfish people, who by their nature are manipulative, work their way to the top. This has occurred throughout history in all political and religious philosophies, yet we do not dismiss other ideologies for their human faults.

        I’m not saying that you should agree with Marxism outright, or at all if you have read and disagree with it, but to label it as a secretive evil working to unbalance the world I believe to be foolish paranoia.

        I thank you for your response, and hope we can continue disagreeing with one another with civility. For my own part, I strive not to lower myself by resorting to buffoonish behavior; unnecessary profanity, name calling and such. In fact, I believe the closest I’ve come on this blog is accusing your one commenter of being the next Adolf Hitler, with his commentary about “bombing and strafing” funeral processions and shooting Muslims in the head if they fail to accept mental conditioning. Whether that comment was childish or not, I’ll leave to others to judge for themselves, but I was awestricken by that person’s unashamedly, and openly hateful bigotry. Extermination of an entire race or religion should be unthinkable by any moral standard, but I digress.

        As for the American way, and defense of Christian faith:

        The American way has always been one of progress and a celebration of diversity. This is always going to leave some disappointed, but it is simply the nature of the world; things always change. However, I have never seen an infringement on the rights of Christians to worship their God and Jesus Christ, or to live their own lives by the moral codes laid out for them in the Bible. The expectations that non-Christians should have to live by laws, created out of religious principles that don’t apply to them, is more of an infringement on the Constitutional Rights you so vociferously defend, than simply tolerating or ignoring them. Abortion, for example, is not something that is forced upon Christians. When a Christian woman gets pregnant, the doctor doesn’t try to abort her baby by force, and even if they suggest that it would be safer for the mother not to have the child for whatever health reason, the mother can refuse out of religious principle and no one prevents her from doing so. So, in this case, I ask, why should someone who does not believe in God be prevented from taking a course of action that they feel is acceptable? I know you would argue for the “rights of the fetus”, but setting that aside, would you not agree that imposing your religious beliefs on one who does not follow them is unfair and hypocritical? Would you accept an atheist coming into your church and enforcing a law that you must follow, but that infringe upon your rights or beliefs? Separation of churches and government is as much for the protection of religious freedom as it is for the rights of individuals to chose whether they follow a religious faith or not, and whether they should be made to follow religious doctrine or not. I believe, that if religious laws begin being enforced, that soon afterward, churches will have to start inviting government into their organization. We are getting off topic, however, so I will digress, but leave it as food for thought.

        I myself am not a Christian, but I believe that you should have the right to worship as you choose, without interferance, provided that your faith is not at the expense of the rights of others. I would never suggest that Christians be wiped out or regulated because of their beliefs, but nor do I believe that Christians, or any other religion, should have the right to enforce their doctrines, by force or law, to influence the actions of a populous of non-believers, when the actions of said populous do not directly violate their religious freedoms.

        Like

  2. Bryan I appreciate the civility of this last comment. The only thing I can get behind 100% is the concept of the Free Choice and the 1st Amendment. As you can guess there are some nuances that I can never agree with.

    Leftists, Atheists and perhaps centrists that interpret the 1st Amendment as the Freedom from religion in the sense of Christian Morality is flawed. And you can realize why from our exchanges. On the other hand I absolutely support one practicing any faith that does not run contrary to the American-style of the rule of law and I absolutely support a non-religious life if so chosen. What I cannot support is for Leftists, Atheists, Centrists or non-Christian faiths forcing the practice of Christianity out of the public forum. That was never the Original Intent of the Constitution. Rather the Original Intent was to make the rule of Law to not force anyone practice a particular form of Christianity and I’ll accept by extension to not force anyone to practice any form of religion or atheism. However, unconstitutional Separation of Church and State enthusiasts force Christians NOT to practice their faith quite forcefully under the false that practicing faith forces the non-faithful to practice a religion or ideology that is against another’s faith or lack thereof.

    The Original Intent of the First Amendment was to offer anyone to practice their faith even in a public forum without restrictions than with restrictive prohibitions. The government is not endorsing any religion because the public forum allows one to freely practice like-minded religious principles. After all there is a certain universality on the foundations of Christian between all the Denominations of Protestants (incidentally the Original thinking of the Founding Fathers), Roman Catholics and Eastern Rite Christianity. Hence a prayer by a football team or a city council will probably have more broad agreement than hostile disagreement. If an atheist chooses not to pray – so be it. If a non-Christian in attendance wishes to pray according their own faith – so be it. Don’t force a culture in which Christians cannot pray just because taxpayer money might be paying for a Public School Football team or Field or pays for the meeting room of a City Council et al. That is breaking religious freedom more than the fallacy of allowing prayer establishes a national Church. The 1st Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a national Church (Original Intent) and by extension any national religion.

    The case for or against abortion is argued as a woman’s free choice with their own body or against the personal life of the unborn baby in a woman’s womb. For a Biblical Christian calling an unborn baby a body extension with philosophically sanitized word of “fetus” is just smoke and mirrors to people of faith.

    The increasing (and unfortunate) success of homosexual activists changing the minds of a huge chunk of American voters does not make the homosexual lifestyle any more acceptable to Biblical Christians. Yet homosexual activists have successfully used the legal system to force Biblical Christians to make wedding cakes for same-sex weddings, restricted Biblical Christian clubs or associations in Public Schools or Public Colleges from forming while allowing homosexual clubs and associations to prosper. This is a restriction of 1st Amendment religious freedom to accommodate a fairly recent acceptance of homosexuality. Indeed a Biblical Christian is now vilified as a bigot for demanding their religious freedom on a campus while a homosexual club or association gleefully mocks the Biblical Christians because they are restricted and the homosexuals freely practice a lifestyle Biblical Christians find abhorrent.

    The one complaint you have that indicts me is my attitude toward Islam. I have a huge problem with Islam as a religion and Muslims that support Salafist (i.e. purest) Islam or even Muslims that might consider themselves moderate yet support Islamic terrorist like Hamas that are dedicated to killing Jews, Christians and Americans. I actually sway back and forth between Dajjal’s solution for Muslims who hate and the Christian principles of forgiveness and mercy. It depends on the Muslim atrocity, the Muslim self-justification or the Muslim lie of the day versus how much time I have spent in meditation in the Holy Scriptures. This inner struggle between ending Muslim hate and the patience of Jesus is constant. Perhaps you can be the conscience of the day once in a while that isn’t quite antagonistic.

    Bryan I am certain I probably did not respond to all your concerns but I have run out of gas. I think you get the idea of my frustration with Leftist, Atheist and Centrist complainers of the practice of Free Market principles and Biblical Christianity. I am also certain your principles are no more tolerant of my Biblical Christian Conservative ideology than I would be with yours.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.