Comments on: The Presidential Mash Up http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-presidential-mash-up/ Fighting a never ending battle... Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:04:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Adam Graham http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-presidential-mash-up/comment-page-1/#comment-43602 Adam Graham Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:43:46 +0000 http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-presidential-mash-up/#comment-43602 When people begin to rewrite the Bible (even with the best of intentions) to serve their own purposes, it's incredibly dangerous not to mention foolish (see Book of Revelations.) When people begin to rewrite the Bible (even with the best of intentions) to serve their own purposes, it’s incredibly dangerous not to mention foolish (see Book of Revelations.)

]]> By: David http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-presidential-mash-up/comment-page-1/#comment-43600 David Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:45:58 +0000 http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-presidential-mash-up/#comment-43600 Pelosi's "new" scripture is a very common sentiment among certain theologically leftist circles, and since such circles regard scripture as a general guideline to be modified to suit their conceptual and preconceptual biases (rather than something to guide them in determining their prioroties), a mythic work that allows them to draw whatever conclusions they wish (such as this one or a blessing of homosexual "marriages" etc.), then she may well honestly believe she is citing scriptire. Of course, she may honestly believe much of the other claptrap she utters as well. Doesn't make it true, simply means she may well be honestly, sincerely deluded. And, frankly, that would make her even more dangerous than an openly dishonest, manipulative politician *spit* Pelosi’s “new” scripture is a very common sentiment among certain theologically leftist circles, and since such circles regard scripture as a general guideline to be modified to suit their conceptual and preconceptual biases (rather than something to guide them in determining their prioroties), a mythic work that allows them to draw whatever conclusions they wish (such as this one or a blessing of homosexual “marriages” etc.), then she may well honestly believe she is citing scriptire.

Of course, she may honestly believe much of the other claptrap she utters as well. Doesn’t make it true, simply means she may well be honestly, sincerely deluded.

And, frankly, that would make her even more dangerous than an openly dishonest, manipulative politician *spit*

]]>