Before you were even born your mommy’s mommy pretended that it’s a completely normal thing to announce your own grandchild’s birth to the world at a joint press appearance with your mom, hosted on Skype and live-streamed. With America Ferrera!
Although you will at all times pretend to be a normal baby, you actually already have your very own career, like doctor or fireman or lobbyist! Can you say “Campaign Asset”? Good, now let’s learn about skill sets! You only need one talent. Ready? It’s “Soften the Candidate”! Sort of like human bubble bath.
It’s apparently driving a lot of hostile comments from readers.
It’s apparently driving a lot of hostile comments from readers.
Well, the truth can sometimes hurt.
“And, kid, thanks to your grandma and Obama, you’ll be growing up in a country where individual liberty is a thing of the past!”
say what you want about the Clinton’s politically, a real christian would never
believe the sins of the father shall not be visited on the children.
No one said they should, and I’m not a Christian, “real” or otherwise, you moron.
Isn’t calling dn-guy a “moron” rather harsh, Mr. Simberg?
Nah, I’m just joking. If there were any doubt, this newest post confirms it. He is the Brick Tamland of the State-shtuppers who regularly post here.
you are happy criticizing an unborn child for the sin of being a clinton.
It’s pretty obvious you have no familiarity with even the most basic principles of
christianity.
I didn’t criticize an unborn child, and I’ve never claimed to be a Christian, you moron.
(I know, engaging with a known troll…)
Isn’t it quite clear that this piece of satire is aimed at WJC and HRC and somewhat at the former Chelsea Clinton, not the baby-to-be?
And do you believe that Jonathan Swift was serious in advocating that the British eat Irish babies?
dn-guy, there are indeed Bible verses that refer to generational punishment, and they are in the Old Testament / Old Covenant (Deuteronomy 5:9. Exodus 20:5, for example). But the Old Testament also says that children are NOT held accountable by God for the sins of their parents (Deuteronomy 24:16, Ezekiel 18:20, for example). As single verses these are seemingly contradictory concepts, but if you study the context of the surrounding verses it is pretty clear…guilt of sin and eternal condemnation cannot be inherited, instead it is our own conduct that determines whether or not we are guilty of sin. God was patient with Israel when they turned away and worshipped idols, but if it continued into the 3rd or 4th generation then He allowed them to be overrun by other nations.
The New Testament / New Covenant replaces the 613 ceremonial, dietary, and behavioral Old Covenant laws with a simple “Love God, love people”. The Old Covenant ended (as well as God’s wrath) with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, the New Covenant began with Christ’s resurrection.
I was going to ask: “Why the overlap between roughly 30AD and 70AD?”
I had never heard of this before.
But then I waded into this:
http://faculty.oc.edu/stafford.north/70AD.html
I certainly am not up to speed on the breadth of modern Bible scholarship, but I have to confess that your linked article is the first time I have EVER read/heard someone report that some Christians believe that Christ returned in AD70. I would consider that view to be an outlier.
The overlap of the time between the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New Covenant that I was referring to is also mentioned in Hebrews 8:13 “By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.”
hence how distasteful Simberg is when he criticizes a child?
I didn’t “criticize a child,” you moron.
The only child I ever criticize is you, you moron.