People that watch HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" are infinitely aware that the host is not only an atheist, but is also an antitheist, meaning that he hates religion.
No finer example of Maher's disdain for theism and Judeo-Christian principles occurred on Friday's installment of "Real Time" when he actually declared, "At least half of the [Ten] Commandments are stupid!"
This came moments after Maher proudly stated, "If I had a child, the last book I would ever give to teach morality would be the Bible, especially the Old Testament." This led one of his guests to say that Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain should be stoned for committing adultery.
I kid you not.
Here's the first astounding exchange on the subject of religion (video available here courtesy our friend Ms Underestimated):
BILL MAHER, HOST: As a book of morality, it would be about last on my list. If I had a child, the last book I would ever give to teach morality would be the Bible, especially the Old Testament.
DAN SAVAGE, COLUMNIST: People only pretend to read the Bible. Their eyes glaze over, and they remember a couple of passages that they ignore when they feel like ignoring, like "Turn the other cheek." And, then they, when they don't like somebody, they go flipping through this massive book, full of ancient desert prejudices, looking for something to justify it. Just like they justified slavery using the Bible, because there are passages in the Bible that justify slavery, including passages that justify selling your daughters into sex slavery. Right there, that's Biblical, those are Biblical family values. And so, we have this selective sort of reading problem with the Bible. If we're going to enforce it all, stone the gay people, but, you know, stoning the adulterers first starting with Newt Gingrich, and Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain...by the time it's my turn, they'll be out of rocks.
Of course, Savage didn't mention former President Bill Clinton in the list. I wonder why.
Later, the Wall Street Journal's John Fund tried to bring some sanity into the discussion:
Of course there's a lot of stuff in the Bible that's contradictory. But who's going to argue that the Ten Commandments are a pretty good way to lead your life, and that if more people did do that, it would be a better place?
Well, John, Maher's going to argue that:
And at least half of the Commandments are stupid...If you were going to make a list of like the ten things you absolutely can't do, wouldn't you put on there rape, incest, bestiality, slavery? But, instead, they have things like "Don't swear," you know, "Don't build statues to other Gods," obviously the ideas of primitive man living in primitive times, and this is what you look up to.
Yet, maybe the best moment in this debate was when country singer Trace Adkins explained why he's religious:
TRACE ADKINS, COUNTRY SINGER: There's two reasons why I go with the God thing, because, number one...
MAHER: (Laughing, grabs Adkins' arm).
ADKINS: (To Maher) Shut up!
MAHER: You go with the God thing?
FUND: Listen to him.
MAHER: I know, I always listen to him.
ADKINS: Number one, just in case!
MAHER: (Laughing) Now that's honest, right.
ADKINS: And number two, my momma may be watching. Just as D.L. [Hughley, other panelist] was saying, too, because his momma's watching. (To Maher) Is your momma watching?
MAHER: She passed away.
ADKINS: See, she's watching, you better shut up!
‘Nuff said.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Comments Policy
That's nothing. At least
January 19, 2008 - 14:16 ET by ThisnThatThat's nothing. At least 98% of all MSM newsreaders and talking head pundits are also stupid.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Maher is such a tool
January 19, 2008 - 14:22 ET by timzankThis pissant's career will come to a screeching halt the day after Hugh Hefner dies. That's how he got the HBO show, his only source of relevance since being booted from ABC is reaffirmation by the attendee's of the grotto parties.
He's a lonely, pathetic man with absolutely NO moral compass. It's one thing to be a non-believer or even a critic of religion, I can live with that. It's quite another to be a "basher" with such venom.
Maher a tool?
January 19, 2008 - 15:18 ET by c5back9Tools have value and some useful purpose. Maher is a boneheaded asswipe without value. I don't waste time watching this slithering idiot. He's an excellent example of why abortion must remain legal.
Well, if you want to be
January 20, 2008 - 02:29 ET by fitzfongWell, if you want to be technical, an asswipe is kind of a tool. Right? :-)
Fool
January 19, 2008 - 14:31 ET by nkviking75I hesitate to quote this verse because I don't want to offend the more reasonable atheists here, but in Psalm 14:1 the Bible says, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" That would certainly seem to sum up Maher.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Poor Bill...
January 20, 2008 - 09:37 ET by sentforth5I swear, it's even worse than Psalm 14, because the fool is ignorant of God..but Bill takes my head to Romans 1v30. He is a hater of God and is worthy of death.( I am no judge; I am quoting Scripture).
I first read that 15 years ago and thought to myself,"who would HATE God?!"...well, there ya go...Poor, poor Bill.
Noel: I don't want to say,
January 19, 2008 - 18:05 ET by SMGalbraithNoel: I don't want to say, "I told you so" but...
Let's call it, to borrow from philosophy, "pundit essentialism" or "commentator essentialism". That is, the essence of the commentator is perceptible in all that they say. And everything they say must be considered when we judge some of the things they say.
Okay, granted, I'm full of it ("pundit essentialism"? Who am I kidding?). But not half as much as Maher.
Maher proves his stupidity everytme he opens his mouth.
January 19, 2008 - 14:38 ET by c5thenRape and incest are covered under the "Thou shall not commit adulttery" commandment. Adultery means any sex out of wedlock.
Here they are:
shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of
anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them
nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting
the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth
generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to
those who love Me and keep My commandments. (Or else you can't follow #1 above)
the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all
your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In
it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your
manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger
who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them,
and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. (Seems reasonable who wants to work 24x7?)
shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your
neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox,
nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s."
Gee, if you follow all these commandments, you'll be a pretty good and moral citizen. I wonder what Maher uses as his moral guide other than whatever feels good to him.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
It's #10 that Maher has the
January 19, 2008 - 14:49 ET by Free StinkerIt's #10 that Maher has the bigest problem with.
I'll just bet he thinks people should be allowed to covet their neighbor's Salary . . .
Newsbusters. Log on and find out What the heck is so yummy over here!
You hit the nail on the head Free
January 19, 2008 - 18:13 ET by Dee BunkThat is exactly his problem. He spews hate just so he can live like his Hollywood neighbors. He's as weak as a human being can be.
C5, when you were called
January 19, 2008 - 14:57 ET by MikeBC5, if you were called into existence by being sneezed out of the nose of the Great Green Arkleseizure, like Maher was, of course it would give you a rather snotty outlook on life, and could tend to make you bitter.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Beating a dead horse...
January 19, 2008 - 18:29 ET by SyriusIt's all in the interpretation of the word of God through his
messengers and how they related his word to the people. Through
reflection & the reading of several interpretations, one could
formulate a better understanding of the ten commandments. I know you
all hate 'wiki' but a lot of you actually use it, so, here's the link...
http://en.wikipedia....
I
love how most of you can throw the first stones at others when it's
convienent or fits your narrow focus. Each commandment is equal. How
many of you can actually say you have followed each commandment
throughout your life?
Go ahead, throw your stones...
Syrius
Syrius...
January 20, 2008 - 09:49 ET by sentforth5I'm not starting trouble, I swear, but 2Peter lets us know that there is no private interpretation of scripture. It is rock solid and each scripture has a second or third witness somewhere else in His book.
"How many of you can say you have followed each commandment throughout your life?"
In Ecclesiastes ch.7 God says everybody transgresses His Laws, or, in a word..SINS. EVERYONE SINS. God knows that. He judges our intentions...our WILLINGNESS to try.
Geez...I'm kinda preachy today...guess I better cut it out before I upset someone.
Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 10:49 ET by botgThere are disputes yes. There is a core of 'essentials' which are agreed upon by Christians through the years. Check the Nicene Creed. Also you claim that none of us has kept the whole of the Ten Commandments is simply one of the central themes of the 'Sermon on the Mount' (Matt 5,6,7)
When you say "I love how most of you can throw the first stones at others" i say ouch that stone hit me!
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Someone had written a couple of weeks ago...
January 20, 2008 - 12:13 ET by Syriusbotg,
It went something like this...
God sends a message through a messenger and the messenger delivers it through evangelism. The earliest gospels were written around 65ad. Through the passage of time they have been written, rewritten, translated, edited, and have been taught as the word of God to generation after generation. Again, it takes one's own belief, reflection and experiences to sift through what has been written by men, prophets and witnesses in order to further one's own knowledge and understanding.
Syrius
Serious mischaracterization
January 20, 2008 - 12:28 ET by botgSerious mischaracterization there Syrius. Transmission of the writtings went more like this. An original is produced many many copies and translations are carefully made of the originals. Many many copies are made of the copies. We have these third generation copies (and lots of them) which we can compare to be able to 'reverse engineer' back such that we can be very very confidant that we have accurate writings today. The translations today come directly from the ancient mss sources and not translations of translations of translations. (That is an urban myth)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Not really...and your point...
January 20, 2008 - 12:42 ET by Syriusbotg,
Your statement...
"Transmission of the
writtings went more like this. An original is produced(by Whom?) many many
copies and translations are carefully made of the originals(agreed, only if the copiers/scribes were as accurate as they were taught. Also, this leaves open the argument on whether the 'powers that be' wanted certain text emphasized and/or edited.). Many many
copies are made of the copies. We have these third generation copies
(and lots of them) which we can compare to be able to 'reverse
engineer' back such that we can be very very confidant that we have
accurate writings today. The translations today come directly from the
ancient mss sources and not translations of translations of
translations. (That is an urban myth-Proof?)"
...starts after the message has been received by the messenger and then is produced for evangelism.
Syrius
by whom?
January 20, 2008 - 13:06 ET by botgwell, Matthew wrote Matthew, Luke wrote Luke and Acts, Paul wrote his letters (Hebrews being not so certain) etc. etc.
proof? well if we know how we got our modern writtings and there is an alternate story which is different from the established facts it would then be a myth.
the powers that be? this might have been a valid concern 200 years ago when most manuscripts came from a central source but with all archeological finds of the 18 & 19 hundreds such a conspiracy would be laughable
note the dead sea scrolls (dated to 200 BC) contain no New Testament mss. What they do contain are copies of the Septuigent from that era. Until then the earliest copies were dated (i think) to about 1000 AD. An approximate 1200 year separation and they were found to be incredibly alike, some minor (spelling, word ommissions or adds) differences. This attests to the care used in the copying process. Did you know that in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek letters have numeric value? As each section was copied it was then totalled as a separate check for accuracy.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
God, message, messenger, evangelism.
January 20, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Syriusbotg,
Perhaps you & others need more information on your beliefs or what you believe to be true...
http://rhetjournal.n...
Frank Hughes underlines the foundations of my argument with you. I hope you get a chance to read it and comment from a more enlightened position.
Syrius
S
January 20, 2008 - 13:43 ET by botgyour article is printing, in the meantime
The consensus among current Pauline scholars about the Pauline authorship of Romans, the Corinthian correspondence, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon, and 1 Thessalonians, however, is not matched by a consensus about either the authorship or the interpretation of several of the pseudopauline letters, for a variety of reasons. Colossians, Ephesians, 2 Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Letters are, I think, considerably harder to interpret than the undisputed Pauline letters, primarily because the interpreter must either accept and attempt to defend Pauline authorship for all or part of these letters, or the interpreter must follow the harder and thus less travelled road of pseudopauline authorship and then (hopefully) make an experimental reconstruction of the relationship of the pseudonymous author to various Pauline traditions.
where does any of this prove Paul did not write his letters? "(hopefully) make an experimental reconstruction"? LMAO, let me translate: 'come up with a good story'
Do you truly believe the German redactionists have a stonger hold on the historicity than say Augustine or other church fathers? Please.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I can assure you
January 20, 2008 - 14:05 ET by sentforth5God wrote the book of Hebrews through Paul.
Paul or not it is as
January 20, 2008 - 14:14 ET by botgPaul or not it is as inspired of the Spirit. Since it is not signed the Spirit would seem to be telling us that the instrument is not the important matter.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I could not agree more BOTG
January 20, 2008 - 14:19 ET by sentforth5I just get tired of the Hebrews argument. Paul was indeed the vessel; his thumb print is all over it, but it is all One Word.
Once again...
January 20, 2008 - 14:41 ET by SyriusGod creates message.
God delivers message to messenger.
Messenger delivers message to the people through evangelism.
"Paul was indeed the vessel; his thumb print is all over it, but it is all One Word."
You don't agree with what I'm proposing but continue to justify it through your statements.
Syrius
S
January 20, 2008 - 15:05 ET by sentforth5I am not really an evangelist.Evangelists bring people to Christ, but not through much scripture. I am a Teacher and scriptural accuracy is my job.
The ENTIRE Bible is ONE Book with ONE Author.
I don't agree or disagree with you.
It's your ship and only you can sail it. We can still be buds, tho, can't we?
Once again...
January 20, 2008 - 14:37 ET by Syrius...where does it prove he did write his letters? Your belief and your faith will guide you in this answer. I'm showing you, once again, my first comments stand with merit the arguments, the reflection needed in order to comprehend all text written now and in the past. It's philosophical arguments we are discussing. I do not need to 'come up with a good story' as you say but to discuss openly a topic of understanding on written words and phrases through the passage of time. You will believe what you want to believe according to what little information you decide to read. In this context you need only to question others on their beliefs and never answer the foundations to yours. So, don't get angry at me for telling the truth...
Syrius
radical skepticism ala Hume
January 20, 2008 - 14:49 ET by botgis just soo 20th century. Why would you hold to such self-defeating postulates?
Why would think i am angry? Are you projecting? Do you truly believe i have not studied and questioned? (If so you hold a foolish stance)
When a letter begins "Paul by the grace...."
is not all that i think or seem merely but a dream within a dream ---- EA Poe (paraphrase)
botg...it was a paraphrased quote...
January 20, 2008 - 15:06 ET by Syrius"Do not be angry with me if I tell you the truth." -Socrates
I beginning to understand your misconceptions from whatever you have studied and the closing of your mind to concepts presented, not as simple stories for children, but as adult discussions. This thread could be analogous to the Big Bang theory of the universe and Paul's writings. "It began, but, what happen before it?" is the question posed in this discussion. Another question would be, "It exists, but, how did it come to be?". I do think you need more background or scholarly study in rhetoric and philosophy.
Syrius
because i disagree with you?
January 20, 2008 - 15:14 ET by botgi have a closed mind? such rhetoric on your part is abysmal.
Syriusly, 'In the beginning God' you fail to catch that so you hold to foolish postmodern views based in skepticism.
see you after the game
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg, ignorance does not mean...
January 20, 2008 - 15:50 ET by Syrius...you are dumb. I propose you continue studying other forms of intellectual thought which may be opposed to your view. If you choose not to study, then, you have become closed minded to other schools of thought. It is a choice you will make for yourself. You do have free will, correct?
Syrius
S
January 20, 2008 - 21:19 ET by botgyou fail to comprehend that the whole point of study is to come to the truth. Now truth is an exclusive proposition as it excludes non-truth. If you wish to call that close minded then you are the one harmed not i for you are the one wasting time following the self defeating philosophies. A house divided against itself can not stand. You also seem to believe that anyone who disagrees with you must not understand or have studied. You are not only incorrect in that belief but it also prevents you from examining your own lack of thought and study. You truly can be free to disagree with the Academy as they mostly defend their status quo for more selfish rather than scholarly reasons. Truly Hume and all his followers can not defend their positions. Post-modern thought is lacking. There is some insight to be gained in the redaction theories of the Germans but there is much that is bunk. These systems contain common pre-suppositions with which i and many have some serious questions. GIGO, Syrius. Would you spend time studying a base 10 math system that was telling you 2+2=5?
Let me sum up with a simple question: "In this universe does such a thing as an 'actual infinity' exist?"
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
S let me add:
January 20, 2008 - 13:50 ET by botgpostmodernism is doomed! need proof? well 'my story' says 'your story' is bunk. And in postmodern thought (or lack thereof) it's all about our stories. Sophomoric rhetoric full of self-defeating propositions
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Your story is...
January 20, 2008 - 14:46 ET by Syrius...full of holes. I'm telling no stories at this present time but showing you how ludicrous your justifications have been.
Syrius
telling no stories?
January 20, 2008 - 14:58 ET by botgdon't lie to us S it's not nice.
Either you know a lot less about what you purport to know or you are being disingenuous. Either way it is you who would teach who needs to study before bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Absolute, logical thread...
January 20, 2008 - 15:26 ET by Syrius...turns into an illogical attack towards me. Your misconceptions, lack of thought, comprehension and logic have once again proven to be of enormous comic relief to me. Gosh, botg, you might want to reread this thread & try to see through your weak simple statements. Thank you for allowing me to expose your absolute ignorance on this subject.
Syrius
Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 22:35 ET by botghad you studied the post-modern philosophy which you espouse you would understand that it puts much into people's 'stories'. You have your 'story', i have my 'story', an aborigine has their 'story'. There is no truth only our 'stories'. So when you come espousing a post-modern viewpoint and say you are not telling a 'story'; is it not logical to say you are either disingenuous or not as expert as you claim? And that you confuse this with ad-hominem just makes it more sure.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Hey Syrius. If you can
January 20, 2008 - 23:21 ET by tracheostomyHey Syrius. If you can boil it down to a single thesis in the woodshed or in the OT forum, I promise never to use ad hominems in your direction.
I also promise to make it painless. =)
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
S
January 20, 2008 - 15:08 ET by botgtime to 'make the stores' before the game; will be back
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
→ Not Catholic Commandments
January 20, 2008 - 10:05 ET by Cool Arrowc5then, it is obvious you are not a Catholic. The Commandments are different for Catholics.
I ♣ My Seal
Catholics use the word 'murder' over 'kill'...
January 20, 2008 - 11:59 ET by Syrius...to strengthen their stand on the abortion issue and to absolve those who have killed others in the battle over evil.
Syrius
Translation issue
January 20, 2008 - 12:06 ET by nkviking75I've read in several places that "Thou shalt not murder" would have been a more accurate translation of the original Hebrew.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
→ Try again Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 12:08 ET by Cool ArrowCatholics completely omit the one about "thou shalt not set before thee any graven images and bow down to them.
They round out the ten by splitting the tenth with:
...Thy neighbor's wife
...Thy neighbor's goods
I ♣ My Seal
Most evangelicals if I'm not mistaken...
January 20, 2008 - 12:21 ET by Syriusdespise the fact that Catholics have embraced the images/ sculptures of the Crucified Christ, The Virgin Mary, Joseph, and others in Catholic Churches. They bow and pray to carved idols. Yes, I would agree it's just uncomfortable to maintain that particular commandment...
"You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of
anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or
that is in the water under the earth."
...therefore, let's just edit it.
Syrius
Syrius Seeing as how
January 20, 2008 - 20:40 ET by James2306Syrius Seeing as how Catholics were the first christians with the others coming along 1000 years or so later I would say that the editing was done by others.
Pacifism is a luxury bought with the blood of the valorous
Catholics were not the
January 20, 2008 - 21:04 ET by tracheostomyCatholics were not the first Christians, Jews were.
Then the history was retconned by the ruling order of non-Augustinian syncretists, who just happen to have run the Roman church for oh, the past 1000 years or so.
Get it right.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 12:10 ET by botgthe original language denotes more of a murder understanding than a kill translation. I would agree with the magisterium on this. Look at it in context, in the same writting the punishment for many sins is death. Thou shall not murder allows this, Thou shall not kill does not.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
the fact that proper
January 20, 2008 - 12:14 ET by botgthe fact that proper translation is consistant with the abortion stance and the battle against evil shows just that --- consistancy. For you to imply a motive of manipulation here is disingenious and a manipulation of your own (hypocritical)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Look above at Cool Arrow's statement...
January 20, 2008 - 12:29 ET by SyriusEdit, rewrite, and teach what is to be learned. Let the words speak for themselves. I have not rewritten anything nor claimed it to be true or false or disingenuous or a manipulation of my own (hypocritical...what?). I'm pointing out once again, we begin to get into semantics and wordplay. What I write may be uncomfortable because it doesn't fit into your way of thinking? Please, I'm no authority on your beliefs but if you want to educate me by all means I'm all ears...
Syrius
S
January 20, 2008 - 12:44 ET by botgcheck things out the example is an outline. Next look in the actual Bible translations what is omitted? Can you say that it is changed because an outline is not the full script? Anywhere else you would not have such a narrow judgementalism.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 12:48 ET by botgbtw i am not a Roman Catholic but there are many 'essentials' where RCs and evangelicals agree.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I was raised as a Catholic...
January 20, 2008 - 15:36 ET by Syrius...& saw some of my family become 'Born-Again'. It was enlightening as I enjoyed being the devil's advocate, so to speak. My studies in philosophy, art, sciences and language have been extremely helpful in understanding, comprehending, and disseminating facts, half-truths, falsehoods and lies.
Syrius
Congratulations. I have to
January 20, 2008 - 15:47 ET by Jack BauerCongratulations. I have to admit it takes guts for you to admit you are very good at disseminating half-truths, falsehoods and lies
Kudos to you for honesty.
It must be getting warm out here..
January 20, 2008 - 15:56 ET by Syrius...slithering from under his rock, Jack appears.
What do you have to say or add to this illogical thread, winging pomme?
Syrius
I'm going to give Syrius
January 20, 2008 - 15:59 ET by JasonCI'm going to give Syrius the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant a word like "parsing", "separating", or "distinguishing", as opposed to the rather damning "disseminating".
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
"Then you should say what
January 20, 2008 - 16:12 ET by Jack BauerThanks for the correction...JC.
January 20, 2008 - 16:13 ET by SyriusI'll take the hit. Me spreadin' lies? no, not me...thwarted once again!
That was pretty damning once I reread it...
Syrius
There you go again:
January 20, 2008 - 16:04 ET by Jack BauerThere you go again: disseminating falsehoods and lies.
You do understand what the word "disseminating" means, don't you?
The proper word is
January 20, 2008 - 20:55 ET by MikeBThe proper word is "murder". If it were "kill", then the other parts of the Law that requires the death penalty for murder, rape, kidnap for ransom, an incorrigible child who "calls down evil" upon his parents, etc., would be a violation of the commandment not to kill. Do you actually think a loving God would inflict such a paradox on His people?
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Maher
January 19, 2008 - 14:49 ET by SgthulkaMore insight and intellect from the Hef's Grotto.
I think there's a reason this guy doesn't have any kids currently (or won't admit to having any). It's because he's all talk and no action, telling others how to raise kids without having the balls to raise his own .
Sgthulka - I was the perfect parent until I had a child
January 19, 2008 - 18:15 ET by Dee BunkPeople who don't have them just don't get it.
Well over half
January 19, 2008 - 14:54 ET by IamTinmanof Mahers comments are stupid including this one. Yet people still listen. Why I don't know.
If Maher is right he will soon be dead and forgotten by everyone except the 7 people who bought his books.
Bill...you are a coward, plain and simple.
January 19, 2008 - 16:05 ET by Army BratSeems strange to me that this peice of crap is constantly attacking a religion that no longer practices stoning, or selling people into slavery, rather than the one that still practices these acts to this day.
Well...not strange, just cowardly. (Remember...he called Baldwin "Brave" when Alec called his own daughter a "little pig." That's his idea of bravery. What a pair of punks!)
Just once I'd like to see him attack Islam with the same fervor with which he attacks Christianity. Of course he won't because those folks will cut his brainless head off if he does. He's like the moron that harasses the Amish cause he knows he won't get bitch slapped for it. (As would be most appropriate in this case.)
Happy Trails...
Maher wrote a book?
January 19, 2008 - 18:02 ET by R D HelmDid it have pictures?
Did it have those little cardboard thingies that pop up when you turn the page?
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Maher is one of those
January 19, 2008 - 16:01 ET by Captain RepusMaher is one of those pathetic people who have no moral compass at all, and is quite happy to live that way. He achieves almost orgasmic satisfaction in smearing people in feeble attempts to reduce them to his level of slime and hate. I suspect there are some persuasional reasons he has never married or had children.
I eagerly await the day this twisted moron gets busted late at night in a car with a couple of bags of crack and his face full of a pretty 13 year old boy.
Ya gotta have morals...
January 19, 2008 - 16:13 ET by Army Bratto have a moral compass. One must have ethics to be ethical. I could go on and on in this fashion, as he lacks so many of the qualities that make a man a man....
Happy Trails...
Savage: Their eyes glaze
January 19, 2008 - 16:36 ET by motherbeltSavage: Their eyes glaze over, and they remember a couple of passages that they
ignore when they feel like ignoring, like "Turn the other cheek." And,
then they, when they don't like somebody, they go flipping through this
massive book, full of ancient desert prejudices, looking for something
to justify it.
And people like Maher and Savage go flipping through this massive book to find a couple of passages they can point to and ridicule, and they remember those passages, and use them to justify ignoring everything about the Bible that they don't like.
Right on, MB
January 19, 2008 - 22:11 ET by Cape ConservativeSelective reading & spouting - that's their game!
Bill, For the love
January 19, 2008 - 16:36 ET by JWFBill,
For the love of God, will you give it a rest!
People kill in the name of allah every single day all over this planet. It is not just our problem. They are killing in the name of allah in the Philippines, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq,Yemen, Somalia, Algeria, Lebanon,Chechnya, Israel, Mauritania, Russia, Sudan,Syria, oh I am getting tired. Religionofpeace.com has documented over 10,000 attacks in the name of Islam since 9/11/2001!
They kill their own daughters in Canada and the U.S!
When will you get it through your Bush hating brain? Christians are not the problem.
No one, no one on the planet has killed anyone in the name of Christ in a very long time, measured in millennia.
I'd like to know who
January 19, 2008 - 17:57 ET by zhombreI'd like to know who composes the audience for a POS like Maher? I confess I know a couple of otherwise decent people who watch this ass clown. They are churchgoers, and for the life of me I can't fathom why they are fans of a so-called comic who regards their beliefs with so much contempt.
the bible
January 19, 2008 - 19:59 ET by grantnwhow does 'thou shalt not kill' fit with, say, Deuteronomy13:6 which helpfully explains how to kill your family if they worship another God (say, Jesus?)
The english is shaky
January 20, 2008 - 09:54 ET by sentforth5The Hebrew manuscripts say MURDER. Thou shalt do no premeditated homicide. By the by...Jesus IS God.
Mr Shepard
January 19, 2008 - 18:11 ET by KeithMr Shepard
Why are you surprised and why is this on this blog? Bill Maher has continually stated that he HATES RELIGION, Christianity in particular. So why would his views of the ten commandments be worthy of reprinting? All you are doing by highlighting what this FOOL has said, is furthering the promulgation of hatred towards Christ. ESPECIALLY when you cite morons like Trace "Just in case" Adkins as the "voice of religion" or weak SO CALLED Christians like "John Fund" who assert for every stupid liberal to slobber over, that the Bible CONTRADICTS ITSELF! For the record IT DOESN'T, those who think it does simply don't have the Spirit necessary to understand it in the first place. See my voluminous posts concerning the false doctrine that most of you have been exposed to! This crap belongs in the GARBAGE not reprinted anywhere in my opinion. Especially when the man is an on record HATER of Jesus Christ!
What does YOUR religion say about the motivations of someone who professes a HATRED of Christ? And if you understand what your religion says about the motivation of someone who professes a HATRED of Christ, why would you give him more ink? It's not news and it isn't "new". So why would you waste your extremely valuable time with Bill Maher?
P.S. And to pre-empt the haters that are going to say I'm "judging" Trace Adkins and John Fund, the Bible is God's judgement for mankind. Repeating what it says or telling you what it CONDEMNS is not "Judging" that's just another scripture that you don't understand. In regard to false teaching, Jesus said "By their Fruit ye shall know them" what would the purpose of "knowing" the evil people be, if you weren't supposed to either avoid them or what they taught? DUH. Judging is THROWING THE ROCK, not acknowledging the error. "Judges" imposed sentences. Believing in Christ "just in case" is an example cited by Jesus in MANY PLACES, of people who "ain't gonna make it". Matt 7:21, John 3:1-8, etc, and thinking that the Bible contradicts itself would be in direct variance with all of the scriptures that tell you that it doesn't and that you have to keep Christ's commandments. Why would you "keep" something that you feel is somehow, in error? You wouldn't. And you wouldn't make it either.
Keith
January 19, 2008 - 18:41 ET by Noel SheppardLighten up, Francis!
:-) ns
LOL. LOL. Point taken sir!
January 19, 2008 - 22:03 ET by KeithLOL. LOL.Point taken sir! Well said!
Keith
January 20, 2008 - 09:42 ET by Noel SheppardKeith,
:-) ns
The funny thing about
January 19, 2008 - 18:12 ET by BlazerThe funny thing about being a pampered celebrity in America is, you can spend your entire life being one and not even realise your spineless coward.
Place ole' Billy boy here under one those jihadist's knives and I'll bet he'd find his god real quick.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Stop adding fuel.
January 19, 2008 - 18:30 ET by okiehawk44Mahar lives from show to show by getting ink for saying or doing something outlandish that NB and others then pick up and run with. STOP IT! Let this one-trick pony ooze his rambling anti-Christian and anti-American puss without Tony Snow's (previous show) or Trace Adkins' assistance. He doesn't care if he is "proven" incorrect because he generates ratings (if you can call his tiny numbers that) from what he gets others to comment on.
Maher
January 19, 2008 - 18:45 ET by Philly Pete 07I have never watched this clown nor do I anticipate doing so in the future. I have read about enough of his antics in the past to get a grasp on what he is all about. Why someone would bother to watch him is beyond me but different strokes for different folks, I guess. Honestly though, don't you sometimes wonder what his meeting with the Lord will be like? God's mercy is beyond our understanding but you would think that there would be a moment of time when he (Maher) would realize what a cruel jackass he has been all of his life. Alas, that is really not our job to worry about another's judgement when we really must be concerned about our own. But there are times when the temptation to ponder a vicious person such as Maher getting his comeuppance is hard to avoid.
Bill Maher is in the Bible
January 19, 2008 - 19:01 ET by Lame CherryThe fool has said in his heart, "There is no God", they are corrupt and their works are abominable.
Bill Maher is a fool.
It wastes time having him on this site, because if Bill Maher claims there is no God or no need for the 10 Commandments which are tormenting him every day and a God Who does not exist is ALWAYS on his mind..............then let him go to a place like North Korea and find out how long his "stupid Commandments" will not be around to protect him there.
I would bet Bill would be fleeing to one of Kim's Churches, yes Kim was raised in a Christian environment and allows in North Korea Christian Churches..........the North Koreans shun God, but even they have the sense to keep Him around........unlike Bill Maher.
I know on Bill Maher's death I could care less as he will not matter, but it would be so recompense to see him dragged away by demons as he is screaming this can not be happening as they don't exist and Jesus does not exist.
Nice place as a Christian to make a note here again, that Jesus is thee Son of God, my Savior on Whom I only trust for my redemption into the Family of God.
LC
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Firing for effect comedy.
January 19, 2008 - 19:16 ET by pocomocoLike Rosie O’Donnell, Maher is ‘firing for effect’ as a way of keeping his name before the public.
He and O’Donnell have both failed as comedians which is why they need to be outrageous in order to be noticed.
O’Donnell uses lesbianism and Maher uses atheism.
As NewsBusters proves in this thread, both subjects are sure-fire ways of getting into the headlines. All they ask is, whether you love us or hate us, be sure to spell our names correctly.
Maher is an AssClown
January 19, 2008 - 19:18 ET by BritcomMaher is the kind of guy who thinks the Nazis he helped create won't burn him too when they get a-hold of him because he will say, "Hey, I agree with you guys, doesn't that count for something?" and the answer right before he gets shoved into the oven will be, "Nein.", "Sie brennen jetzt Jude!"
The Bible is the Foundation of all civilized western society and good governance, and the 10 Commandments are the essence of the Bible's wisdom. Maher's pickled pea brain can't grasp that.
I continue to pray for Bill
January 19, 2008 - 20:06 ET by LilyPearlI continue to pray for Bill Maher's salvation.
Thank You Noel
January 19, 2008 - 20:44 ET by Khyris"the host is not only an atheist, but is also an antitheist"
Thank you for making that distinction. Some of us don't appreciate being commonly lumped into the same category as this jerk.
paganism
January 19, 2008 - 22:08 ET by CurtBill Maher is just a pagan acting like a pagan. Why should anyone be surprised?
In the spirit of Sanctity of Human Life Sunday (January 20), let's remember that even he is made in God's image - no matter how much he has warped that image. Pray for him.
Curt
If God had wanted everyone
January 20, 2008 - 09:32 ET by Jack BauerIf God had wanted everyone to think half the Commandments were stupid he'd have made Bill Maher funny.
More like Mel Brooks, as he famously told the rest of the story, as MOSES...
Maher has gone insane. No
January 19, 2008 - 23:15 ET by ConservativeRexMaher has gone insane. No one above a double digit IQ would think such a thing as that about the Ten Commandments.. He has gone completely around the bend.
He at this point, needs to be held in derision. Never to be taken seriously (if he ever was). And laughed at in public at any chance. He has no redeeming values, so there is no loss, or stigma attached in treating him as such. He has brought this all upon himself. He really has ceased to be anything of any value, a modern untouchable. So, frankly, to hell with him.
I don't watch Maher a lot,
January 19, 2008 - 23:25 ET by balboaI don't watch Maher a lot, but I enjoy his show for two reasons:
1. The different POV. Maher has a lot of outlandish views, and it's refreshing to hear them.
2. To see which celebrities are well-spoken and can make good arguments.
→ Well spoken celebrities
January 20, 2008 - 09:28 ET by Cool ArrowAre there any?
I ♣ My Seal
Sorry but I went to college
January 20, 2008 - 09:51 ET by Jack BauerSorry but I went to college where crazy people with his crazy views were a dime a dozen.
Many of them on the Faculty. Despite the fact that they were and are the establishment, they seem to think they are edgy anti-establishment types.
Bill Maher is so reactionary it's painful. He and his ilk are predominent in the driving seat of our culture: hollywood, TV, the media, academia, music.
Fifty years ago he wasn't, but in 2008 HE IS THE ORTHODOXY.
That's wht there is such a cultural disconnect between the likes of Maher and vast swathes of people which polls consistently show 80%+ consider themselves Christian.
Add to that Newsrooms which don't look like America from a faith standpoint.
First 4 are meaningless
January 20, 2008 - 12:08 ET by trthskrFirst four are meaningless to an anti-theist. The rest are fine for anyone with morals. Religion does not create a moral man. You can have one without the other.There are many moral men without religion, just as there are many religious men without morals.
I don't agree with Maher on much, so I don't watch him. (It's hard without HBO) Opinion isn't bias. It's OPINION. Why is there so much discussion of 'opinion bias' on what is supposed to be a 'Liberal Media Bias' blog?
Anti-theist
A person who holds the view that organized religion when considered throughout the centuries has been a destructive force in society, wrongly believed is that all are also agnostics or atheists, but a great number of faithful theists also see organized religion as harmful to society and choose to follow their own path to god.
Anyone have a better or more accurate definition?