This is so insane, I don't know what to think :P

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/20/lauren-boebert-republican-dinner-jesus-second-coming


Knox County, TN: Republican Colorado representative Lauren Boebert has told a group of party members that they “get to be part of ushering in the second coming of Jesus”, prompting shock and mockery online.

“It is an honor to serve in this time. I believe that many of us in this room believe that we are in the last of the last days and that’s not a time to complain, that’s not a time to grumble, to be dismayed, to be disheartened, but a time to rejoice,” Boebert said.

“You get to be a part of ushering in the second coming of Jesus,” the congresswoman said to applause across the room.

Boebert’s remarks of the Christian belief that Jesus will return again after his ascension to heaven 2,000 years ago has triggered a slew of reactions online.

The Lincoln Project, a Republican political action committee aimed at defeating Trumpism, tweeted: “Christian or not, Lauren Boebert cannot adequately represent any constituent who does not believe in this end times prophecy. Can you really have someone making decisions on your behalf that thinks nothing they do now will matter?”

One user wrote, “If the end of times are coming why is she bothering with an election?”

“I say this in all sincerity as a Knox county constituent and as an actual Christian … what in the HELL was that all about???” another user tweeted.

Wednesday’s address by Boebert was not the first time the Republican congresswoman made striking remarks about Christianity.

Earlier this year, Boebert hinted that Jesus may have prevented his crucifixion if he owned AR-15 rifles.

“How many AR-15s do you think Jesus would have had?” Boebert asked a crowd at a Christian event in Colorado. “Well, he didn’t have enough to keep his government from killing him.”

What's Boebert talking about?

We all know the Second Coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ occurred in January 2017.

Orange you happy to know that?

Orange has nothing to do with it. I just don’t want to get turned red by Jesus’s assault rifle.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/20/2022 09:35PM by Lot's Wife.

The original Annoying Orange

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD5UKQggXTc

(practically prescient)

"Boebert’s remarks of the Christian belief that Jesus will return again after his ascension to heaven 2,000 years ago"

Boebert: I feel lucky.

Sigh. This took place just 60 miles north of me. Crazy times. We see banners once in awhile with a beefed up Trump holding an AK47 or AR15. For some reason assault rifles and extreme Christianity go together. It is difficult to comprehend.

Eric K Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For
> some reason assault rifles and extreme
> Christianity go together. It is difficult to
> comprehend.

Amen.

Blessed are the peacemakers. Somebody once said.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/20/2022 09:53PM by Nightingale.

Nightingale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eric K Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For
> > some reason assault rifles and extreme
> > Christianity go together. It is difficult to
> > comprehend.
>
> Amen.
>
> Blessed are the peacemakers. Somebody once said.

Jesus, psycho killer,” Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” Mat 10:34

I know about the Red Team and the Blue Team . . .

What are some of the other likely teams, and what color will each have?

Anyone care to ID his or her favorite Apocalyptic team and its color(s)?

Green Team, Mother Nature, because she always wins.
Time to let the majority (women) take the reins of power for once, before toxic males blow us all to bits!

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Time to let the majority (women) take the reins of
> power for once, before toxic males blow us all to
> bits!

Males don't have exclusive rights to toxicity. The subject of this thread is female. She seems pretty toxic.

I don't think the issue is the gender of a person but more what's between their ears.

I agree, but she is defending the cruelty of the patriarchy.

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree, but she is defending the cruelty of the
> patriarchy.

To be more serious in response to this comment, stating the obvious fact that a person who is female is acting like a fool when she is, and a dangerous one at that, is not in any way analogous to comparing said female to anything but herself. It is a clear, and limited, statement of opinion.

A person shouldn't be evaluated solely according to gender. One person of any gender is not representative of all people of the same gender.

Criticizing a woman who seems lacking in intellectual skills, causing her to say and do stupid things, does not either damn all females nor advocate for "the patriarchy".

Just to be clear.


(teensy tiny grammatical edit)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2022 07:06PM by Nightingale.

Nightingale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> schrodingerscat Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I agree, but she is defending the cruelty of
> the
> > patriarchy.
>
> To be more serious in response to this comment,
> stating the obvious fact that a person who is
> female is acting like a fool when she is, and a
> dangerous one at that, is not in any way analogous
> to comparing said female to anything but herself.
> It is a clear, and limited, statement of opinion.
>
>
> A person shouldn't be evaluated solely according
> to gender. One person of any gender is not
> representative of all people of the same gender.
>
> Criticizing a woman who seems lacking in
> intellectual skills, causing her to say and do
> stupid things, does not either damn all females
> nor advocate for "the patriarchy".
>
> Just to be clear.
>
>
> (teensy tiny grammatical edit)

The way I see it, the real divide in this country, as in the rest of the world, is between egalitarianism on the left and White Nationalism on the far right. Theres a pendulum swinging between the two extremes. And somehow everything balances out and it works. Sometimes, better than others. Sometimes things seem really lopsided and broken, like on 1/6, when the White Nationalist Patriarchy reared it’s ugly head.

Ironically, on 9/11, it was just the opposite, everybody was a patriot on the side of good old Red White and Blue, against an outside enemy.

Now the enemy is us, inside. And they’re disguised as Patriots wearing Red White and Blue, while beating up Cops with American flags and breaking into the Capitol.

She’s the Head Cheerleader for White (Christian) Nationalism, MTG is her Co-Captain. She admits it.

There’s a great podcast out right now about this “Ultra Nationalism” called “Ultra” by Rachel Maddow that I’m listening to right now. Highly recommend it. We have no clue how close America came to being taken over by Nazis. You never hear about this history in American History class.

Take it from the ladies, chicks can be vicious. Maybe you haven't crossed paths with one who would change your mind.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2022 11:50PM by bradley.

bradley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Take it from the ladies, chicks can be vicious.
> Maybe you haven't crossed paths with one who would
> change your mind.


I grew up with 3 sisters and a very outspoken Mother.
They’ve all changed my mind, and still do from time to time.
I’ve also got an adult daughter who can make me change my mind.
And a Granddaughter who melts my stone cold heart.

My oldest granddaughter has been traumatized by a kid who brought a gun to school (elementary). Nobody was shot and somebody got the gun away from the kid. But my granddaughter was afraid to return to that school and her parents transferred her to another school.

An AR-15 isn’t an assault rifle. A M16 is an assault rifle. An AK47 is an assault rifle. M16’s and AK47’s are class 3 firearms and illegal to own unless you have a class 3 license and the firearm is legally registered to you. Class 3 licenses and firearms are very expensive so most people don’t own them.

For people not familiar with firearms:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/21/definition-of-whats-an-assault-weapon-is-a-very-contentious-issue.html

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry trade association, points out on its website that the “AR” actually doesn’t stand for assault rifle or automatic rifle but dates back to the 1950s and refers to the company that developed the weapon system, Armalite Rifle.

“AR-15-style rifles are NOT ‘assault weapons’ or ‘assault rifles,’ according to NSSF’s website. “An assault rifle is fully automatic — a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934.”

The NSSF added, “AR-15-style rifles look like military rifles, such as the M-16, but function like other semi-automatic civilian sporting firearms, firing only one round with each pull of the trigger.”

@@@@@@@@@@

https://www.recoilweb.com/turning-your-ar-15-into-an-m-16-150631.html

In late 2017, in Issue 34, I wrote an article about the various “full-auto simulators” that were available at the time. In a tragic twist of irony, I was putting the finishing touches on the story when a mass shooting occurred that made some of the products (bump stocks) I wrote about illegal under federal law. In the time since then, I’ve seen thousands of examples of folks on both sides of the debate consistently misuse terms and get basic facts about the operation of a machinegun, or even a semiautomatic rifle completely wrong.

This is somewhat understandable as manufacture of new machineguns for civilian use has been illegal since 1986 when the NFA (National Firearms Act) registry for new machine-guns for the civilian market was closed. As a result, most firearm enthusiasts and even experts who came of age in the past 35 years have little firsthand knowledge of inner workings of machineguns. There are exceptions of course when it comes to military armorers, federally licensed Special Occupational Taxpayers (SOT) who manufacture new machineguns for government use and those of us who read old books and manuals to grasp a better understanding of how things work. To educate the public, I thought I’d take a look at the various ways to make an M-16 from an AR-15.


@@@@@@@@


But the issue here is the theological rational that links the AR-15 with white nationalist Protestant Evangelical Christianity -- or, in other words, why does God want you to have an AR-15?


https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/the-nationalist-roots-of-white-evangelical-politics

While the Bebbington Quadrilateral has become the standard definition of evangelicalism, it offers little insight into why white evangelicals have been drawn to right-wing populism. The crisis in understanding only deepens when we learn that, according to some Pew polls, increased church attendance correlates with higher levels of support for Trump. Yet African-American evangelicals hold these exact same doctrinal beliefs and vote for the Democratic Party (as do many Latino evangelicals). This helps Never Trump evangelicals to avoid implicating theology, but it doesn’t help explain white evangelical support for the president. A historical approach to the relationship between doctrinal belief and political principle—political theology—can help make sense of these patterns.

Since Luther’s Reformation, the bulk of Protestantism has hedged its bets for survival on the goodwill of kings and nation-states. A threat to the nation, in turn, has often been viewed as a threaten to Protestantism itself. This is true of the history of Protestant evangelicalism, which has deep roots in U.S. history. From its origins, white evangelicalism has been marked by a vision of a Christian America, driven to overcome its perceived enemies. Seventeenth-century New England Puritans understood their wars against indigenous peoples “as a cosmic struggle between the forces of light and the forces of darkness,” argues sociologist Philip Gorski. “Bloody conquest and violent apocalypse—this has been the basic recipe for religious nationalism American-style ever since.” During the American Revolution, evangelical leaders who supported independence portrayed the war against the British as a struggle between God and Satan, or Moses and the Pharaoh; the Loyalists they branded as “infidels.” Through the Civil War, evangelicals in the South drew a connection between the holy American nation and racial hierarchy, appealing to the Bible to defend the institution of slavery. During Reconstruction, Southern white evangelicals remained completely silent on lynching and enforced segregation.


@@@@@@@@@


https://religionnews.com/2014/03/26/jesus-said-buy-assault-rifle/

Family Research Council’s Gen. Jerry Boykin told the ProFamily Legislators Conference that Jesus was going to return with an AR-15 assault rifle in hand. Citing Revelation 19, Boykin said that Jesus would return as a blood-stained warrior with sword in hand.

“I’ve checked this out,” Boykin said, “I believe that sword he’ll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15.”

The audience laughed, though isn’t clear if was because was joking or kidding on the square.

Boykin didn’t stop with his novel interpretation of Revelation. Jesus, it turns out, is the originator of the Second Amendment. In Luke’s account of the Last Supper, Jesus tells his disciples, “if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

Boykin emphasized that this was not metaphorical. It was a warning that Christians would need to defend themselves.

“The sword today is an AR-15, so if you don’t have one, go get one. You’re supposed to have one. It’s biblical,” Boykin said. “If you don’t have an AR-15 sell your cloak and for some of you guys sell your big screen TV with the clicker and go get you an AR-15. Ok?”

Even if Boykin’s interpretation is on point, it skips over some important details. The warrior in Revelation 19 doesn’t have a sword in his hand — it’s protruding from his mouth. And in Luke, the disciples told Jesus that they had two swords to share between all of them. Jesus replied that two swords was enough to share between all of them



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2022 07:59AM by anybody.

I would think full-auto would go against their religious theology of "one round one kill". Jesus would never prefer an M16 over an AR-15.

If a rifle can be used to assault somebody, it is an assault rifle.

So literally EVERY rifle in existence. Not to mention countless other objects scattered around the house. That’s dumb argument.

It may be a "dumb" argument to you but, from the near-gunless society I live in, I agree with it. A gun exists to hurt people/animals, doesn't matter whether it's used in attack or defence, that's what it's for.

How does it work in France? Do people own weapons at all? If so, under what circumstances?

Nucking Futz !

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is so insane, I don't know what to think :P
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/20/la
> uren-boebert-republican-dinner-jesus-second-coming
>
>
>
> Knox County, TN: Republican Colorado
> representative Lauren Boebert has told a group of
> party members that they “get to be part of
> ushering in the second coming of Jesus”,
> prompting shock and mockery online.
>
> “It is an honor to serve in this time. I believe
> that many of us in this room believe that we are
> in the last of the last days and that’s not a
> time to complain, that’s not a time to grumble,
> to be dismayed, to be disheartened, but a time to
> rejoice,” Boebert said.
>
> “You get to be a part of ushering in the second
> coming of Jesus,” the congresswoman said to
> applause across the room.

On end time prophecies, Ms. Boebert sounds a lot like some past LDS leaders I've read about here. That said, there is a Bible verse (I think it's in all three of the Synoptic gospels) where Jesus, when introducing an end times discussion, says that "You do not know when I will come." In other words, the Colorado representative has definitely got this one just plain wrong.
>
> Boebert’s remarks of the Christian belief that
> Jesus will return again after his ascension to
> heaven 2,000 years ago has triggered a slew of
> reactions online.
>
> The Lincoln Project, a Republican political action
> committee aimed at defeating Trumpism, tweeted:
> “Christian or not, Lauren Boebert cannot
> adequately represent any constituent who does not
> believe in this end times prophecy. Can you really
> have someone making decisions on your behalf that
> thinks nothing they do now will matter?”
>
> One user wrote, “If the end of times are coming
> why is she bothering with an election?”
>
> “I say this in all sincerity as a Knox county
> constituent and as an actual Christian … what in
> the HELL was that all about???” another user
> tweeted.
>
> Wednesday’s address by Boebert was not the first
> time the Republican congresswoman made striking
> remarks about Christianity.
>
> Earlier this year, Boebert hinted that Jesus may
> have prevented his crucifixion if he owned AR-15
> rifles.
>
> “How many AR-15s do you think Jesus would have
> had?” Boebert asked a crowd at a Christian event
> in Colorado. “Well, he didn’t have enough to
> keep his government from killing him.”

Again, Ms. Boebert misses the point of the Bible here. According to Genesis, Isaiah, and other Old Testament prophets, the Son of God was supposed to be put to death so that human beings could be saved from what Roman Catholics refer to as "original sin." (I'm aware that Mormons didn't (and maybe still don't) believe that that was the reason Jesus was sent.) At any rate, Jesus is well aware (it is mentioned in several passages in all of the gospels) that he is supposed to be put to death. As a matter of fact, both Luke and Matthew's gospels run an incident where the apostle Peter cuts off the ear of one of the Jewish high priests with a sword and Jesus rebukes him for doing just that because he is supposed to die according to the prophecies spoken about him. So again, Ms. Boebert is very wrong on her facts, especially why Jesus came and the nature of his mission.

For those who are still wondering, I am still an atheist and I believe the Bible to now be a work of fiction. Yet I think that Ms. Boebert's misreading and misinterpreting of the Bible should be called out for what it is: a series of lies on which she is trying to hang her political career.

Biebert is wrong on her facts? Facts have nothing to do with it. The Show is the thing. Performative politics.

Oh, and blindguy is a better theologian than most or all of the Q15.

It seems that the religious whack-a-doodles who are involved in politics are less inclined to hide their more extreme beliefs. I suppose they think it's a way to connect with their base.

He will need an AR25 because the second coming is all about America.

Always did get my 2s and 1s mixed up.

Jesus and AR 15?

Nope.

His Mormon connections assure us he would have used a BAR - Browning Automatic Rifle - invented by John Browning, a Mormon. A lot more power than an AR15 and Jesus was Power guy!

Browning should create a commemorative model with the Nauvoo temple engraved on the stock. Mormons would eat it up.

L.A. Exmo, could you repost the link to the Radiolab episode? It went down as collateral damage before I could listen to it.

Yikes, that went down fast. Here's the magazine article link.

https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-blue-and-how-do-we-see-color-2015-2

Thank you. I found the 2012 Radiolab program but thought you might have been referring to something more recent.

I'm a little skeptical of the article's main point. Relying so heavily on 19th century Europeans for understanding of ancient cultures is dubious; and Classical Chinese does in fact have a word for "blue" from the earliest extant texts onward, which puts it at about 1,000 BCE and probably earlier. The earliest documented Japanese does too, though the evidence there doesn't stretch back more than 1,500 years or so.

Which leads to another problem: how can anyone say when and in what order different colors entered a language? For most languages there is no evidence before the advent of written records. That's how we know that Chinese had the six or seven main colors by 3,000 years ago at the very least and the very latest. There's no evidence as to the order of those denotations although yellow and red permeate the earliest Han Chinese documents and inscriptions. In some cases linguistics can go further by reconstructing "proto" tongues. Proto-Greek had yellow, green, silver, and red as well as black and white, which isn't surprising because proto-Indo-European from 4,500 years ago did too. But you can't date the linguistic innovations let alone put then in chronological order.

That said, there are some fascinating ideas in the article, particularly the cognitive ones. Does the existence of words shape our perception of reality? Very likely. One of the Inuit languages has seventeen words for snow, which probably makes nuance a lot easier to identify. I also have long wondered what memory would look like if one lacked words and grammar. Does language facilitate and consolidate perception? Does it alter the nature and quality of memory?

Anyway, these are great topics and I look forward to listening to the Radiolab piece!

I found something else on the Chinese color progression. I'm not erudite enough on the topic to make an informed comment, just introducing it as food for thought.

https://www.lsusr.com/blog/history-of-color-in-chinese.html

Deutscher's book appears to be the main source for Geiger's theories.

The Namibian* experiment was a strange experience. I confess that I couldn't see the differently-shaded green square, even when it was later identified. So the experiment worked on me also.

*Good thing he didn't go to Nambia instead. All they see there is stark black & white.

The lsusr article isn't reliable. The author makes a lot of simple radicals (a set part of Chinese characters) but doesn't know what the set radicals actually are and hence reaches incorrect conclusions. He also suggests that "red" came much later than the other colors and yet we know that the "hong (red)" and "long (dragon)" motifs have been tied together from the earliest period of Chinese history.

I read a couple of reviews of the Deutscher book and they take some of his punch away. For example, he asks if the terms available to people cause them to perceive the world differently but, the reviewer says, he then cites a study showing that people perceive the differences with full accuracy even if they don't have separate words. So we are left with the different but nonetheless interesting point that different cultures divide the electromagnetic spectrum differently--a mixed green/blue in Chinese (and other Asian languages?) as opposed to the western green versus blue) but that doesn't appear to influence perception.


-------------------
> *Good thing he didn't go to Nambia instead. All
> they see there is stark black & white.

Excellent!








PS: I couldn't tell the different greens apart either.

I just did a search and found 49 uses of the word "blue" in the Hebrew bible, used mainly along with other colors--like saying the clothes were blue, red, purple, etc. That invalidates the claim in the article that Hebrew did not have that word.

I also stumbled across an anthropology article saying that blue was a late arrival, no earlier than 20,000 BCE, which is relevant.

All interesting stuff.

As if...

*D'oh!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2022 11:00PM by Lot's Wife.

"Yes, some say it's just a part of it, We've got to fulfill the book." - Bob Marley

It's a little funny and a little terrifying. These end-timers are hot for Armageddon because then Jesus will return. Okay, return to what?