Holiday Wishes for Obama

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by n david

I corrected the "excrement" statement. It wasn't blatant, it was unintentional and was corrected immediately when I saw the error.

The NLT/paraphrase thing is your problem. I posted a link directly to the NLT website which states they used paraphrase with the new bible. Don't complain to me about what their website says, write them. You want me to get their contact info for you?

Your "dirt" on Danny -- some dumb letter written by an "annonymous" person who spends most of the letter bashing Danny's church and all of one paragraph, or 3 sentences, complaining about Danny's leadership. Oh, and yah there was one very, very brief mention that he flirted with the girls on the worship team.

When I pointed this out you suddenly developed the urge to retract your statments and not want to go further with it.

As for Kris, you make a baseless statement on some allegation. No source, no proof, nothing.

If anything doesn't add up, it's these baseless accusations against Danny and Kris, which you even admitted to bringing up as a way to deflect criticism of your mancrush Adam Lambert ... then you stated regret for doing so.










Pretty straight forward ...


Intentions to support gay rights and marriage. There is an added "even if it be freedoms I disagree with."


Here's the kicker. Praying those who do have gay rights and marriage are happy and "find You [God]."

It's a gay friendly prayer. No mention of right or wrong. Very ambiguous, politically correct.


Right to choose? Not the property of the US Gov't, sure. But she does belong to God. The choice was made before the moment of conception, when she committed the act. After that, it's no longer a choice.


It ends on a nice note, prayer that they choose life. But it's still a morally ambiguous prayer that says nothing of right and wrong, and even states emphatically that the woman should have a right to choose.

I stand by my analysis. I didn't twist or misquote. It's there. At best it's a politically correct, morally ambiguous prayer. No right or wrong. It's okay as long as the intention is pure.

Makes me want to

I don't even wanna read all that gobbledy-gook right now. I'll look at it later. But two quick things:

1) The NLT website DOES NOT say that. You are deliberately and completely misrepresenting what they say. Either that or you're unable to understand the clear english language writings on the site. There isn't a single legitimate translation critic who considers the NLT a paraphrase. Your amateurish, slanted, biased opinion is worthless.

2) "I also pray that those who he empowers choose life." And you're saying this prayer is pro-abortion? Is your elevator broken??? It's clearly not going to the top floor. Just this statement alone "that he prayed a perverted prayer that supports abortion", discredits everything you say. It's like standing with you beside a blue wall and you're arguing that it's red. I'm not even sure what to say.

[n david]

Originally Posted by notofworks

I don't even wanna read all that gobbledy-gook right now. I'll look at it later. But two quick things:

1) The NLT website DOES NOT say that. You are deliberately and completely misrepresenting what they say. Either that or you're unable to understand the clear english language writings on the site. There isn't a single legitimate translation critic who considers the NLT a paraphrase. Your amateurish, slanted, biased opinion is worthless.

Here it is again. Read it, follow the link and read it again. I haven't altered or twisted anything. You choose to be willfully ignorant if you'd like, doesn't matter to me. To use your illustration, sometimes it's like standing besides a wall and you argue it's not there.

Essentially Literal (free only where absolutely necessary):
This philosophy is reluctant to "clarify" the meaning of the text, though it is open to doing so when absolutely necessary for understanding. It holds English style at a higher value than the more literal approach and often adjusts syntax to help it read better, even if this makes it less literal.

Dynamic Equivalent (free where helpful to clarify meaning):
This philosophy is open to "clarify" the meaning of the text whenever a literal rendering of the text might be confusing to the normal, uninitiated reader. This does not mean it deviates from the text; on the contrary, it does whatever is helpful to ensure that the text’s meaning comes through in English. In general, such translations try to balance the concerns of both functional equivalence and literal approaches.

Paraphrase (free for clarity and to catch attention):
This method is normally used by an individual translator, while the other methods usually employ committees of scholars. Creativity and style are extremely important here; the translator sometimes tries to catch the attention of readers in a fresh way, seeking to jolt and surprise them into understanding.

Link

Below is the contact information for Tyndale, the publisher for NLT. You can contact them to complain that their website is lying about their bible.
Contact Link

Originally Posted by notofworks

2) "I also pray that those who he empowers choose life." And you're saying this prayer is pro-abortion? Is your elevator broken??? It's clearly not going to the top floor. Just this statement alone "that he prayed a perverted prayer that supports abortion", discredits everything you say. It's like standing with you beside a blue wall and you're arguing that it's red. I'm not even sure what to say.

You willfully ignored the part about a woman's right to choose at the beginning of the prayer. Most would agree that right to choose is more synonymous with abortion than with pro-life.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by n david

Here it is again. Read it, follow the link and read it again. I haven't altered or twisted anything. You choose to be willfully ignorant if you'd like, doesn't matter to me. To use your illustration, sometimes it's like standing besides a wall and you argue it's not there.



Link

Below is the contact information for Tyndale, the publisher for NLT. You can contact them to complain that their website is lying about their bible.
Contact Link

You, evidently, have a complete inability to understand the English language. I'm not even sure what to say. I want to argue with you, but I'm not sure what to say when they go into deep detail (provided below) about how they TRANSLATED their bible, and you say that they claim to have paraphrased it. I don't know....words fail me.



You willfully ignored the part about a woman's right to choose at the beginning of the prayer.

Huh??? Ignored wh................what??? Did you dial the wrong number?

Most would agree that right to choose is more synonymous with abortion than with pro-life.

Incorrect. The beginning of the prayer has to do with gay rights...but I wouldn't expect you to be accurate with much of anything.

The following is from the NLT website. I bolded several things:

The translators of the New Living Translation set out to render the message of the original texts of Scripture into clear, contemporary English. As they did so, they kept the concerns of both formal-equivalence and dynamic-equivalence in mind. On the one hand, they translated as simply and literally as possible when that approach yielded an accurate, clear, and natural English text. Many words and phrases were rendered literally and consistently into English, preserving essential literary and rhetorical devices, ancient metaphors, and word choices that give structure to the text and provide echoes of meaning from one passage to the next.

On the other hand, the NLT translators rendered the message more dynamically when the literal rendering was hard to understand, was misleading, or yielded archaic or foreign wording. They clarified difficult metaphors and terms to aid in the reader's understanding. The translators first struggled with the meaning of the words and phrases in the ancient context; then they rendered the message into clear, natural English. Their goal was to be both faithful to the ancient texts and eminently readable. The result is a translation that is both exegetically accurate and idiomatically powerful.

More than 90 Bible scholars, along with a group of accomplished English stylists, worked toward that goal. In the end, the NLT is the result of precise scholarship conveyed in living language.

If you can't understand that, you're looking at a blue wall and calling it red. You need to call the elevator repairman.

Here's the prayer:

Heavenly Father,

I pray for our president Obama. I know that he supports equal representation and rights under the law that allows gays to marry. I pray that his intentions are pure and in favor of freedom, even if it be freedoms I disagree with. I pray that those who take this freedom find happiness, but ultimately I pray they find you.

Father, I know Obama believes that a woman's body isn't property of the United States Government and that a woman should have a right to choose. I pray that his motives are pure and truly are concerned with the rights and welfare of women. I also pray that those who he empowers choose life.

I ask oh Lord that you lead and guide him as he leads our nation in the days ahead.

In Jesus name.

Amen.

For you to call this perverted is perverse. You're no fun to talk to. There isn't a fact in this world you pay attention to, in favor of your own preconceived ideas. "Don't confuse the issue with the facts, please."

I think I'll check out of this discussion with you. I'm completely wasting time trying to include intellect with idiocy.

[n david]

Originally Posted by notofworks

The following is from the NLT website. I bolded several things:

The translators of the New Living Translation set out to render the message of the original texts of Scripture into clear, contemporary English. As they did so, they kept the concerns of both formal-equivalence and dynamic-equivalence in mind. On the one hand, they translated as simply and literally as possible when that approach yielded an accurate, clear, and natural English text. Many words and phrases were rendered literally and consistently into English, preserving essential literary and rhetorical devices, ancient metaphors, and word choices that give structure to the text and provide echoes of meaning from one passage to the next.

On the other hand, the NLT translators rendered the message more dynamically when the literal rendering was hard to understand, was misleading, or yielded archaic or foreign wording. They clarified difficult metaphors and terms to aid in the reader's understanding. The translators first struggled with the meaning of the words and phrases in the ancient context; then they rendered the message into clear, natural English. Their goal was to be both faithful to the ancient texts and eminently readable. The result is a translation that is both exegetically accurate and idiomatically powerful.

More than 90 Bible scholars, along with a group of accomplished English stylists, worked toward that goal. In the end, the NLT is the result of precise scholarship conveyed in living language.

If you can't understand that, you're looking at a blue wall and calling it red. You need to call the elevator repairman.

Oh looky, you bolded the word "translation," "translators," and "translated." Wow. I'm such an idiot! I should've just looked at the title of their Bible. It's hilarious that you bolded the "translation" in the "New Living Translation" as though that's proof enough.

One thing though, you complete IGNORED ... yet again ... the link from the site and what I posted where they stated their philosophy and methodology with the NLT. It includes Paraphrase. You continue to be willfully ignorant of that.

Originally Posted by notofworks

Here's the prayer:

Heavenly Father,

I pray for our president Obama. I know that he supports equal representation and rights under the law that allows gays to marry. I pray that his intentions are pure and in favor of freedom, even if it be freedoms I disagree with. I pray that those who take this freedom find happiness, but ultimately I pray they find you.

Father, I know Obama believes that a woman's body isn't property of the United States Government and that a woman should have a right to choose. I pray that his motives are pure and truly are concerned with the rights and welfare of women. I also pray that those who he empowers choose life.

I ask oh Lord that you lead and guide him as he leads our nation in the days ahead.

In Jesus name.

Amen.

For you to call this perverted is perverse. You're no fun to talk to. There isn't a fact in this world you pay attention to, in favor of your own preconceived ideas. "Don't confuse the issue with the facts, please."

I think I'll check out of this discussion with you. I'm completely wasting time trying to include intellect with idiocy.

Nah, you're not wasting your time trying to include intellect ... not when you have none to begin with. Your willfull ignorance overrides any intellect you may possess.

I've already broken down the prayer line by line and posted responses to it ... which you must have ignored as well.

I'll state again, the prayer is ambiguous, politically-correct, contains nothing about what is biblically right or wrong, and because of that is one of the most perverted prayers I've seen/heard.

You could take a poll and most would agree that right to choose is more synonymous with abortion than with pro-life. Argue that all you want, but it's true.

Check out, cop out, whatever. Makes no difference to me.

Perhaps you and your intellect would be better matched against, hmmm, Nancy Pelosi? She likes being willfully ignorant, you two would hit it off.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Colin Powell? Are you speaking of the Colin Powell that endorsed Barak Obama for president? Pretty sure it's the same guy. Interesting how an Obama supporter would be the fulfillment of the dream, but Obama isn't. Hmmm......

Ok. I am done with this conversation given that you are comparing Reagon's governorship to Obama's presidency and can't understand the difference. Which is ridiculous anyway given that Reagon was the president of the Screen Actor's Guild before he was the govenor of California. Reagon demonstrated LEADERSHIP and EXPERIENCE before seeking the highest office of the free world.

And for the record- I seriously doubt that Colin Powell is electable as president NOW because he endorsed Obama who is the opposite of what Americans loved about Colin Powell 9 years ago.

[Monterrey]

VIVA LA MEXICO



Vincente Fox for president of USA in 2012



He will bring safety, no troops in Afganistan, end to drug war, end of violence......




JUST LIKE HE DID IN MEXICO!!!!!





LOL

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Newman

Ok. I am done with this conversation given that you are comparing Reagon's governorship to Obama's presidency and can't understand the difference. Which is ridiculous anyway given that Reagon was the president of the Screen Actor's Guild before he was the govenor of California. Reagon demonstrated LEADERSHIP and EXPERIENCE before seeking the highest office of the free world.

And for the record- I seriously doubt that Colin Powell is electable as president NOW because he endorsed Obama who is the opposite of what Americans loved about Colin Powell 9 years ago.

Wait.....Screen Actor's Guild?? The Screen Actor's Guild?? That's when he was a Democrat, right?

So you're going to compare being a Union Boss to the position of U.S. Senator? I can see why you're leaving the debate. If that's the best ya got, I'd leave too.

And look....it was YOU that said great things about the potential of Colin Powell being elected. I'm sorry that I had to point out to you that he endorsed Obama, which I'm sure, is another motivation for you to stop the debate, because your point there didn't go over so well. It did, indeed, end up being a rather one-sided discussion. Talk to you later and nice to meet you.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Wait.....Screen Actor's Guild?? The Screen Actor's Guild?? That's when he was a Democrat, right?

So you're going to compare being a Union Boss to the position of U.S. Senator? I can see why you're leaving the debate. If that's the best ya got, I'd leave too.

And look....it was YOU that said great things about the potential of Colin Powell being elected. I'm sorry that I had to point out to you that he endorsed Obama, which I'm sure, is another motivation for you to stop the debate, because your point there didn't go over so well. It did, indeed, end up being a rather one-sided discussion. Talk to you later and nice to meet you.

Ummm.... actually I am getting out of the conversation because it is illogical to point out Reagon as a counter point to Obama (and you don't grasp that).

It is also immaterial to our discussion that Colin Powell endorsed Obama 9 years after he considered running for office. I would have voted for him then. I would not vote for him now. Why is that so hard to understand?

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Newman

Ummm.... actually I am getting out of the conversation because it is illogical to point out Reagon as a counter point to Obama (and you don't grasp that).

It is also immaterial to our discussion that Colin Powell endorsed Obama 9 years after he considered running for office. I would have voted for him then. I would not vote for him now. Why is that so hard to understand?

Oh ok, I thought you were "done." If you had voted for Powell then, you would have ended up with a president similar to Obama. Powell has always had liberal leanings. I surprised you wouldn't have know that.

Would a "Community Planner" be similar to a "Union Boss"?

[Newman]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Oh ok, I thought you were "done." If you had voted for Powell then, you would have ended up with a president similar to Obama. Powell has always had liberal leanings. I surprised you wouldn't have know that.

Would a "Community Planner" be similar to a "Union Boss"?

OOOOOOHHHHHH! Please stop responding.

Colin Powell- (war hero/proud American) vs. Al Gore?????

I would have voted for Colin Powell.

NORMAL EXPERIENCE BEFORE running for PRESIDENT on Democratic or Republican ticket (pick one).....>

1. US Vice President
2. State Governor
3. US Senator (much harder to do)
4. Well loved and respected military leader
``````````````````````````````````````````````
5. Community Organizer--> inexperienced state legislator:---> NOT EVEN ONE TERM US SENATOR---> US President????????????