The lynch-mob mentality

[CurveLight]

So a novelist that's been dead for 60 years, is going to explain what idiot number one said about what he calls "nationalist" today? Makes sense.

I take it you advocate burning the New Testament because it's most prolific writer has been dead for over 2000 years. Is that true or is your time frame of dead authors only used when your superbly arrogant shadow has no other way to ignore information that nauseates your stupidity?

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God? Are you claiming God's inspiration in people ceased to exist 2000 years ago or are you saying you have the power to state whom has or has not been inspired by God?

I linked Orwell because he's an awesome fucking writer and I was hoping you get off your lazy mental ass and actually read the link. Every time you don't like a post you call the poster stupid or some other ridiculous name. So here's the deal: you agree to refrain from any personal attacks, as I will make the same commitment, and i'll start a new thread explaining the differences between American Patriotism and Nationalism. Do you agree to that simple request?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I take it you advocate burning the New Testament because it's most prolific writer has been dead for over 2000 years. Is that true or is your time frame of dead authors only used when your superbly arrogant shadow has no other way to ignore information that nauseates your stupidity?

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God? Are you claiming God's inspiration in people ceased to exist 2000 years ago or are you saying you have the power to state whom has or has not been inspired by God?

I linked Orwell because he's an awesome fucking writer and I was hoping you get off your lazy mental ass and actually read the link. Every time you don't like a post you call the poster stupid or some other ridiculous name. So here's the deal: you agree to refrain from any personal attacks, as I will make the same commitment, and i'll start a new thread explaining the differences between American Patriotism and Nationalism. Do you agree to that simple request?

If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.

I'll agree to your terms the minute you answer the questions I posed to you, you know the ones you've been dodging?


I'll add this little bit of information just in case you question why I believe those that wrote the bible were ispired by God. If you read , 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul states "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,".

And in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 it states:

"But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’
“And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."


Fulfilled prophecy is the signature that God has spoken in the Bible. The Bible is the only sacred book that contains future predictions that have come true. It is a very sunique book with 737 prophecies recorded in about 8,500 verses. That is about 25% of the Bible. The prophecies occur in both the Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament prophets, the New Testament apostles, and Jesus Christ all made predictions about the future. They have all come true except for those which are yet future. The Bible is also a book of history whose facts are being proven to be true with almost every archeological finding. The Bible is accurate when it speaks to history; and when it makes predictions, they come true.

 

[stephensmith]

I guess this is tangential somewhat, but I highly recommend Orwell's essay, "On Shooting An Elephant," about his experience as a colonial police official in India (or Burma? I don't have it at hand). It is the most succinct picture of imperialism, and what it does to both the governed and the governors, that I have ever seen.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Backing saddam, like we backed iran, had the same goal: a doorway for physical US presence in the ME capable of direct control over energy.

You should have informed me you were an Islamofascist who saw EVERYTHING as a US attempt to exert imperialistic control over teh (sic) everpeaceful religion of Mohammed. I would not have wasted time trying to inform you, as your religion (or is that cult) dictates your beliefs.

"Islamofascist" is an ignorant term propelled by the uninformed. Moreover, I never brought up islam, you did. Do you use bullshit terms to hide behind every time you encounter someone you can't bullshit? You ignored my entire post just to make it personal in the hopes of concealing your inability to respond to the facts.

When you spout Islamofascist ideological tenets as if they were facts then what conclusion should I draw? I only responded in case some less informed reader actually gave credence to your biased rant about US imperialism.

 

[uscitizen]

Can anyone prove the bible was written by men inspired by God"?

 

[Charles Stucker]

Can anyone prove the bible was written by men inspired by God"?

No, but I can make a pretty good case that the King James version's translation was inspired by a monarch who claimed he was God's chosen, does that count?

Where is that sarcasm smiley.

 

[uscitizen]

Can anyone prove the bible was written by men inspired by God"?

No, but I can make a pretty good case that the King James version's translation was inspired by a monarch who claimed he was God's chosen, does that count?

Where is that sarcasm smiley.

Claimed is the key word.

 

[CurveLight]

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God? Are you claiming God's inspiration in people ceased to exist 2000 years ago or are you saying you have the power to state whom has or has not been inspired by God?

I linked Orwell because he's an awesome fucking writer and I was hoping you get off your lazy mental ass and actually read the link. Every time you don't like a post you call the poster stupid or some other ridiculous name. So here's the deal: you agree to refrain from any personal attacks, as I will make the same commitment, and i'll start a new thread explaining the differences between American Patriotism and Nationalism. Do you agree to that simple request?

If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.

I'll agree to your terms the minute you answer the questions I posed to you, you know the ones you've been dodging?


I'll add this little bit of information just in case you question why I believe those that wrote the bible were ispired by God. If you read , 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul states "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,".

And in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 it states:

"But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’
“And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."


Fulfilled prophecy is the signature that God has spoken in the Bible. The Bible is the only sacred book that contains future predictions that have come true. It is a very sunique book with 737 prophecies recorded in about 8,500 verses. That is about 25% of the Bible. The prophecies occur in both the Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament prophets, the New Testament apostles, and Jesus Christ all made predictions about the future. They have all come true except for those which are yet future. The Bible is also a book of history whose facts are being proven to be true with almost every archeological finding. The Bible is accurate when it speaks to history; and when it makes predictions, they come true.

I never claimed orwell was inspired by God.

Your biblical exegesis looks like a pamphlet that fell off John Smith's wagon and you completely avoided the simple request in my post. I asked it to expose you are not here for sincere dialogue. You see, I'm not going to waste time jumping through hoops for someone who pretends (that would be you) to be sincere.

The benefit of a message board is you can hide the ugliness of your physical appearance but your true beauty, or lack of, has no place to hide. Quite ironic.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Can anyone prove the bible was written by men inspired by God"?

No, but I can make a pretty good case that the King James version's translation was inspired by a monarch who claimed he was God's chosen, does that count?

Where is that sarcasm smiley.

Claimed is the key word.

I forgot, religion is like insurance for the "next life" and everyone knows the key to getting a return on insurance is making claims

 

[Lonestar_logic]

How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God? Are you claiming God's inspiration in people ceased to exist 2000 years ago or are you saying you have the power to state whom has or has not been inspired by God?

I linked Orwell because he's an awesome fucking writer and I was hoping you get off your lazy mental ass and actually read the link. Every time you don't like a post you call the poster stupid or some other ridiculous name. So here's the deal: you agree to refrain from any personal attacks, as I will make the same commitment, and i'll start a new thread explaining the differences between American Patriotism and Nationalism. Do you agree to that simple request?

If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.

I'll agree to your terms the minute you answer the questions I posed to you, you know the ones you've been dodging?


I'll add this little bit of information just in case you question why I believe those that wrote the bible were ispired by God. If you read , 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul states "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,".

And in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 it states:

"But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’
“And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."


Fulfilled prophecy is the signature that God has spoken in the Bible. The Bible is the only sacred book that contains future predictions that have come true. It is a very sunique book with 737 prophecies recorded in about 8,500 verses. That is about 25% of the Bible. The prophecies occur in both the Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament prophets, the New Testament apostles, and Jesus Christ all made predictions about the future. They have all come true except for those which are yet future. The Bible is also a book of history whose facts are being proven to be true with almost every archeological finding. The Bible is accurate when it speaks to history; and when it makes predictions, they come true.

I never claimed orwell was inspired by God.

Your biblical exegesis looks like a pamphlet that fell off John Smith's wagon and you completely avoided the simple request in my post. I asked it to expose you are not here for sincere dialogue. You see, I'm not going to waste time jumping through hoops for someone who pretends (that would be you) to be sincere.

The benefit of a message board is you can hide the ugliness of your physical appearance but your true beauty, or lack of, has no place to hide. Quite ironic.

I never said you made that claim. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? You asked "How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God?", I replied, "If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.". So obviously you were basically talking out your ass.

I answered your simple request and agreed with it with one caveat, that you answer the questions that you've been avoiding and continue to avoid.

It's clear that you do not want to participate in sincere dialogue or you would have answered the questions I directed at you in the first place.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A novelist is going to expalin to me what you're incapable of explaining? A novelist that's been dead for sixty years? You people are the dumbest fucks I've ever seen.

Your concession is duly noted.

Orwell was not just a novelist, no more than Erich Maria Remarque, Stephen Crane and Dalton Trumbo were just novelists. Novels, as well as musical lyrics and other forms of artistic endeavor have been used for centuries to frame our world for us by creative thinkers.
Only the ignorant or the mentally challenged fail to understand the value of George Orwell's words to political discourse.

So a novelist that's been dead for 60 years, is going to explain what idiot number one said about what he calls "nationalist" today? Makes sense.

I wouldn't expect eveyone to understand, it takes a bit of abstraction - remember, some are ignorant willfully, others as a result of congenital limitations.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

You can say "I BELIEVE - the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and - I BELIEVE -God is still around. But all that is only your opinion.

It is no different than what most everyone does up here, state their own, or opinions by others.

Orwell's general opinion of how Nationalists behave really does seem to fit you quite well. That is MY opinion.

Don't like it ? ? ? PPPPFFFFFFTTTTT ! ! !

 

[Lonestar_logic]

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

You can say "I BELIEVE - the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and - I BELIEVE -God is still around. But all that is only your opinion.

It is no different than what most everyone does up here, state their own, or opinions by others.

Orwell's general opinion of how Nationalists behave really does seem to fit you quite well. That is MY opinion.

Don't like it ? ? ? PPPPFFFFFFTTTTT ! ! !

Not only my opinion but the opinion of 80 percent of Americans as well.

A nationalist in my opinion is one who has a great love for their nation and desires political independence.

Merriam-Webster defines nationalist as :

1 : an advocate of or believer in nationalism
2 : a member of a political party or group advocating national independence or strong national government

 

[CurveLight]

If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.

I'll agree to your terms the minute you answer the questions I posed to you, you know the ones you've been dodging?


I'll add this little bit of information just in case you question why I believe those that wrote the bible were ispired by God. If you read , 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul states "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,".

And in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 it states:

"But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’
“And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."


Fulfilled prophecy is the signature that God has spoken in the Bible. The Bible is the only sacred book that contains future predictions that have come true. It is a very sunique book with 737 prophecies recorded in about 8,500 verses. That is about 25% of the Bible. The prophecies occur in both the Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament prophets, the New Testament apostles, and Jesus Christ all made predictions about the future. They have all come true except for those which are yet future. The Bible is also a book of history whose facts are being proven to be true with almost every archeological finding. The Bible is accurate when it speaks to history; and when it makes predictions, they come true.

I never claimed orwell was inspired by God.

Your biblical exegesis looks like a pamphlet that fell off John Smith's wagon and you completely avoided the simple request in my post. I asked it to expose you are not here for sincere dialogue. You see, I'm not going to waste time jumping through hoops for someone who pretends (that would be you) to be sincere.

The benefit of a message board is you can hide the ugliness of your physical appearance but your true beauty, or lack of, has no place to hide. Quite ironic.

I never said you made that claim. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? You asked "How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God?", I replied, "If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.". So obviously you were basically talking out your ass.

I answered your simple request and agreed with it with one caveat, that you answer the questions that you've been avoiding and continue to avoid.

It's clear that you do not want to participate in sincere dialogue or you would have answered the questions I directed at you in the first place.

So when you said:

"If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it."

.....you weren't accusing me of claiming he was inspired by God? Yeah....cause we all know requesting evidence to support a claim isn't saying the person made a claim.....lol.

Also, your questions would have been answered in full if you had simply agreed to a very simple request. You hid behind your "caveat" and it's painfully obvious.

Please, please have the last word......

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

No because the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and God is still around. Just admit that you can't answer the questions I posed to you and be done with it.

I ask you direct questions about comments you made and you respond with some bullshit from George Orwell. Now explain to me how he, being dead for sixty years, can explain the comment you made just yesterday. It's obvious you can't explain your comments so you resort to diversionary tactics, which is common among you idiot liberals, when asked to answer for the asinine comments that are made.

You can say "I BELIEVE - the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and - I BELIEVE -God is still around. But all that is only your opinion.

It is no different than what most everyone does up here, state their own, or opinions by others.

Orwell's general opinion of how Nationalists behave really does seem to fit you quite well. That is MY opinion.

Don't like it ? ? ? PPPPFFFFFFTTTTT ! ! !

Not only my opinion but the opinion of 80 percent of Americans as well.

A nationalist in my opinion is one who has a great love for their nation and desires political independence.

Merriam-Webster defines nationalist as :

1 : an advocate of or believer in nationalism
2 : a member of a political party or group advocating national independence or strong national government

SO WHAT ! ! !

Just because a group believes something does not make it so; Logical fallacy: Argumentum ad populum - appeal to popularity/bandwagon - everybody is doing it!

1 : loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

In my opinion, not a particularlyly good thing in view of what these sorts do, which takes us back to Orwell...

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I never claimed orwell was inspired by God.

Your biblical exegesis looks like a pamphlet that fell off John Smith's wagon and you completely avoided the simple request in my post. I asked it to expose you are not here for sincere dialogue. You see, I'm not going to waste time jumping through hoops for someone who pretends (that would be you) to be sincere.

The benefit of a message board is you can hide the ugliness of your physical appearance but your true beauty, or lack of, has no place to hide. Quite ironic.

I never said you made that claim. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? You asked "How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God?", I replied, "If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.". So obviously you were basically talking out your ass.

I answered your simple request and agreed with it with one caveat, that you answer the questions that you've been avoiding and continue to avoid.

It's clear that you do not want to participate in sincere dialogue or you would have answered the questions I directed at you in the first place.

So when you said:

"If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it."

.....you weren't accusing me of claiming he was inspired by God? Yeah....cause we all know requesting evidence to support a claim isn't saying the person made a claim.....lol.

Also, your questions would have been answered in full if you had simply agreed to a very simple request. You hid behind your "caveat" and it's painfully obvious.

Please, please have the last word......

No it was more a rhetorical question. Which meant that if in fact Orwell was inspired by God then surely someone would have provided some sort of evidence to support it. Or you would have offered it in rebuttal. The fact that you phrased your question in the manner that you did, I knew you didn't possess the evidence nor did I think you actually believe Orwell was inspired by God.

There was no hiding, it's there for all to see in black and white. The fact that you still refuse to answer the questions shows you're not sincere in having an honest discussion. You would rather piss and moan about the caveat in typical liberal fashion.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You can say "I BELIEVE - the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God, and - I BELIEVE -God is still around. But all that is only your opinion.

It is no different than what most everyone does up here, state their own, or opinions by others.

Orwell's general opinion of how Nationalists behave really does seem to fit you quite well. That is MY opinion.

Don't like it ? ? ? PPPPFFFFFFTTTTT ! ! !

Not only my opinion but the opinion of 80 percent of Americans as well.

A nationalist in my opinion is one who has a great love for their nation and desires political independence.

Merriam-Webster defines nationalist as :

1 : an advocate of or believer in nationalism
2 : a member of a political party or group advocating national independence or strong national government

SO WHAT ! ! !

Just because a group believes something does not make it so; Logical fallacy: Argumentum ad populum - appeal to popularity/bandwagon - everybody is doing it!

1 : loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

In my opinion, not a particularlyly good thing in view of what these sorts do, which takes us back to Orwell...

So what? So you were wrong it's not only my opinion but an opinion shared by hundreds of millions.

Tell me are you a practitioner of faith? If so, which faith?

That may we be your definition of what a nationalist is, but I've already given you my thoughts, which isn't too far off from Merriam-Webster's definition.

 

[CurveLight]

I never said you made that claim. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? You asked "How do you know Orwell wasn't inspired by God?", I replied, "If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it.". So obviously you were basically talking out your ass.

I answered your simple request and agreed with it with one caveat, that you answer the questions that you've been avoiding and continue to avoid.

It's clear that you do not want to participate in sincere dialogue or you would have answered the questions I directed at you in the first place.

So when you said:

"If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it."

.....you weren't accusing me of claiming he was inspired by God? Yeah....cause we all know requesting evidence to support a claim isn't saying the person made a claim.....lol.

Also, your questions would have been answered in full if you had simply agreed to a very simple request. You hid behind your "caveat" and it's painfully obvious.

Please, please have the last word......

No it was more a rhetorical question. Which meant that if in fact Orwell was inspired by God then surely someone would have provided some sort of evidence to support it. Or you would have offered it in rebuttal. The fact that you phrased your question in the manner that you did, I knew you didn't possess the evidence nor did I think you actually believe Orwell was inspired by God.

There was no hiding, it's there for all to see in black and white. The fact that you still refuse to answer the questions shows you're not sincere in having an honest discussion. You would rather piss and moan about the caveat in typical liberal fashion.

Gotta point out you justified respecting authors who have been dead for 2000 years on the claim they were inspired by God while ignoring what Wells has written on the basis he has been dead for 60 years. By implication you claimed Wells was not inspired by God. Hence, my question. It's about time you called me stupid because I doubt you will be honest in your response.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Not only my opinion but the opinion of 80 percent of Americans as well.

A nationalist in my opinion is one who has a great love for their nation and desires political independence.

Merriam-Webster defines nationalist as :

1 : an advocate of or believer in nationalism
2 : a member of a political party or group advocating national independence or strong national government

SO WHAT ! ! !

Just because a group believes something does not make it so; Logical fallacy: Argumentum ad populum - appeal to popularity/bandwagon - everybody is doing it!

1 : loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

In my opinion, not a particularlyly good thing in view of what these sorts do, which takes us back to Orwell...

So what? So you were wrong it's not only my opinion but an opinion shared by hundreds of millions.

Tell me are you a practitioner of faith? If so, which faith?

That may we be your definition of what a nationalist is, but I've already given you my thoughts, which isn't too far off from Merriam-Webster's definition.

I got my definition of nationalism from Merriam-Webster's here: Nationalism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Just because an OPINION is shared by "hundreds of millions" does NOT make an OPINION into a fact.

Whether I am or am not of some "faith" is not what this is about, but if it was "faith" then it would be based on some subjective opinion, NOT fact!

And I am not wrong, you are!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So when you said:

"If he was inspired by God then provide the evidence to support it."

.....you weren't accusing me of claiming he was inspired by God? Yeah....cause we all know requesting evidence to support a claim isn't saying the person made a claim.....lol.

Also, your questions would have been answered in full if you had simply agreed to a very simple request. You hid behind your "caveat" and it's painfully obvious.

Please, please have the last word......

No it was more a rhetorical question. Which meant that if in fact Orwell was inspired by God then surely someone would have provided some sort of evidence to support it. Or you would have offered it in rebuttal. The fact that you phrased your question in the manner that you did, I knew you didn't possess the evidence nor did I think you actually believe Orwell was inspired by God.

There was no hiding, it's there for all to see in black and white. The fact that you still refuse to answer the questions shows you're not sincere in having an honest discussion. You would rather piss and moan about the caveat in typical liberal fashion.

Gotta point out you justified respecting authors who have been dead for 2000 years on the claim they were inspired by God while ignoring what Wells has written on the basis he has been dead for 60 years. By implication you claimed Wells was not inspired by God. Hence, my question. It's about time you called me stupid because I doubt you will be honest in your response.

I'm pretty sure calling you stupid is something you're quite used to and you have probably come to expect it. But I'll try to be civil, if just for a few minutes. I'm also pretty sure I didn't specifically say I respected the authors who have been dead for 2000 years, that's just an assumption on your part. I will say that I do respect the inspiration these authors had and I trust the words that they penned.

Orwell on the other hand is a mere journalist/novelist that's entitled to his opinions. That doesn't make his opinion fact and it doesn't mean his opinions transcends time. You made comments about nationalist (and I'm fairly certain you implied the tea partiers were nationalist) and what they believe as if you were an authority on nationalism, which we both know your not. I ask you quite simply to explain how you came to your conclusions about the tea partiers/ nationalist or whatever term your currently using to describe them, and all I've seen since is one diversionary tactic after another. Why you refuse to answer simple questions is beyond me, I can only assume it's because you have no answer, you more than likely were just spouting off bullshit cause you thought it made you look smart, which it didn't.