Post Election Bonus Coverage

Posted by on 21 November, 2008
This post was filed in Politics and has 29 comments

Can’t get enough politics? Join Stu as he brings you bonus 2008 election material never heard on Truthtalk Live.  Conversations recorded after “red hot” programs went off the air. Some of the most spirited discussions took place after the show and you’ll hear them today. And we’ll look forward to your comments right here.

Bookmark and Share

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

29 Comments on “Post Election Bonus Coverage”

  • 1.
    21 November, 2008, 5:26 pm

    Here’s a little quiz I put together for my co-workers. Im shocked at how little they know about Christ even tho most claim to be very religious and regular church attenders. No one has scored higher than 70%.

  • 2.
    21 November, 2008, 6:10 pm

    I GOT AN 80!

  • 3.
    21 November, 2008, 8:25 pm


  • 4.
    22 November, 2008, 9:56 am

    Well, I got a 30 so I guess I am the class dunce.

    Question #1 is wrong, though, December 25 is after the solstice so technically it was wintertime not fall. Right?

  • 5.
    Mike S
    22 November, 2008, 10:07 am

    I don’t know what the reasons for the 12/25 tradition are. Although I’m sure that John will say that it’s because Christianity has pagan roots. Yet the Gospel was first pointed to in Genesis 1 so I disagree.

  • 6.
    F. L. A.
    22 November, 2008, 1:29 pm

    Yes, he would Mr.Sears.
    In his treatise “Retractationes”, St.Augustine himself refuted the traditional view that Christianity, though of obvious Jewish roots, virtually “fell from the skys” as a radically new, unique religion destined to fulfill of eclipse all other faiths.Few average Christians indeed are aware that Augustine himself received the Christian doctrine of the Trinity from a Pagan….the philosopher Plotinus[c.A.D.205-270], who “fed his mind on the attributes of the Pagan divinities and was steeped in Hellenistic rational religion and esotericism”.
    St.Augustine’s words are echoed by the church historian Esebius, the Bishop of Caesarea and one of the major shapers of the emerging Christian orthodoxy. In his famous book “Ecclesiastical History” said that the Gospels of the New Testament were really the old dramatic books of the Essenes, from the pre-Christian days. Of a group of Essenes called Therapeutae in Egypt he writes “These ancient Therapeutae were Christians, and there writtings are our Gospels and Epistiles.”.
    I could go on and on, but I think that you get my point. Early Christianity was a great “assimilator” of other faiths and others wisdom. Second century theologian and historian Justin Martyr conceded as much when he wrote “Whatever thing were rightly said among the ancients are now the property of the Christians!”.
    Why do you not know the reasons for the December 25th traditions, Mr.Sears?

  • 7.
    Mike S
    22 November, 2008, 2:01 pm

    Thanks F.L.A.
    I knew you’d come through. So, it was a great “assimilator” of other faiths because all those other faiths have a God Man sacrificing himself for them? I think not. That is the main difference that stands out from all other faiths and is the prime essential doctrine of the Christian faith. “Why do you not know the reasons for the December 25th traditions” It’s not essential doctrine, so I don’t concern myself with it. Happy Weekend! Go Deacs and Go Texas Tech!!

  • 8.
    F. L. A.
    22 November, 2008, 3:43 pm

    You theologies “main difference is not all that different after all, Mr.Sears.
    Studies show that there are close “parallel cycles” of allegorical “events” in the mythic and dramatic representations of 30 to 50 earlier Gods in the ancient sacred writings of the world. For example….the parallels in the birth and life of Lord Krishna, the Hindu “Christ” are now well known. The Persian prophet Zoroaster was born in innocence and of a virgin birth[As was the Buddha], from a ray of divine reason[Logos]. Eventually he was suspended from a tree. The is also the story of Salivahana, a divine child born of a virgin in Ceylon[Sri Lanka]. He was the son of a carpenter named Tarshaca. His story shows such a close affinity to that of Jesus that it is difficult to believe they both did not arise from the same source. Many of the other circumstances with slight variations are also the same as those told of Lord Krishna.
    Comparative religion studies show that almost every known theological belief system has stories of a “God-Man” like character, a Deity that becomes as a mortal, suffers, dies, defeats enemies, and then arises back up to power and “goes home”. There are at least 30 to 50 such avatars or saviors including but not limited to Osiris, Iu-em-hetep, Horus, Krishna, Bacchus, Orpheus, Hermes, Balder, Adonis, Hercules, Attis, Mithras, Tammus of Syria, Thor[Son of Odin], Beddru of Japan, Deva Tat of Siam, Zoroaster, and Salivahana.
    THE ONLY REAL DIFFERENCE, between the story of Jesus in the New Testament and all of the other stories and ancient myths is that very few cultures prior to the Christian Movement, enforced the belief that the events were actually historical fact.
    I have to go now, for it grows too cold for me to tolerate.
    Enjoy your sporting games.

  • 9.
    22 November, 2008, 6:50 pm

    Try doing a little research on the holidays of Yule and Saturnalia and what the Early CHURCH did to help convert the pagans into Christianity, for a better understanding of the origins of what we now call Christmas, MikeS.
    This is why a some Christians don’t have very much to do with Christmas, or Easter for that matter.
    The Pilgrims wouldn’t have anything to do with it at all, but then they were a rather “stuffy” bunch.

  • 10.
    23 November, 2008, 11:59 am

    They stole the Christmas from the pagans.

  • 11.
    23 November, 2008, 5:25 pm

    Close enough, Stanley.
    We celebrate both Yule and Christmas now.
    Any excuse to have a good time with others[smile].

  • 12.
    Ed R.
    23 November, 2008, 6:15 pm

    Please understand, the early Chruch could have cared less about the date of Jesus’ birth. It just was not an issue. When the birthdate was desired, incorporation of other religions was also desired. So, without an acutal “birthdate” to use, the pegan date was acceptable. Now, is the actual date of the birth of Jesus that absolute as to cause the failing of the Chruch? Of course not. I am a retired submarine Navy vet. I cannot count the number of birthdays that were “postponed” till I got home. The date is not as important as the worship of Jesus.

  • 13.
    F. L. A.
    24 November, 2008, 4:38 pm

    The personal life and death facts of the most important figure in all of Christian history seems like a rather important detail for the early Church to look into to ME. We do not even know what the man looked like, so little is there of any “factual evidence” of his existence.

  • 14.
    Ed R.
    24 November, 2008, 4:48 pm

    The early Church was expecting the second comming within thier lifetimes. Unlike any other faith, the actual date of birth was not important. Unlike most other faiths, Christians were being killed for thier faith at the onset. The death, burial and resurection were the focal point of the faith, not the birth.

  • 15.
    F. L. A.
    24 November, 2008, 4:55 pm

    And this is fine Ed, as so long as the story and it’s characters are not presented as being historical fact.

  • 16.
    Ed R.
    24 November, 2008, 5:02 pm

    What do you wish. a birth certificate? Then provide the birth certificates of Plato, Arostotle and the like.

  • 17.
    24 November, 2008, 7:33 pm

    Ironically Ed, we actually know what these two men[Plato and his student Aristotle] actually looked like, their birth and death dates, and we know more about their lives then than we do about Jesus. Odd too, considering that they both predated Jesus by centuries. It was all recorded by historians, which makes the lack of information available on Jesus all the more perplexing.
    Do you know why the Christians had such a hard time within ancient society “on the onset”?
    Because the Christians were a new heretical minority cult in a dominantly Pagan world.
    If it makes you feel better, you got us Pagans[and the Jews, ironically] back for it from the Dark Ages up to about the early/mid twentieth century.

  • 18.
    Ed R.
    24 November, 2008, 7:50 pm

    There is one more thing about the early Christians. To make an image of Jesus was concidered idolatry. This thinking is still found in many denominations today. I remember somebody finding records of a Jesus born in Bethleham to Mary and Joseph. Another point would have been that the early Church could have been easliy destroyed by producing a body of Jesus or not finding people who had actually met Jesus. The only groups that deny that Jesus exsisted are modern groups or groups that were not in the area at the time.

  • 19.
    25 November, 2008, 11:10 am

    “I remember somebody finding records of a Jesus born in Bethleham to Mary and Joseph.” – Ed R.

    Who, where and when, please? Thanks!

  • 20.
    25 November, 2008, 11:21 am

    FLA,John.and Barney: A good book you could read would be “Who moved the stone” by Frank Morrison.

  • 21.
    25 November, 2008, 5:09 pm

    I shall keep my eyes open for it, Paul. Thankyou for the title.
    And please allow me to return the favor.
    Read “Intelligent Thought: Science verses the Intelligent Design Movement” edited by John Brockman, published by Vintage Books.
    Even if you don’t agree with it, it is still a good read in that it will help you better understand what others think and perhaps help you in a future debate or confrontation.
    We have…..many books..on Young Earth Christian Creationism.

  • 22.
    26 November, 2008, 12:41 pm


  • 23.
    26 November, 2008, 12:46 pm

    Paul: #20: I’v read that, one of the best books on the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

  • 24.
    26 November, 2008, 12:57 pm

    Maz: Yeah from a guy that set out to prove it wrong.

  • 25.
    26 November, 2008, 1:28 pm

    That’s why it is so good. I also have ”The Resurrection Factor” by Josh McDowell with compelling evidence which proves the resurrection of Jesus Christ beyond reasonable doubt.

  • 26.
    26 November, 2008, 2:03 pm

    Yes, another good one.

  • 27.
    27 November, 2008, 7:30 am

    The biggest problem in regards to this information presented, however is that to someone such as myself, the resurrection of Jesus is a moot point. I can chose to believe in it and it still has no impact on my faith, as it’s not connected with, nor contrary to my theological belief system[grin].
    Happy Thanksgiving everybody!

  • 28.
    27 November, 2008, 10:55 am

    John: ” I can chose to believe in it and it still has no impact on my faith, as it’s not connected with, nor contrary to my theological belief system[grin].”

    Are you saying that you can believe in the resurrection of Jesus and still hold on to your other gods?If you believe in Jesus resurrection, then you would have to believe that He is alive today, then you would have to believe that He is the Son of God, and therefore the Savior of the world. And then you would have to make a choice, whether to accept Him or reject Him. If you accept Him as the risen Lord and Savior, you would have to let go of all your other deities.

  • 29.
    28 November, 2008, 5:49 pm

    Maz, trying to explain this matter to you would be a lot like trying to debate with you about evolutionary science. Things are a lot more complicated, and simpler, and weirder than you might ever seriously consider. I had thought that from reading my posts within the various sites in the past you would have had a better understanding of what my thoughts are on Christ and the Christian God, and why your dualistic theological view doesn’t apply to me.