I thought something was going on when I saw that there were a few people who were coming to my blog after doing a technorati search for independentchristianpatriot. Robert, although he claims he believes in free speech and even has Free Speech flag on is blog, has blocked me from giving comments on his blog when he was defending racial profiling. Here is his free speech flag:
That doesn’t sound like free speech to me, but it isn’t unusual. As I said before, some people only believe in free speech when it is their own. I’ve invited Robert over here to comment, since I won’t block him, even though he, in a very Christian-like manner, has called me lots of very nasty names because I am against racism. Robert writes a post about me today titled "Understanding Basic Scripture Settings, is Not A Priority For Some."
And although Robert thinks I have ‘trouble with coming up with a rational thought,’ I think I do pretty well here. No one has complained before (except for those who lack a basic understanding of what I am trying to do here). He seems to think that I am obsessed with him–but as I said before, I am obsessed with what he has to say, especially when it is just plain strange. I had no clue who Robert Bayn was when he was a homosexual. He seems to think, for some unknown reason, that Joe Brummer and I have ganged up on him:
Now let me start with, Dr. Kevin is a little obsessed with me, and this Blog, as well as our radio show. Dr. Kevin spends his day, going from blog to blog, looking for something to complain about, he routinely complains about people like D.L. Foster and Stacy Harp, and since returning to Christ and denouncing my past lifestyle, Dr. Kevin has taken it upon himself, including his buddy Joe Brummer, to attack me, I don’t know what kind of pleasure they get out of this, but certainly they have some issues, with other people speaking out against their lifestyle, and in the process complain about other things, that people like me find important.
The truth is, I’ve only asked Joe about Robert once, when Joe said that when Robert was gay he asked Joe to take part in a radio program (or something like that). That is it. So Robert seems to be a bit paranoid and he is making himself out to be more important to me and Joe than he really is. I will point out that every single day Robert finds something from other blogs or the news and then writes/complains about it. I guess it is only o.k. and rational if he does it, but not if I do it. He also seems to think that I attack him. Anyone can read this latest post I did and see that I did not attack him at all. In my comments on his racial profiling mess I did not attack him. If anything, he attacked me constantly with all those names. And Robert even likes to say things on his blog that aren’t true, hoping his readers won’t bother to look around and check up on what he has to say. For instance, he states:
In the last 3 weeks, Dr. Kevin has made about 7 Posts about this blog, while most of his posts about me are knee jerk reactions, and made up accusations, like Wain Miers was not coming on the show because he found out I do not agree with Mormonism…
(I noticed that he didn’t say how many times he mentioned my name or called me names after he blocked me from his site)
What I actually said was:
Now put these two together and you can get a pretty good feel for why a Mormon wouldn’t dare step foot into this mess. It would be like walking into a lion’s den. A false doctrine? A cancer? A cult? It would be interesting to hear from this Mormon why he couldn’t call in on Sunday. Maybe there really was a scheduling conflict. But maybe he just planned on getting a headache…
There is a difference. I said that maybe there really was a conflict. I think Robert has trouble understanding words like ‘maybe’ and ‘could’ (as we will see below). Besides, if Wain Miers isn’t a bit hesitant to come on, then he should be. I have a feeling they will just eat him up and spit him out. But that is just my opinion.
Robert is also wrong when he states:
…or accusing me of forcing my beliefs on others, which is a common term used by Activist types (I know because I use to say that!)…
I’ve never said that, nor do I believe it. I don’t think that Robert and his merry band of friends are very good examples of Christianity, so I doubt that he could try and force his beliefs on others even if he wanted to.
Now to the juicy bit:
So in essence we see the real point of Dr. Kevin’s post, was not to disagree with what TMW had to say, but rather take time to attack Christianity, and call it a "bloodthirsty" religion. The problem is, obviously Dr. Kevin does not understand basic Biblical settings. War in Biblical times, were nasty and were not any fun at all, city streets would run with blood, but that is because of the times, and society norms. Christians however, belong to the new covenant, and do not act in that way, certainly the Christian Crusades is a good argument, but that was also the norm during that time period. Christians today do not go out and try to kill people, labeling Christians as Bloodthirsty maniacs, as Dr. Kevin did was outrageous, and a nasty attack on people of the Christian faith. Dr. Kevin promotes himself as not going the low road, yet he made a broad and absurd statement to attack Christians. Dr. Kevin should denounce labeling Christians as he did, I expect a better argument from Dr. Kevin than this, very disappointing indeed.
The essence? 🙂 The REAL essence (and I should know since I wrote that post!) is that people who think their religion is better had better be careful with what they say, since there is always someone who can find something else, usually the opposite, to say. Poor Robert seems to think that I was attacking Christianity because I quote a bit of Deuteronomy that he apparently doesn’t like. I guess when I go in for yet another meeting about doing some fundraising for a nearby Christian church I will have to mention that I have attacked Christianity. 🙂 Robert constantly accuses the Islamic faith of being violent and hateful.
Since Christians take the Old Testament as part of their sacred scripture, one could easily say that Christianity is bloodthirsty and is commanded by God to kill all who do not believe (which is really who these enemies are).
Um–that isn’t calling Christians bloodthirsty. Being delighted over the prospect that God will slice off the heads of evil doers, I have to say, is just a bit bloodthirsty (but that is another subject altogether). Sorry Robert, you need to learn what a comparison means. Let me spell it out for you–you believe that Islam is a bloodthirsty religion because of the little you know of it (what you see on tv) and because someone gives you a bit of their sacred scripture that talks about killing infidels. Remember, it is you who agreed with The Merry Widow that Islam (or in the old way of speaking, Muhammadism) "IS demonic and straight from the Pit, and smells like smoke." Your words to that? "Preach on Sister!" That sounds like ‘my religion is better than your religion." My point, and write this down (in the words of Mark), is to compare what you believe about Islam with what anyone can find in the Old Testament. I said ‘one could easily say.’ ‘Could’ is the key term here. And let me spell that out even more clearly for you–if I had said ‘Christianity is a bloodthirsty religion’ then you can rightly say that I have called it a bloodthirsty religion. But I didn’t say that. Big difference, Mr. Bayn. Since this is the case, maybe you should rethink that entire paragraph about my so-called attack and your ramblings about what you think Christian history is or isn’t. Your belief that I have attacked Christians makes about as much sense as it does when people say that Christians will be thrown in jail for free speech if they discuss the bible. Read my words, please.
What Robert then does is what most people in his situation do when it suits them–they say that Christians aren’t under that particular part of the Old Testament. That gets so old sometimes. Someone from their group really needs to sit down with the entire Old Testament and block out what is applicable to Christians and what isn’t. I think that would be extremely useful and would probably be a big seller (hey, maybe I should be doing that!). I mean really, talk about selective use of scripture! I’m getting sick of hearing this line every time someone brings up a line of scripture that another group doesn’t want to hear. He also says:
"War in Biblical times, were [sic] nasty and were not any fun at all, city streets would run with blood, but that is because of the times, and society norms."
So war is fun today? When is war fun at all? No blood in the streets today? I guess what I see happening in Iraq is just fake…
"Christians today do not go out and try to kill people…" Are you kidding me? Have you ever heard of Ireland and the Catholics and the Protestants and their wars? Have you ever heard of someone like Bush, who calls himself a Christian, who has led the invasion of Iraq based on lies and hundreds of thousands of people are dead? I see you have heard of the Crusades, but you’ve discounted that bit of history because you think that was ‘the norm.’ When are religious wars not the norm? And while you look up what happened in Ireland, look at the history of Europe. Wars about which Christianity was the true one caused nothing but disasters and death. So don’t lecture me about whether I know biblical settings or not.
So this whole notion that I have attacked Christianity is not only absurd, but it is funny too. Robert seems to be acting like he is a moral teacher here, lecturing me about the history of Christianity and even worse, telling me that I should apologize! Very funny Robert. If you have a problem with your own scripture, then you will have to take care of that one yourself. I did not write that passage from Deuteronomy (in case you were wondering). And if you can’t understand what I was writing about, then there is nothing I can do about it either.
"I expect a better argument from Dr. Kevin than this, very disappointing indeed." Very disappointing indeed? Two things here–Robert, you blocked me from leaving comments, so stop pretending that you actually care what argument I have. And two–I don’t write to gain your acceptance for anything. Write that down too. I could care less if you are disappointed with what I write. Anyone who believes that racial profiling is a good thing has no respect from me, so whether you are disappointed with me or not doesn’t make a bit of difference to me at all. And anyone who calls himself Christian and then calls me a coward, a leftist, a militant homosexual, a dumbass, a little prissy girl, a nutjob, a troll, a cockroach and a prissy little bitch (all because I thought racial profiling was a horrible thing), deserves ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT FROM ME. You show a bad example for would-be Christians and for other Christians. So get over yourself.
Oh, and I hope you are looking forward to Post #9, because I am certain that sometime soon I will find something interesting to say. My guess is the upcoming radio show with the Mormon, the ex-Mormon and your ideas the Mormonism is a cancer is going to give me plenty of things to write about!