The Off Topic Topic

[Habbaku]

I look forward to tomorrow's heresy.

[Josquius]

Well that escalated strangely

[Duque de Bragança]

I think someone may have posted this one here already, but on the topic and interesting:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-39278092

"Why it's hard to be a Kevin in France"

In Germany too, AFAIK.

[merithyn]

That isn't blasphemy, nor even close to it, Meri. And nor should it be. Saying the Old Testament is the Word of God is accurate, even if Jesus "washed [it] away" (which he didn't). Jesus Himself asserted that the Old Testament was the Word.

Depends on your flavor of Christian, I guess. I stepped out nearly 20 years ago, so I'm going off what friends have said recently. They are, apparently, New Covenant Theologians.

New Covenant Theology[edit]
New Covenant Theology (or NCT), is a recently expressed Christian theological system on this issue that incorporates aspects of Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology.[31]

NCT claims that all Old Covenant laws have been fulfilled by Christ and are thus cancelled or abrogated[32] in favor of the Law of Christ or New Covenant law. This can be summarized as the ethical expectation found in the New Testament. Thus NCT rejects antinomianism as they do not reject religious law, only the Old Covenant law. NCT is in contrast with other views on Biblical law in that most other Christian churches do not believe the Ten Commandments and other Divine laws of the Old Covenant have been "cancelled."[33]

New Covenant theologians see the Law of Christ or New Testament Law as actually including many of the Divine Laws, thus, even though all Old Covenant laws have been cancelled, many have still been renewed under the Law of Christ. This is a conclusion similar to older Christian theological systems on this issue, that some Old Covenant laws are still valid, but this understanding is reached in a different way. On the issue of the law, Dispensationalism is most similar to NCT, but New Covenant Theology may be still evolving a coherent system that will better distinguish itself from it. Richard Barcellos has criticized NCT for proposing that the Ten Commandments have been cancelled.[34]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_the_Old_Covenant

[Jacob]

Seriously... you think Stephen Harper was a worse leader than Richard Nixon?

That seems like an easily arguable point.

I disagree with your assessments of Carter and Harper.

[derspiess]

I think I mentioned the temporary neighbor family who's youngest was named Bella.

In my daughter's age group, there are a ton of Bellas. 

[Valmy]

That's blasphemy to a Christian.. or should be. The whole point of Jesus was that he washed away the Old Testament. He was the New Beginning.

Um....

Depends on your flavor of Christian, I guess. I stepped out nearly 20 years ago, so I'm going off what friends have said recently. They are, apparently, New Covenant Theologians.

And there were in the past. And they were ruled heretics back then so why would this view be determining blasphemy for all Christians? It is rather against the orthodox grain.

[derspiess]

CUT AND RUN MERI

[Valmy]

CUT AND RUN MERI

[Eddie Teach]

CUT AND RUN MERI

(imagine the sign says Valmy instead)

[Habbaku]

What Valmy said. It's still not "blasphemy" Meri, nor even close.

[Barrister]

Seriously... you think Stephen Harper was a worse leader than Richard Nixon?

That seems like an easily arguable point.

I disagree with your assessments of Carter and Harper.

I think historians are pretty much agreed on Jimmy Carter - that while he has perhaps made the most of being an ex-President of any former holder of the office, his run as #39 was very poor.  Between his malaise speech, the Iran hostage scenario (and the debacle of a rescue mission), persistent stagflation, and being the only single-term President (who didn't succeed someone from his own party) in over 100 years, he was below-average at best.

Whereas Stephen Harper not only created the Party he ultimately won several elections with, he successfully navigated two minority governments and the 2008 market collapse.

[Habbaku]

being the only single-term President (who didn't succeed someone from his own party) in over 100 years

This is a really weird and meaningless attribute that doesn't actually assess anything.

[garbon]

being the only single-term President (who didn't succeed someone from his own party) in over 100 years

This is a really weird and meaningless attribute that doesn't actually assess anything.

It's really just a proxy.

[Barrister]

being the only single-term President (who didn't succeed someone from his own party) in over 100 years

This is a really weird and meaningless attribute that doesn't actually assess anything.

I think it does.  Given the powers of incumbency the vast majority of presidents win re-election.  We had 8 years of Obama, 8 years of Bush 43, 8 years of Clinton.  Bush 41 was a one-term president, but that can be seen as 12 years of Bush-Reagan.  Jimmy Carter's one term Presidency, book-ended by Republicans on either side, really does stand out.

As garbon says it doesn't directly say whether one was a good president or not, but seems to indicate that even with the advantages of incumbency, the US electorate thought very little of Jimmy Carter as President.