politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How Ed Miliband compares to his predecessors

I can't believe people are criticising the bible.

How anyone can criticise a book with this passage, something we should all adhere too

"Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love."

Proverbs 5:19

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+5:19&version=KJV

MD, the Fourth Crusade was indeed a disgrace. On balance, I think the First was rather admirable.

Charles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Deuteronomy

21"18 If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, 19 then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. 20 "And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 "Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear,"


22 "20 But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21 then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her father’s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you,"

This is from the holiest book in the Christian faith. Our children are encouraged to read this book to this very day.

Richard, if you had studied Christianity a little more rather than just dismissing all religions you'd understand that the New Covenant had entirely replaced the Old Covenant. Deuteronomy is only interesting as a historical record of the Jewish law at a point in time 2000 years ago

And yet 2000 years later our children are still taught old testament stories, large swathes of the Christian world still cite old testament arguments to support their position on social issues and right now both the mainstream Anglican and Catholic hierarchies are using making arguments based on old testament beliefs to oppose extending equal rights to gays.

Another less contentious example is that the the Catholic code of Canon law still proscribes the eating of meat on Fridays.

I was bought up a Catholic and taught by nuns so I have a pretty damn good idea about Christian teachings.

By the way, one of the main reasons for the split between the early Christians and the Gnostics was that the Gnostics wanted to exclude the Old Testament from the Bible whereas the Christians successfully fought to have it kept in. You are also being rather parochial since I suspect you are looking at this from a purely western Christian position. The Orthodox Church sees the Old testament in a very different light and it is far more central to their beliefs.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Back from the cricket.

Just one thought.

No12 in the Olympic Medal table last year and now this, Time for Yorkshire to cast off the underperforming UK rump, and fulfill our destiny

I knew Scotland getting their referendum would stir up restless English provinces. I issue a rallying call for people to rise up and head to Yorkshire to keep them in line.* I know, it involves crossing the line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash, which normally I'd not be in favour of, but sometimes these things need doing.

*after the Test match

SeanT said:

Sean_F said:

MD, the Fourth Crusade was indeed a disgrace. On balance, I think the First was rather admirable.

The First Crusaders were incredibly brave - and unbelievably violent. When they finally took Jerusalem they slaughtered so many Muslims and Jews - men, women and children alike - the Christian knights' horses "rode in blood up to their bridles".

Some historians believe this brutal massacre continued for THREE DAYS.

http://www.medievalists.net/2011/01/14/crusaders-massacre-of-jerusalem-was-done-in-cold-blood-not-religious-frenzy-historian-argues/

In his recent article, “The Demographics of Urban Space in Crusade Period Jerusalem (1099-1187), Alan V. Murray of the University of Leeds examines what happened when the Crusaders stormed into the Holy City on July 15th after a long siege

Blimey - just goes to show you not to pre-judge the contents of an article by its title. Demographics of urban space indeed

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Back from the cricket.

Just one thought.

No12 in the Olympic Medal table last year and now this, Time for Yorkshire to cast off the underperforming UK rump, and fulfill our destiny

I knew Scotland getting their referendum would stir up restless English provinces. I issue a rallying call for people to rise up and head to Yorkshire to keep them in line.* I know, it involves crossing the line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash, which normally I'd not be in favour of, but sometimes these things need doing.

*after the Test match

No one can ever defeat Yorkshire or a Yorkshireman.

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Back from the cricket.

Just one thought.

No12 in the Olympic Medal table last year and now this, Time for Yorkshire to cast off the underperforming UK rump, and fulfill our destiny

I knew Scotland getting their referendum would stir up restless English provinces. I issue a rallying call for people to rise up and head to Yorkshire to keep them in line.* I know, it involves crossing the line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash, which normally I'd not be in favour of, but sometimes these things need doing.

*after the Test match

No one can ever defeat Yorkshire or a Yorkshireman.

Honestly, you let some jumped up county win the War of the Roses and they think they're so great. What about the Danelaw, huh? While Yorkshire was bowing to their Danish overlords, down here in Wessex we kept up the fires of resistance, and eventually tossed them out and saved the realm, creating England as a whole.

SeanT said:

Sean_F said:

MD, the Fourth Crusade was indeed a disgrace. On balance, I think the First was rather admirable.

The First Crusaders were incredibly brave - and unbelievably violent. When they finally took Jerusalem they slaughtered so many Muslims and Jews - men, women and children alike - the Christian knights' horses "rode in blood up to their bridles".

Some historians believe this brutal massacre continued for THREE DAYS.

http://www.medievalists.net/2011/01/14/crusaders-massacre-of-jerusalem-was-done-in-cold-blood-not-religious-frenzy-historian-argues/

Don;t forget the Albigensian Crusade that happened in large part in southern France!

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pop quiz Pbers.

One of the most pivotal people in Christian History had a very strong connection to Yorkshire, who was it and why?

This person was so pivotal, it is unlikely that Christianity would be where it is today, without this person.

Too easy - Constantine the Great.

Congratulations.

See only people with strong Yorkshire connections get called Great.

Live now on BBC3 - a young man on stage inciting a crowd of thousands of Londonderry youngsters to "throw bombs on it, throw bombs on it, throw bombs on it"

A sign of how far NI has come in recent years, or a bit of a gaffe by whoever approved the set list?

It amused me anyway...

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well Hazel Blears has lit the blue touch paper

Woolwich attack: coalition failing to tackle extremism, says Hazel Blears

Former Labour minister Hazel Blears says funding cuts are undermining government strategy against Islamist extremism

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/25/woolwich-attack-hazel-blears-attacks-coalition

That's a ballsy move from her. So much so, I can only presume she believes it genuinely.

They'll be dancing on the streets of Bayern now

Interesting thing about Salah-al-din, I was informed by a crusader historian once after a lecture on 'crusades' in Eastern Europe, that Saladin was not particularly well known or venerated in the Islamic world for quite a long time, as other leaders were more pious or successful against the crusaders, but that Western historians revived his reputation thanks to tales of his chivalry.

They'll be dancing in the streets of Borussia now, 1-1 now

The City of Dortmund is awesome, I had a great night there in May 2001

Richard T,

People read one bit of the bible and interpret it in the prism of their own prejudice. The Old Testament - particularly Exodus - can be read as an invitation to genocide. David did a lot of slaying, adultery (ask Uriah the Hittite) and even joined the enemy against the Israelites, yet he's revered in Jewish eyes as a great king. Not exactly respecting the "Golden Rule", though.

Or you could read it as a vaguely historical document demonstrating God's patience and forgiveness for the Israelites. For example, Abraham supposedly negotiating with God for the safety of Sodom and Gomorrah (if there are ten righteous men). The two versions of the garden of Eden story in Genesis are clearly contradictor but show man's disobedience, the Tower of Babel is a story about pride, so why expect Christians to be perfect?

The New Testament talks of a new wine needing a new wineskin. The food laws are ignored (it's what comes out your mouth not what goes into it) and Paul persuades the developing sect that circumcision was not needed for the new recruits. The women caught in adultery has already been mentioned. Jesus came to the imperfect (100% of the population).

Islam prefers the first five books of the Old Testament and has different versions of the New. Most Christians go with the New Testament but accept that reading the Old is worthwhile too.

But if you take the Bible as Islam takes the Koran, you will find contradictions and strange role-models.

CD13 said:

Richard T,

People read one bit of the bible and interpret it in the prism of their own prejudice. The Old Testament - particularly Exodus - can be read as an invitation to genocide. David did a lot of slaying, adultery (ask Uriah the Hittite) and even joined the enemy against the Israelites, yet he's revered in Jewish eyes as a great king. Not exactly respecting the "Golden Rule", though.

Or you could read it as a vaguely historical document demonstrating God's patience and forgiveness for the Israelites. For example, Abraham supposedly negotiating with God for the safety of Sodom and Gomorrah (if there are ten righteous men). The two versions of the garden of Eden story in Genesis are clearly contradictor but show man's disobedience, the Tower of Babel is a story about pride, so why expect Christians to be perfect?

The New Testament talks of a new wine needing a new wineskin. The food laws are ignored (it's what comes out your mouth not what goes into it) and Paul persuades the developing sect that circumcision was not needed for the new recruits. The women caught in adultery has already been mentioned. Jesus came to the imperfect (100% of the population).

Islam prefers the first five books of the Old Testament and has different versions of the New. Most Christians go with the New Testament but accept that reading the Old is worthwhile too.

But if you take the Bible as Islam takes the Koran, you will find contradictions and strange role-models.

I quite agree. Unfortunately there are still plenty of Christians who do take to the old testament. Fascinating looking at the way the various Christian denominations regard homosexuality and how many of them still cite the Old testament in support of their position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_homosexuality

Incidently it was interesting to find out that the Koran makes no mention of Stoning with regard to adultery and that Sharia law takes that from the Bible.

Carola said:

'TERFOR'

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/338391847619682305/photo/1

one of those damned if he does damned if he doesn't moments.

Socrates said:

MrJones said:

Life_ina_market_town said:

@Charles
It is perfectly true that the Old Testament does not bind gentiles. Yet Christianity has historically been fundamentally and violently intolerant. Aquinas strongly supported the execution of relapsed heretics, and vigorous crusading against Jews and Infidels who threatened to institute dominium over Christians

Is it bigoted to say that about Christianity?

No, it's only bigoted if you take the view that one religion is more extremist than another. If you think they're all equally bad, then that's ok.

No its bigoted to think that well over a billion people are extremists because of a few murderous scumbags. I am sure the Christians would take offence at the idea that the Westboro Baptist Church should be considered as typical of Christian beliefs and morals.

MrJones said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

CD13 said:

Richard T,

People read one bit of the bible and interpret it in the prism of their own prejudice. The Old Testament - particularly Exodus - can be read as an invitation to genocide. David did a lot of slaying, adultery (ask Uriah the Hittite) and even joined the enemy against the Israelites, yet he's revered in Jewish eyes as a great king. Not exactly respecting the "Golden Rule", though.

Or you could read it as a vaguely historical document demonstrating God's patience and forgiveness for the Israelites. For example, Abraham supposedly negotiating with God for the safety of Sodom and Gomorrah (if there are ten righteous men). The two versions of the garden of Eden story in Genesis are clearly contradictor but show man's disobedience, the Tower of Babel is a story about pride, so why expect Christians to be perfect?

The New Testament talks of a new wine needing a new wineskin. The food laws are ignored (it's what comes out your mouth not what goes into it) and Paul persuades the developing sect that circumcision was not needed for the new recruits. The women caught in adultery has already been mentioned. Jesus came to the imperfect (100% of the population).

Islam prefers the first five books of the Old Testament and has different versions of the New. Most Christians go with the New Testament but accept that reading the Old is worthwhile too.

But if you take the Bible as Islam takes the Koran, you will find contradictions and strange role-models.

I quite agree. Unfortunately there are still plenty of Christians who do take to the old testament. Fascinating looking at the way the various Christian denominations regard homosexuality and how many of them still cite the Old testament in support of their position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_homosexuality

Incidently it was interesting to find out that the Koran makes no mention of Stoning with regard to adultery and that Sharia law takes that from the Bible.

Sharia law isn't just based on the Koran. There's the hadiths as well.

Quite right and as I said it takes part of its teachings from the Abrahamic Old Testament.

Great match, and thanks to SeanT once more for his cracking Dortmund tip from yonks back. But glad I laid it off on Betfair before the final

SeanT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

General Election Voting Intention, Change Since Survation poll, May 20th

Conservative: 24% (nc) Labour: 35% (-1) Liberal Democrat: 10% (-1) UKIP: 22% (nc) AP: 9% (+1)

http://survation.com/2013/05/survation-for-the-mail-on-sunday-reaction-to-the-woolwich-incident/

That's quite an important poll. Indeed it is arguably VERY important. It shows that the near-crossover poll of last week was not an outlier.

Yeah, but it is survation.

'31% of GE2010 CON voters tell Survation MoS poll that they now back UKIP'

'Huge gender divide in UKIP vote in MoS Survation poll. 27% of men backed Farage's party to just 16% of women' OGH

I thought he was on holiday?

Carola said:

'31% of GE2010 CON voters tell Survation MoS poll that they now back UKIP'

'Huge gender divide in UKIP vote in MoS Survation poll. 27% of men backed Farage's party to just 16% of women' OGH

I thought he was on holiday?

He's never on holiday when a poll's out.

Usually when he goes on holiday, something major happens.

AndreaParma_82 said:

@Sunil

4 Labour deselections in Redbridge so far. They are always "naughty" at reselection time in your patch!

Luckily the Tories are still the largest party! You probably remember the Aldborough by-election last year - I think it was caused by the Labour councillor not being able to handle the responsibility (or similar)!

UKIP need to get within about 5% of the Tories with another polling organisation apart from Survation in order to be sure that they really are within striking distance.

NickPalmer said:

Interesting Survation poll. On the one hand Woolwich doesn't seem to have affected voting intention at all (good, would be bad if a murder can change large numbers of votes), on the other it repeats the previous finding with UKIP on Tory heels, making it look less like an outlier. The secondaries don't show anything very remarkable - people aren't keen on Choudhary or the EDL getting airtime but it's not overwhelming, and on the whole they think the police did well and the security services are doing OK. I guess the Mail will major on the 2-1 for a death penalty for terrorism.

Very interesting poll.

The morning thread will be about that poll.

I think I'll headline it "Broken Sleazy Labour on the slide"

@Next

AP? What does that stand for? Alternative Parties? Never seen that description before.

AndyJS said:

@Next

AP? What does that stand for? Alternative Parties? Never seen that description before.

I believe it stands for "Another Party".

MikeK said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AndyJS said:

@Next

AP? What does that stand for? Alternative Parties? Never seen that description before.

Another Party

They don't say others now because in Game of Thrones, Others are walking zombies with red eyes.;)

I thought The Others were "ghosts" living with Nicole Kidman!

AndyJS said:

UKIP need to get within about 5% of the Tories with another polling organisation apart from Survation in order to be sure that they really are within striking distance.

The May elections had them 2 points apart. Con 25%, UKIP 23%.

MikeK said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AndyJS said:

@Next

AP? What does that stand for? Alternative Parties? Never seen that description before.

Another Party

They don't say others now because in Game of Thrones, Others are walking zombies with red eyes.;)

It's alright, they don't call them 'Others' in the TV show. The Others from lost however.

Saw an interesting thing a few days ago at Heathrow airport: the (fairly) new fully-automated purple pods, transporting people from a car park to Terminal 5:

http://www.heathrowairport.com/transport-and-directions/heathrow-parking-options/heathrow-business-parking/heathrow-business-parking-terminal-5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULTra_(rapid_transit)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEu2B4WlC34

What is UKIP's position on the death penalty with the post-Woolwich poll showing its rating up and support for the death penalty for terrorists?

eckythumper said:

We had a referendum and kicked AV out so it is not an issue

What's the Home Secretary's favoured electoral system?

May-V!

HYUFD said:

Very much enjoyed the Great Gatsby this evening, a colourful and vibrant film adaptation of the Scott Fitzgerald book it also had an energetic score including music by Jay Z and Beyoncé and Florence and the Machine!

I went to see that with a friend this week. I thought the first half was awful, but it picked up after that (mainly because I left and got sloshed in the cinema bar instead for the duration of the second half).

The Bowie doc just on BBC2, however, was magnificent.

Rod, FPTP has outlived it's usefulness.

WRT Saladdin, he could be very kind and merciful. And also atrociously cruel. I think the Muslim World rather prefers Baibars, who broke Crusader power. Runciman described him as "a statesman of the highest calibre. Untouched by any scruple of mercy, justice, or honour."

By Sword and Fire has convinced me that atrocities are absolutely routine in warfare. Certainly, prolonged, intensive warfare. We condemn them simply because we've been at peace for so long.

WRT Game of Thrones, what made it stand out from other fantasy series was not explicit sex or violence, or killing off important characters. It was the blunt depiction of sympathetic characters conducting mass executions, live burning, torture, murder etc. Yet somehow remaining sympathetic.

Sean_F said:

Rod, FPTP has outlived it's usefulness.

WRT Saladdin, he could be very kind and merciful. And also atrociously cruel. I think the Muslim World rather prefers Baibars, who broke Crusader power. Runciman described him as "a statesman of the highest calibre. Untouched by any scruple of mercy, justice, or honour."

By Sword and Fire has convinced me that atrocities are absolutely routine in warfare. Certainly, prolonged, intensive warfare. We condemn them simply because we've been at peace for so long.

WRT Game of Thrones, what made it stand out from other fantasy series was not explicit sex or violence, or killing off important characters. It was the blunt depiction of sympathetic characters conducting mass executions, live burning, torture, murder etc. Yet somehow remaining sympathetic.

Don't forget Peter Dinklage's performance as Tyrion Lannister.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Back from the cricket.

Just one thought.

No12 in the Olympic Medal table last year and now this, Time for Yorkshire to cast off the underperforming UK rump, and fulfill our destiny

Was in York earlier this week (for the first time, am embarrassed to say). Quite lovely.

Why are you living in Manchester again?

Off-topic:

Kirsty Wark interviews singer/songwriter Julia Fordham in 1988:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqpjC6BQ28U

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Back from the cricket.

Just one thought.

No12 in the Olympic Medal table last year and now this, Time for Yorkshire to cast off the underperforming UK rump, and fulfill our destiny

Was in York earlier this week (for the first time, am embarrassed to say). Quite lovely.

Why are you living in Manchester again?

I live in Manchester for work reasons.

How in a few months time, I am going back to back to live in Sheffield.

After a gap of sixteen years.