Ö÷²¥´óÐã

Have just read the Chapter in Tony Blair's book in relation to Northern Ireland. Have no real love for the man because of his lies, but I would agree in his comment that you can't negotiate with God. We will have our opinions on the man and his term as Prime Minister, but at the end of the day he has to answer to God for all his sins and lies he committed when he was in power. People in political and religious leadeship have to set standards for the rest of us. Accoording to this Tony Blair didn't live up to these standrards. Will God forgive him? We will have to wait and see.

Why would someone in religious leadership have to set standards for the rest of us, I don't mind them setting standards for the people who believe in their particular flavour of belief but they have no role setting standards for anyone else, that would be the height of arrogance.

Tony Blair did not have to answer to god, he has to answer to the electorate, and he got his answer. Unfortunately he exited stage right before he could really feel the brunt of it.

Tony Blair will eventually as we all will have to answer to God. People like Tony Blair who because of they where have more to answer for. It's true that we as electors vote in governments but governments, kngs and people who rule over us are required to rule and govern us in a just and fair way and God WILL hold these people to account for their actions wether they are good or bad.

There are an infinite number of things we are unable to prove; faries, unicorns, hobgoblins. We can't disprove any of them but we don't believe in them these days any more than we believe in Thor or Amun Ra or Aphrodite. We're all atheists about most of the Gods that society have ever believed in - only some of tend to go one God further.

Actually, god *is* a negotiator, as Abraham's haggling over the Sodom incident shows. Of course, this was the primitive sky pixie YHWH, not the "god of classical theism". The bible contains many gods, and the myth of a unified picture is one of those post hoc fantasies so beloved of theologians.

I am really confused about what Tony Blair is actually saying here. First he says that Ian Paisley is a committed Christian (which can be rfuted with remarkable ease) but then goes on to say that Ian Paisley possesses blatantly un-Christian characteristics such as being sly. Committed Christians are NOT sly.

Getting on to Ian Paisley, the so-called 'committed Christian,' a Christian so committed that he spent most of his adult life engaged in a struggle to vilify the Catholic population of the North of Ireland. Ask any Catholic in the North of Ireland whether Ian Paisley is a committed Christian and you will be laughed out of the room quicker than you can say 'No Surrender!' Ian Piasley was certainly committed all right, committed to ensuring Catholics were treated as second class citizens in their own country during the 1960's, committed to stiring up sectarian violence in the 1970's (resulting in Catholics being burned out of their homes) and also committed to some of the most hysterical anti-catholic comments and abuse ever seen in Ireland (or perhaps on a global scale).

Jesus was a man of remarkable love and humility. Paisley is neither. If hatred and bigotry were a currency, Paisley would be a rich man.