Bipartisanship is Dead in the Age of Nonsense - BY ERIC ALTERMAN

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------------

Trump has rocketed us past polarization into an alternate universe, making it impossible to see the other side’s point of view.

We’ve asked historian and author Eric Alterman (Actually, leftist pundit) 

to watch the national party conventions and share his reactions with us in a series of blog posts.

Pundits have long been bemoaning what has come to be called the “cocooning” or the “Facebook Effect,” whereby each side of the political divide see and hear only news that flatters the point of view he or she already holds. Pundits by and large don’t like this because, with few exceptions, they worship at the shrine of “bipartisanship” despite the fact that the far-right takeover of the Republican Party long ago made genuine bipartisanship — as opposed to Democratic surrender — impossible. (This is an astonishing claim. It is the flaming Left that votes lock-step, rarely if ever acting in a bipartisan manner. Hillary, for example, had Republican co-signers for her bills only 30% of the time. 

Time and again Democrats call on Republicans to agree with them and their initiatives. The Leftist agenda plows forward, with or without Republican support. When it is without Republican support, shrieks of indignation over Republicans' recalcitrance.

In fact, the term "bipartisan" as used by the Left means "agreeing with Democrats." It's a measure of how much Republicans are willing to compromise with Democrats. If Republicans stand on their principles, they are obstructionist. Link. Link. Link.)

FB meme: The modern-day gospel says, "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. Therefore, follow these steps, and you can be saved."

A FB friend posted this.

Memo to Hillary Clinton: How to DOUBLE Social Security - BY STEVEN HILL

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------------

Here's a plan to secure retirement for all Americans — without spending any more government money. ("...without spending any more government money." Um, yeah. This I will have to see to believe.)

Recently President Barack Obama announced his support for expanding Social Security for our nation’s retirees. That is welcome news because Obama and other Democrats like Hillary and Bill Clinton have not always been the best friends of Social Security. (...)

Social Security is one of the most popular government programs of all time — even 70 percent of Republicans are in favor of it. And with good reason.

Since its inception during the Great Depression, Social Security has proven to be indispensable as the policy cornerstone of a decades-old philosophy (I'm sure the author would describe himself as "progressive." I wonder, what is progressive about an 80 year old failed program?)

Cessationism, Episode 5: Extra-biblical reasons

Our next Episode in the cessationism series.

Additional Episodes:

• Episode 1, the Perfect.
• Episode 2, the apostles.
• Episode 3, prophecy.
• Episode 4, the closed canon.
• Episode 5, extra biblical reasons.
• Episode 6, only the apostles had all truth.
• Episode 7, there were only limited periods of miracles.
• Episode 8, tongues.
• Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.
• Episode 10, does God speak only through the Scriptures?
• Episode 11, what about impressions?
• Episode 12, what is discernment? 
• Episode 13, the sufficiency of Scripture.
• Episode 14, Was the purpose of miracles restricted to the authentication of the apostles?
• Episode 15, Is revival excluded because of apostasy?
• Episode 16, is prophecy subjective?
• Episode 17, Could only the apostles confer miraculous powers or gifts?
• Episode 18, are charismatics functional cessationists?

Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must

1. be from the Bible
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
--------------------

Who Was Saul Alinsky and Why Does Ben Carson Think He Makes Hillary Satanic? BY BILLMOYERS.COM STAFF

Found here. My comments in bold.

Ben Carson links Hillary Clinton to Satan via the long-dead community organizer at Day Two's most talked-about RNC speech.

Here we go again.

Four years ago, Saul Alinsky, a bespectacled professor who died more than four decades ago, became a post-mortem political football in the presidential campaign, a matter that we here at BillMoyers.com examined at the time.

On Tuesday night, Alinsky came up again in what has become the most buzzed-about speech of Day Two of this year’s Republican National Convention: A Ben Carson peroration in which the neurosurgeon accused Alinsky of being an admirer of Lucifer and, by indirection, Hillary Clinton and the entire progressive movement as well.

“The secular progressive agenda is antithetical to the principles of the founding of this nation,” Carson warned, suggesting that a Clinton victory would mean “God will remove himself from us.”

So exactly who was Alinsky and why is a man who has been in the grave for so long stirring up such deep passions? Here’s what Bill Moyers had to say in 2012, a message that still resonates now: (...)

Carson’s speech can be seen in its entirety here, thanks to C-SPAN’s invaluable video archive. The segment that set off a Twitter-storm of commentary last night (with a number of journalists armed with advance texts of the speeches crowing, “Carson is off script!”) begins at the four-minute mark.

"If a white man wants to lynch me, that's his problem..." FB meme, Stokely Carmichael

This quote makes one or two marginally true assertions, then takes a crazy leap.

There are several assertions here:

Cessationism - Episode 4: The closed canon vs. contemporary prophecy

Our next Episode in the cessationism series.

Additional Episodes:

• Episode 1, the Perfect.
• Episode 2, the apostles.
• Episode 3, prophecy.
• Episode 4, the closed canon.
• Episode 5, extra biblical reasons.
• Episode 6, only the apostles had all truth.
• Episode 7, there were only limited periods of miracles.
• Episode 8, tongues.
• Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.
• Episode 10, does God speak only through the Scriptures?
• Episode 11, what about impressions?
• Episode 12, what is discernment? 
• Episode 13, the sufficiency of Scripture.
• Episode 14, Was the purpose of miracles restricted to the authentication of the apostles?
• Episode 15, Is revival excluded because of apostasy?
• Episode 16, is prophecy subjective?
• Episode 17, Could only the apostles confer miraculous powers or gifts?
• Episode 18, are charismatics functional cessationists?

Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must

1. be from the Bible
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
-------------------

Cessationism - Episode 3: Prophecy

Our next Episode in the cessationism series.

Additional Episodes:

• Episode 1, the Perfect.
• Episode 2, the apostles.
• Episode 3, prophecy.
• Episode 4, the closed canon.
• Episode 5, extra biblical reasons.
• Episode 6, only the apostles had all truth.
• Episode 7, there were only limited periods of miracles.
• Episode 8, tongues.
• Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.
• Episode 10, does God speak only through the Scriptures?
• Episode 11, what about impressions?
• Episode 12, what is discernment? 
• Episode 13, the sufficiency of Scripture.
• Episode 14, Was the purpose of miracles restricted to the authentication of the apostles?
• Episode 15, Is revival excluded because of apostasy?
• Episode 16, is prophecy subjective?
• Episode 17, Could only the apostles confer miraculous powers or gifts?
• Episode 18, are charismatics functional cessationists?

Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must

1. be from the Bible
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
--------------------

Cessationism - Episode 2, The apostles

Our next Episode in the cessationism series.

Additional Episodes:

• Episode 1, the Perfect.
• Episode 2, the apostles.
• Episode 3, prophecy.
• Episode 4, the closed canon.
• Episode 5, extra biblical reasons.
• Episode 6, only the apostles had all truth.
• Episode 7, there were only limited periods of miracles.
• Episode 8, tongues.
• Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.
• Episode 10, does God speak only through the Scriptures?
• Episode 11, what about impressions?
• Episode 12, what is discernment? 
• Episode 13, the sufficiency of Scripture.
• Episode 14, Was the purpose of miracles restricted to the authentication of the apostles?
• Episode 15, Is revival excluded because of apostasy?
• Episode 16, is prophecy subjective?
• Episode 17, Could only the apostles confer miraculous powers or gifts?
• Episode 18, are charismatics functional cessationists?

Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must

1. be from the Bible
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
-------------------

Cessationism - Episode 1, Introduction and the Perfect

Today we are beginning a cessationism series, topic by topic. We need to say right at the start that we are not theologians, We are simply interested in biblical answers. Unfortunately, the answers we receive from cessationists are extremely unsatisfying from a scriptural and logical standpoint. Thus, this series.

Additional Episodes:

• Episode 1, the Perfect.
• Episode 2, the apostles.
• Episode 3, prophecy.
• Episode 4, the closed canon.
• Episode 5, extra biblical reasons.
• Episode 6, only the apostles had all truth.
• Episode 7, there were only limited periods of miracles.
• Episode 8, tongues.
• Episode 9, the work of the Holy Spirit.
• Episode 10, does God speak only through the Scriptures?
• Episode 11, what about impressions?
• Episode 12, what is discernment? 
• Episode 13, the sufficiency of Scripture.
• Episode 14, Was the purpose of miracles restricted to the authentication of the apostles?
• Episode 15, Is revival excluded because of apostasy?
• Episode 16, is prophecy subjective?
• Episode 17, Could only the apostles confer miraculous powers or gifts?
• Episode 18, are charismatics functional cessationists?

Our criteria for the cessationism debate is that the argument must

1. be from the Bible
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

That is, any defense of cessationism must be Sola Scriptura.
---------------------------

NEW REVELATION FROM GOD?-BY STEVE FINNELL

Found here. My comments in bold.
----------------------

Mr. Finnell is nothing if not doggedly consistent. He will latch onto something and not let go. He takes a topic and hammers it until it is beaten into submission, then writes dozens more posts making the same points over and over. 

So when the situation warrants it, we shall be as tenacious as we can be in response. We will not be able to match Mr. Finnell in sheer volume of repetitious material, nor do we desire to, but we can match and even exceed him in rhetorical prowess.
----------------------

Governor’s office shouldn’t be religious pulpit - By Vern Smalley

My comments in bold.
-------------------

I comment on Mr. Smalley's letters from time to time in this blog, because he invariably creates a storm of misdirection. Here's the last time he discussed rights.

--------------------

Why I Am Not Continuationist - by Tom Challies

Found here. My comments in bold.

I continue my odyssey to locate a cogent, scriptural explanation of cessationism. The author brings up  a couple of things I have not seen before, thus this post.

However, he will never quote or even reference Scripture. It's astonishing that a person can write an article about rejecting a particular doctrine and never quote the Bible.
---------------------

20 Diversion Tactics Highly Manipulative Narcissists, Sociopaths And Psychopaths Use To Silence You - by Shahida Arabi

Found here. A very good article.

---------------

Toxic people such as malignant narcissists,psychopaths and those with antisocial traits engage in maladaptive behaviors in relationships that ultimately exploit, demean and hurt their intimate partners, family members and friends. They use a plethora of diversionary tactics that distort the reality of their victims and deflect responsibility. Although those who are not narcissistic can employ these tactics as well, abusive narcissists use these to an excessive extent in an effort to escape accountability for their actions.

Here are the 20 diversionary tactics toxic people use to silence and degrade you.