WWJD : NYT Editors’ Caliphate Is Just Another Way to Hate Jesus
The Valentine’s Day issue of the best fish wrapping paper ever produced, The New York Times, included an editorial from SCOTT TUROW, PAUL AIKEN and JAMES SHAPIRO entitled, “Would the Bard Have Survived the Web?” These three wise men attempt to pander around some lame imaginary relationship between how intellectual property was treated in Shakespeare’s age and how it would most likely be treated today. I always find it funny that these Atheist-liberal-intellectual-elitist like to get paid top dollar for their opinions delivered from atop the intellectual cross of the “free press” so they can support an intellectual social class division. It is a liberal caliphate against those the NYT editors deem as stupid and well below their station.
With a dismissive tone the NYT editors give a conciliatory nod to those sites like ChristWire, who offer free and open publication of written works, while concurrently assigning these sites and their contributors little value in the formation of a robust, thriving civilization. They clearly want their NYT Caliph rules to govern tribute payment and shape the future Caliphate world with ideas that are paid for by the lower intellectual classes.
“Certainly there’s a place for free creative work online, but that cannot be the end of it. A rich culture demands contributions from authors and artists who devote thousands of hours to a work and a lifetime to their craft. Since the Enlightenment, Western societies have been lulled into a belief that progress is inevitable. It never has been. It’s the result of abiding by rules that were carefully constructed and practices that were begun by people living in the long shadow of the Dark Ages. We tamper with those rules at our peril.”
WWJD? He Wouldn’t Hire Ivy League, Pot Smoking Atheists or those that “devote thousands of hours to a work and a lifetime to their craft.” In the draught of the fishes, Luke 5:1-11, Jesus approaches common fishermen. It isn’t tried and tested marketing professionals or homosexual-loving-evolution-pandering-scholars Jesus is looking for to spread the word. These soon to be disciples are what the NYT editors would deem as failures in their current occupation and certainly not at the intellectual class level required for teaching others.
Simon answered, “Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets.”
When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break. So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them, and they came and filled both boats so full that they began to sink.
When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus’ knees and said, “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!” For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken, and so were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, Simon’s partners.
Then Jesus said to Simon, “Don’t be afraid; from now on you will fish for people.” So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.
WWJD? He would ignore the Copyright Laws for distribution of His work.
Walk into any Church and you will receive AT NO COST a fully bound copy of the Bible. Some copies might even have pictures and references. Gideon has long carried out the mission of Christ in the free distribution of the scriptures in nearly any language. Amazon offers the Bible for free download to your Kindle or PC. You can’t say that about the NYT or the texts of made up religions, started by so called “authors”, being investigated by three letter government agencies.
WWJD? He would Copy and Distribute Freely.
Jesus was a pirate by today’s standards. He copied and fed the masses, for free, with five loaves and two fishes. Scott, Paul and James meet Matthew 14:13–21, Mark 6:31-44, Luke 9:10-17 and John 6:5-15.
WWJD? He would Change our Perception of Time.
The NYT editors cite the Enlightenment as the beginning of civilization’s progress. The date of publication printed atop the NYT rag is Christian based. Do they plan to start printing 4,498,878,103 completed orbits around the sun, 1 lunar revolution and 16 earth revolutions since the birth of earth? Duh. This would be confusing to the peoples.
WWJD? He would Change Civilization.
While even most Atheists recognize the impact of Christianity on civilization, even if they only cite wars and famine, there is little room for argument that the Christian evangelical movement is the basis for the exploration and exploitation of the Americas and the world. The NYT editors wish to create and exploit a lower intellectual class, but truthfully Jesus doesn’t care. While the grey lady has been in print since 1851, Jesus was doin’ it rite 1,851 years before that and will long after the old grey spinster is put to bed.
WWJD? He Would Use Parody Parables To Make Lasting Points.
Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, Peter–this very night, before the cock crows, you will deny three times that you even know me.” – Matthew 26:34
The above quote is a parable of the parody below.
As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly. – Proverbs 31:6
WWJD? He Would Use the Words of Haters to Ignite the Faithful.
Do you really need examples?
In conclusion, SCOTT TUROW, PAUL AIKEN and JAMES SHAPIRO are defending much to do about nothing when it comes to the successes attributed to copyrighted materials or the intellectually determined Caliphate they propose. While Shakespeare had his moment and is lovely in a park production or even read aloud, it really isn’t the best tool to use if you just want to show how much you hate Jesus and get paid big bucks while doing it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/opinion/15turow.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
- Sinful
- Suspicious
- Scared
- Sad
- Amused
- Laughing Out Loud
Author: tdomf_15f10
2:32 am
Praise BB!
Often when working overseas doing God’s work in bringing 4th world countries fresh water and sanitation, I often see NYT “journalists” (and I use that term loosely) standing around and “reporting” about the problems of the world. I have never seen them drop their, pad, paper, laptop or camera and lend a hand to the needy. These liberals like to report on the world but never make it a better place. I’m glad someone like you knows better.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
3
3:16 am
What Would Jesus Do?
Cry because of your inability to understand his teachings.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
3
3:25 am
Sources Real Disciple?
Praise or Condemn:
2 
3
3:47 am
Go read through the New Testament again. Remember when Jesus went and forgave people? The adulteress, the tax collectors, even his own disciples when they doubted him? How he healed the sick and lame and possessed?
Jesus: whether I believe he’s the son of some god or not, he was still a pretty cool dude. He preached love and faith and tolerance and acceptance and forgiveness. Clearly, if you claim to follow his teachings, you’re only MAYBE following the bit about faith. Maybe. But as far as love, tolerance, acceptance, and forgiveness go? You’re not even TRYING to act in a similar fashion to Jesus.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
1
3:56 am
Yet every time I forgive and love you, you threaten to call the authorities?
Talk about a mixed message
Praise or Condemn:
3 
3
3:59 am
I’ve never even MENTIONED the authorities in my discussions with you. I have, however, called you out for being a hypocrite, as you seem to have a genuine problem with the things that are most important to myself and my identity, and therefore, you cannot “love” me.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
3
10:31 am
“Little kids are that way; they feel if their parents aren’t watching what they do then what they do isn’t real.”
Philip K Dick, The Man in the High Castle (1962), Winner of the Hugo award 1963.
“If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.” (Luke 17:3)
RD I think you need more understanding. Yes, Jesus called the faithful to forgive, but he also rebuked the Pharisees. Rebuking is act of love for the unrepentant sinner. (Proverbs 3:11-12, 13:24, 25:12, 27:5) Pretending a sin isn’t real because “I’m agnostic” is a shallow, dangerous argument. Only with contrition or by repenting one’s sin can forgiveness be attained, something you seem to avoid at all costs and with a foul temper.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
2
12:32 pm
“RD I think you need more understanding. Yes, Jesus called the faithful to forgive, but he also rebuked the Pharisees.”
You know what else Jesus said?
“Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1)
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you (Matthew 7:12)”
In order to rebuke someone, you need to judge them. Jesus told you not to judge; he was rebuking the Pharisees FOR judging others on how “holy” and “faithful” they were.
“Pretending a sin isn’t real because “I’m agnostic” is a shallow, dangerous argument. Only with contrition or by repenting one’s sin can forgiveness be attained, something you seem to avoid at all costs and with a foul temper.”
I don’t see how I could have “sinned” in any way. Sin is a religious concept; I have no religion, and therefore can’t sin.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
2:26 pm
RD,
Again, you pick and choose while condemning others of the same. The verses right after “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1) in Mathew 7:2-5 we are to recognize sin in others with discernment (John 7:24).
Matthew 7:2-5 declares, “For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” What Jesus was condemning here was hypocritical, self-righteous judgments of others.
You have proclaimed yourself unrepentant. You proudly refuse to recognize the sin, but acknowledge the teachings in your rationalization. When Jesus says to forgive, you aren’t on the list because of your own actions, not mine. I am pointing out that you have a complete misunderstanding of scripture, faith and forgiveness. Not once have I condemned you, with or without the hope of redemption. (Something you have expressed towards me.)
I am repentant. I am a sinner and imperfect, I make no claims of being worthy of forgiveness and I don’t seek it from others because I already have it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
2:34 pm
And yet, you continue to pass judgment on my actions, as well as those of others. You condemn everyone who DOESN’T follow what you think they should, in your words and actions. Hypocrite.
You know what? I asked a Christian deacon what Matthew 7:2-5 meant, since you seem to be unable to trust in my understanding of scripture (though I read religious texts for both fun and for a clearer understanding of the world). The deacon told me this: It means that you shouldn’t be looking for the sins of others unless YOU are completely without sin, and no one is without sin.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:42 pm
I haven’t condemned you. You condemn yourself. Where have I proclaimed or outed you as an agnostic? You’ve done that. Where have I judged you as unrepentant prior to you making that clear yourself?
When you talked to the Deacon about forgiveness, did you inquire how you could be forgiven or only how you could use sophistry to win an argument? Did you honestly inquire about the scripture?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
2:52 pm
“I haven’t condemned you.”
No, you just say rude, potentially hurtful remarks about other people and their lifestyles. That’s not condemning, though. Of course not.
The deacon is a family friend who knows that I am agnostic and a lesbian, and has never once told me that I’m “going to go to hell” or that I need to “repent” for my “sins”. He only asks after me, in a kindly, grandfatherly manner, and advises that I live a life that is “good”. I asked about the scripture in question, and he is used to me asking about religious texts and interpretations of the Bible. That is how he interprets that verse; the priest of the same church confirms that interpretation.
But, then again, you’re too busy playing the part of the Pharisee and condemning the Publican. Shame.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:00 pm
You make me laugh, RD. You are nothing if not an entertaining storyteller.
If you did have such a conversation, is your memory of it what you want it to be, or a rejection of the truth – he sees you as lost and not worthy of a fight? I’m just playing Devil’s advocate here, nothing serious.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:04 am
In the spirit of WWJD. I praise click you and forgive you again.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
3
4:25 am
RD it is past your bed time.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
3
10:57 am
i allways found the idea of “what would jesus do” to be a oxymoron… and a contradiction of crhistianity.
explain to me if jesus would do that…why the fuck has he not done it yet?
also who the fuck are you to say what jesus would do? you are actually calling yourself nat least as smart as jesus. isn’t that blasphemy?
you know what i think? i think jesus would rip your soul out for being the most hateful waste of exsistance ever. and the only reason he hasn’t is that imaginary people tend not to do a lot of stuff in the real world.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
3
11:45 am
Your mode of expression belies any need for discourse or response. You’ve deemed yourself smartest kid on the short bus. Wear your crown proudly.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
2
12:52 pm
I’m sure his crown will match your tiara nicely.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1