HS IS A RARE BIRD | 2004-11-27
HS is a regular commenter here who is unique. He or she is a regular Bible Christian, but when I disagree with HS, HS doesn't have a fit.
As soon as a person says his entire world view is based on God, we all stop talking to him and start humoring him. He is totally incapable of realizing that his world view is based on HIS OWN VIEW of God.
He thinks he IS God.
A person who says his entire world view is based on the Word of God is saying that he IS God, in exactly the same way that a judge who says he is "interpreting" the Constitution is saying that he IS the Constitution.
If you "interpret" the Constitution, you ARE the Constitution. If you interpret God, you ARE God. I said HS may be a he or she. It is also possible that HS is an IT.
How can a person who is convinced they represent God also be a reasonable person who can allow a heretic like me to disagree with the Voice of God? I never met a theologian like that. It is very hard to find a human who calls himself a Bible Christian who is like that.
This leads me to believe that HS is a computer. HS must be an IT.
The point of all this nonsense is to point out a fact we all know but nobody says. We are all terrified of trying to speak rationally with people who call themselves pro-lifers or Biblical Christians.
What I have just said is NOT limited to evangelical, "Bible-believing Christians. I have a cousin who is a very, very, very, very, VERY Modern United Methodist Minister. I simply cannnot get a straight answer from him.
I met with Michael Novak, the theologian of National Review, many years ago. He had written a book called The Unmeltable Ethnic, praising the conservative ethnic Catholics in America. He was the man who invented the term WASP, meaning White Protestant Anglo-Saxon. He was very famous.
I had worked in ethnic areas. I am an honorary Boston Southie. I lived in a campaign headquarters in the Polish steel district of Chicago. In most ways, they were just like us unapologetic Southerners.
Novak knew my history. So I asked him if what he called White Anglos-Saxon Protestants was really just what a Boston Southie would call a "Yankee," a pro-busing suburban yuppie.
He said, "Yes."
I pointed out that most of us Southerners are White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, so it was unfair to confuse us with the Yankee-type WASPs.
He said "Yes."
It didn't bother him in the slightest. A vicious insult to tens of millions of people would make a mere human feel guilty. But Novak is not a mere human. He is the Mouth of God.
In my opinion as a lifetime interrogator, every professional theologian I have ever met is a psychopath. The fact that Novak (Michael, not Robert) had flatly stated he was being unfair to tens of millions of Southerners was of no importance to him at all.
If Novak had said "Yankee" instead of WASP, he would not have been praised by National Review. National Review is an East Coast Catholic magazine. He told National Review and New York what they wanted to hear.
New York does not like white gentiles. National Review does not like Southerners. So Novak said what they wanted to hear.
As a theologian, it never occurred to Novak to worry about this. He is a theologian, the Voice of God Almighty.
So when one Southern redneck reminded him that he was committing a sin here, he almost laughed out loud.
My Bible says that what Novak did is a sin.
I think it's called, "bearing false witness against thy neighbor." But what does a ridiculous simplistic quote like that mean to a Great Theologian?
The Mouth of God is immune to illiterate, lay criticism like mine.
HS doesn't seem to have that sort of immunity from giving a straight answer. All the people who tell me their beliefs are based on the Word of God feel that they are automatically exempted from answering any challenges from us mere humans.
But HS doesn't.
HS has GOT to be a computer.