Toby’s Sunday light

Toby

Disguising himself as an idiot, and thus mixing easily with the staff of three hitherto reputable Christian organisations, Toby, was taken aback at what he saw and heard.

From the US, he reports personally: GC.Ed.@L.

“Wycliffe Bible Translators” and two associated companies “SIL” and “Frontiers”, have removed the terms Father, Son and Son of God from the Bible because these words may offend Muslims.

Father is replaced with Allah or Lord or Guardian, Son is replaced with Proxy and Messiah, so that “This is my beloved son” can be rendered as “This is my beloved proxy.”

I did the obvious things at first and examined the water supply, but it was clear of any mind-altering substances. Then I checked family history for evidence of insanity but, apart from finding an Australian cousin who had once voted for Billy McMahon and supported Manly, there was nothing—nothing at all.

When I asked them why they had done this they denied it point blank—they had not removed the words at all. When I pointed the words out in their publications they said that all they had done was merely re-translate—the original Son was still in there, it was just translated as proxy in case a Muslim ever dared to read the bible.

Wycliffe-bible-islamic-edition-210x300“What would happen if he did?” I asked.

“Well, for one thing he wouldn’t have a clue about the doctrine of the Trinity as it now stands. And we dropped the word “Our” from “Our Father” as it suggested sex was involved, and that would have offended him, too. You see, it is superior scholarship.”

“And you have explained the Trinity?” I asked.

“Well, no, nobody ever really has, but we have taken out the bits that might offend Muslims. You must see—it is all about tolerance and compromise and reaching out, don’t you agree?”

“And you expect the Quran to drop the bit about killing Jews and re-translate so that it will not offend Jews?”

“Goodness, no, the Quran is the actual direct word of God according to Muslims.”

“I understand that your staff have resigned.”

“Some have. We just couldn’t get them to understand that we are right and that they are dwelling in darkness. They don’t understand about tolerance and compromise.”

It occurred to me, as far as I remember from Sunday School, that unless Christ was divine the Bible is just a book of good advice and there is no reason on earth a Muslim should read it or even follow any suggestions made.

Then it also occurred to me that the editors are pompous billygoats drifting toward surrender and calling it tolerance, drifting towards nonsense and calling it scholarship, toward ‘reaching out’ and falling to their knees in subservience.

But I could be wrong.

Editor: “pompous billygoats” is a re-translation of Toby’s original expression and more accurately reflects what he probably really meant. His original was loose, meandering, choleric, and incoherent.

Zero Emissions Foolishness

Forbes

The Australian Climate Commission has pronounced that “emissions need to be reduced to nearly zero by 2050”.

Imagine Australia with “zero emissions” – which means zero production of carbon dioxide from human activities and industries.

This would mean zero usage of coal, oil, petrol, diesel or gas, zero production of cement or steel and the closure of 92% of Australia’s electricity generators.

Sunbeams and sea breezes cannot supply 24/7 electricity – the only feasible non-carbon options for Australian grid power are nuclear or hydro. Has the Climate Commission joined the nuclear power lobby? Or do they have a secret plan for big hydro developments on the Snowy, the Franklin and the Tully-Millstream?

And how do we keep our diesel-fuelled transport fleet operating? Using big, big batteries and even more nuclear or hydro power to recharge them at every roadhouse in the outback? (But once they eliminate our grazing animals and their emissions, we will not need road trains.)

And how do we keep planes operating? Are they suggesting that we divert most of our sugar production to producing power alcohol? 

For cement and steel we could of course try to catch and bury every molecule of carbon dioxide produced, but in reality the costs involved in such stupidity would force closure of these industries, and cement and steel would be imported from more sensible nations.

Unless the Climate Commission can show us a realistic plan for “zero emissions”, with cost benefit analyses, we know it is just more hot emissions from academic dreamers.

They must put up, or shut up.

Viv Forbes,

Rosewood    Qld   Australia
forbes@carbon-sense.com

Home front opens in a foreign war

It was not so much a death threat as a declaration of war.

''You wanna go to war, you f—in' Shia dogs?'' the phone message says. ''We're taking all of you to war, in Sydney and overseas!''

It was 8pm and Jamal Daoud, an aspiring politician from Auburn was having dinner with his wife and children. An outspoken critic of the Free Syrian Army, Daoud is accustomed to abuse but this call was more frightening than most.

Read more: Via SMH

‘Chameleon’ Rudd disgraceful, Howard tells Libs

In the latest sign that asylum seeker policy will be a key election battleground, Mr Howard appeared at a presidential-style rally in Melbourne on Saturday to slam Mr Rudd as ''the great chameleon of Australian politics'' and warn voters he had little credibility when it came to dealing with boat arrivals. He lashed out at Labor's resurrected leader for dismantling the Pacific Solution, and then for flip-flopping on border protection by urging the ALP not to ''lurch to the right'' in 2010, only to say last week that it shouldn't ''lurch to the left''.

Read more: Via SMH

The Backwater State

by Nico.

Bob Hawke and the Labour Party have a lot to answer for.

It was he and his mates who passed the World Heritage Act under the “treaties” powers of the Government. This provided a pulpit for every Green on earth to be outraged at Australia’s “failure” to protect frogs and things.

More importantly, it was passed quite cynically to prevent the Franklin Dam being built.

Tasmania has very few industrial resources, but one shining light is hydroelectric power generation. It’s hard to find anything which is more clean, green, environmentally friendly and less polluting than to generate electricity by using falling water.

Opposition to dam building in Tasmania from the Greens reveals their true purpose. It has nothing to do with lack of pollution, greenhouse gases or dirty industries. Freely available power at cheap rates will mean industrial development and population growth. Both of these in the green paradigm represent a nightmare.

Green philosophy has nothing to do with being Green; it has everything to do with being anti-development – anti-growth-at all costs. The idea of any kind of industrial machinery, no matter how neutral or harmless represents an object of fear. To talk to these deep Greens is to enter a nether world of delusion and darkness. Their ultimate aim is to return society to a pre-industrial state of agricultural smallholdings, individual plots and small family farms, all of which are supposed to be self-sustaining.

That’s fine for those who want that kind of thing. If some people want to go and live in a humpy in the sticks, grow their own vegetables and knit their own socks, then there is absolutely nothing to prevent them from pursuing that kind of lifestyle. However for most Australians that is not the way they want to live, and they are becoming increasingly resentful at the self-righteousness of Green politics which tells them that they should. That kind of lifestyle may give some satisfaction if you like it, but if it is not your way of life, then for most people it removes two main drivers for their lives; hope and ambition. Therein lies part of the Tasmanian malaise. There is no hope, and there is thwarted ambition.

The Greens are latter day Puritans, and nowhere in Australia is their presence more pervasive, stultifying and negative than in Tasmania. They are the new buckled shoe and black pointy hat brigade; self-righteous, overweening, hectoring, lecturing and dictating – determined to impose their so-called “progressive” agendas on a population which has the highest unemployment in the country, the lowest per capita income and the most dismal prospects for enterprise, manufacturing and retailing.

For the Greens, the rule of law is a minor irritation to be ignored, invoked when convenient, and contemptuously defied, by direct action, if necessary. For the Green left, personal ideology trumps law every time.

In Tasmania a clear economic case exists for the building of several more dams and more major infrastructure. The Basslink cable which joins Tasmania to the mainland is grossly underutilised, and potential exists to sell large amounts of energy to the mainland. This would also go a long way to alleviating the dismal condition of this state’s finances and help to lift Tasmania out of being the economic basket-case of Australia.

The Green left government of Lara Giddings has been an unmitigated disaster, and in the forthcoming 2014 election they are likely to be routed. Unfortunately, the Liberals under a lacklustre Will Hodgman do not inspire confidence either.

Hodgman acts as if afraid to tackle those things which need to be tackled, afraid to attack the attitudes which have been holding Tasmania back, and incapable of driving an inspiring media presence.

It seems that this backwater State is doomed to remain nothing more than the poor cousin of the rest of the Commonwealth. There is much potential which has been smothered by stultifying left-wing paralysis.

What the place needs is a conservative nationalist; someone who will raise the tone, provide optimism to working people, hope to businesses, ambition to school-leavers and,kick the Greens in their collective heads.