Bob makes a case that had Jephtath gone to God and asked to be released from a stupid vow that God never asked him to make anyway, God would have extended mercy and released him.

Other Topics: 

Current Events:

-Donald Trump’s fake applause

-Obama exploits South Carolina shootings by talking about gun control

-The Supreme Court may overturn part of the Affordable Health Care Act

Satire:

In the wake of a white woman who calls herself black, Bob looks into the future and explores other possibilities of people being only who they FEEL they are.

SAN DIEGO, June 16, 2015 —One day after resigning as president of the NAACP’s Spokane, Wash., branch, Rachel Dolezal finally decided to explain her claim to be black, a claim recently challenged by white  biological parents. Her explanation was as clear as mud.

In an interview on “The Today Show” with Matt Lauer, Dolezal insisted she had not been lying.

“I do take exception to that because it’s a little more complex than me identifying as black or answering a question of, are you black or white?”

Earlier, when the story first broke, Dolezal was asked by the Spokane Review to clarify her position. She said “That question is not as easy as it seems… There’s a lot of complexities … and I don’t know that everyone would understand that.”

Many are drawing a comparison between Dolezal and Bruce Jenner in the wake of his (her) recent decision to undergo “gender reassignment.”

But this goes light years beyond Jenner. These days, if a middle school boy simply feels like a girl, he’s allowed to use the girl’s locker room. There need be no pending sex-change operation.

Obviously, America has reached a new level of sophistication, so prepare yourself, for this will not stop with gender identification or race identification. We have opened up Pandora’s box, and all kinds of fun toys are going to pop out of it.

Do you want to number yourself among those who understand the complexities and subtle nuances of life, or do you wish to remain some back-woods bumpkin who is dumb enough to actually trust his eyes?

To help you stay ahead of the game, here are some future scenarios to be on the lookout for.

1) Be careful the next time a waitress messes up your order because chances are, you only think she messed up. True, you may have ordered a hamburger and she may have brought you a watercress sandwich, but did it ever occur to you that she feels like a waitress who gets people’s orders correct? If that is the way she feels, who are you to judge?

2) During the next summer Olympics, be prepared: One of the silver medal gymnasts might feel like a gold medal winner. Sportscasters who report otherwise will be showing their own shortsightedness.

3) The next time somebody is arrested for holding up a grocery store, the perpetrator might testify in court that in his heart he does not feel like a criminal. Any jury who refuses to acquit him based upon that testimony is showing horrible insensitivity.

4) And while we’re on the subject of crime…Maybe a captured Islamic terrorist feels he is in reality a Jewish rabbi and that his “act of terror” was merely an officiation of a special shabbat service.

5) Last but not least: When a college student in class flunks a test, he would be well advised to promptly inform the instructor that he feels he deserved an A.  In fact, he feels this in his heart with every fiber of his being! Not only does he feel that he deserved an A but upon staring at the letter scribbled on top of the test in red ink, the student is quite certain that he actually sees an A!

NOTE: This last one has the best chance of garnering a positive response. After all, he will not be challenging a mere simpleton, but rather a sophisticated college professor who understands the complexities of life. There are many ideas today that only one with a graduate school education can grasp.

This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.

Capturing child-like wonder is another theme.

Other new movies reviewed: 

-Mad Max

-Tomorrowland

-San Andreas

Older films discussed:

-Close Encounters of the Third Kind

-Safety Not Guarenteed

SAN DIEGO, June 9, 2015 — Never missing an opportunity to deliver yet another misleading speech, President Obama decided to share his vast legal expertise with the Supreme Court, at least indirectly. While  attending the G-7 summit in Germany, he held a press conference and brazenly dropped a hint that the Supreme Court would be offering “a twisted interpretation of the law” should they overturn that portion of the Affordable Health Care Act which offers federal subsidies to people enrolled in health insurance coverage through the federal portal, HealthCare.gov.

“This should be an easy case. Frankly, it probably shouldn’t even have been taken up,” Obama explained.

The legal challenge is that the law allowed for subsidies only to those individuals who signed on with state run exchanges. Since many states do not offer the exchanges, the federal government kicked in money anyway and that action is now in question. If this portion of the law is overturned, many who enrolled in Healthcare.Gov will no longer qualify for government assistance.

Many Republicans view this potential ruling with great enthusiasm

In December Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)said, “You could have a mulligan here, a major do-over of the whole thing, that opportunity presented to us by the Supreme Court.”

Actually, Republicans might want to be careful what they wish for.

True, the entire law should have already been overturned based upon the lies President Obama created in order to get it passed: lies such as “If you like your doctor, you can keep him;” or the interesting about-face, which insisted the Affordable Health Care Act was not a tax while getting it through Congress, only to then argue before the Supreme Court that it actually was a tax so that it would not be overturned.

There is also a glaring irony when a man who demonstrates such contempt for our Constitution that he legalizes immigrants through Executive Order decides to give patronizing lectures about the Constitution even to the U.S. Supreme Court.

That being said, we should keep in mind that the Supreme Court can easily strike down part of the law without the rest of the law necessarily crumbling.

If people suddenly lose their insurance subsidies, they will be upset and they will look for somebody to blame. The problem is, we happen to have a president who is an expert at shifting blame to everybody but himself.

Even a family that never voted for Obama and never wanted his health care law in the first place, will still need to make ends meet. Perhaps they lost their previous insurance plan as a result of rising premiums in the face of Obama’s new, strangling regulations. Maybe they turned around and signed up for Obama Care only because they could no longer afford anything else. The correct response should be to feel even more double crossed than ever by President Obama.

But it is this very same president who will be quick to point out that should their currently non-exchange state transform their law and offer insurance exchanges, the federal government will be free to return providing the health insurance subsidies.

In the process, Republican Governors will be denounced as if they are Ebeneezer Scrooge on steroids. Undoubtedly, the race card will also be pulled out of the deck. We will hear that African-Americans and other minorities are the primary victims of these evil Republicans.

Some of those governors may very well cave in to this pressure, especially if they are up for reelection.

Meanwhile, Republicans in the House and Senate will be tempted to “fix the health care law” instead of overturning the health care law as they promised.

So be careful what you wish for, Republicans. That doesn’t mean you should not still make the wish. Just be sure to stand your ground if the wish is granted. Don’t be fools and try to put the genie back in the bottle. Instead, show some courage! After Obama gives his speech, stand up and deliver a better one!

Understand that people will have a right to be angry if the Supreme Court’s ruling goes against the administration’s untenable position. But make sure this anger gets directed at the real perpetrator this time, not you and your fellow Republicans, none of whom voted for Obamacare in the first place.

And don’t worry about how the mainstream media will portray you. You do not answer to them. You answer to those who put you in office because they believed your promises. If you break your campaign pledges, you are no better than our Liar-in-Chief.

This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.

Questions include:

-Was Paul a woman hater?

-If Cain was the third human being, the first born of Adam and Eve, who was his wife and why was he afraid of running into other people when he was banished?

-How will God judge those who never heard of Jesus?

The passage in question can be found in John 21: 15-19

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?”

“Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.”

Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.”

16 Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”

He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.”

Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.”

17 The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”

Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. 18 Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”19 Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!” (NIV)

The background is that after Christ had been arrested, Peter publicly denied him three times. This is something he never would have imagined himself doing. After all, he’d followed Jesus around for years, believing with all his heart that Jesus was the promised Messiah of his people, a warrior-king who would deliver his people from the tyranny of the Romans.

Peter had also gone out of his way to tell Jesus that he would remain loyal even if everyone else forsook Him.

But when the moment of truth arrived, Peter’s courage failed him.

What a difference a few days make! Now, Jesus has risen from the dead and word gets out to Peter that this same Jesus wants to see him. Can you just imagine how the poor guy must have felt? It was worse than some kid being dragged to the principal’s office.

Readers are dripping with anticipation as they devour this narrative found in the end of John’s Gospel, only to find a somewhat confusing and somewhat repetitive conversation between Jesus and Peter.

The problem is with our English translations. Much more is going on here than we realize and an exploration into the original Greek provides a very interesting spotlight to an otherwise bland looking dialogue.

Most of us are conditioned to thinking of foreign language studies as a boring endeavor reserved only for intellectuals who have nothing better to do with their time. The most commonly shared experience is that of taking a language class to satisfy some kind of general-ed requirement in school.We recall sitting in classrooms, anxiously glancing at our watches, while an enthusiastic instructor talked about nouns, participles, and present tenses, looking far more enthusiastic than any one else in the room.

Yes, foreign language gets a bad wrap. Be that as it may, the subject is unavoidable. After all, the New Testament was originally written in Greek. Although we have many excellent translations into English, certain words do not maintain their original flavor after crossing the border.

This conversation between Jesus and Peter offers a glaring example. The most reoccurring word is love. It is repeated often in just a matter of minutes, making Jesus come across either as a man who has a hearing problem or as one who delights in redundancy.

“Do you love me?”

“Yes.”

“Do you love me?”

“Yes.”

“OK. Just in case you didn’t hear me, let me ask just one more time. Do you love me?”

“YES!!!”

That’s the way it comes across in English. But the Greek text offers something substantially different. In English, we have one word for love. It’s called love. In Greek there are many words for love. There’s the word eros, referring to romantic or sexual love. This is where we get the word erotic from.

There’s storge, the kind of love one has for his family.

There’s philea, which means the kind of love one has for a friend. Philadelphia was named as “the city of brotherly love.”

But the most important word for love in the New Testament is agape. This word can include emotion but the emphasis is more on action and was primarily used for sacrificial action, i.e. loving a person enough to lay down your life for him! This is the same word used of God in John 3:16 where the Gospel writer talks about God loving the entire world enough to send His only Son to die for us.

When Jesus asks Peter if he loves him, he is using a form of the word agape. Peter responds with a the word philo a form of the word philea.

Understanding these two different words makes all the difference in the world.

“Peter, do you love me enough to lay down your life and die for me?”

Well, everybody standing there, especially Peter, already knew the answer to that question. When given an opportunity to die for his friend, Peter had wimped out.

Peter responded like a politician dodging a Sunday morning news show question.

“Lord, you know I’ve always had a strong affection for you as a friend.”

So Jesus repeats the question:

“Peter do you love (agapas) me?”

Peter gives the same answer. “Lord, you know I love (philo) you.”

The third time Jesus changes the word:

“Peter, do you love (phileis) me?

Peter sadly agrees.

“Yes, Lord, I have affection for you as a friend and that is all I am able to do. I must confess that I do not love you enough to lay down my life for you.”

And then, Jesus comforts him by saying, “Well don’t worry. Some day you WILL die for me.”

You see? All at once Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s death makes perfect sense because we now have a better understanding of the context. Peter felt horrible about his cowardice. He had sworn that he would never forsake Jesus but when push came to shove, he did not measure up. By telling Peter that someday he will indeed be a martyr, Jesus is giving Peter the best news he can possibly hear.

In the book of Acts, we see a completely different Peter, defending his Christian convictions under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. When Peter and John were threatened by the governing authorities and warned to stop preaching the Gospel, they replied.

“Which is right in God’s eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges! 20 As for us, we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19 NIV)

Years later, Peter was executed under Emperor Nero. Church tradition tells us that when they were about to crucify him, he insisted on being crucified upside down because it was too much of an honor to be crucified right side up like his Lord.

All of this was anticipated by Jesus as He restored Peter to fellowship. The flavor of the conversation accentuates itself with just a little bit of Greek. And so, as you can see, occasionally language studies are not nearly as boring as we thought.