Visitors from around the World

Translate blog:

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

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

Announcements

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

facebook: Discerning the World

Sign up to Receive Email Updates


powered by MailChimp!

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

Recent Comments

General Comments Section:

Click here for the General Comments Section Discerning the World - General Conversation Section

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

Article Archive

Click here to find a List of all Articles List of all Articles
Click here to find a List of all Categories to search by Categories / Keywords

Website Stats

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

“Stop Comparing Nelson Mandela to Jesus”

"Stop Comparing Nelson Mandela to Jesus"

NELSON MANDELA

While the world is mourning the death of Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela several admirers have inadvertently compared him to Jesus Christ by testifying that heNelson Mandela taught them to love their enemies.

It truly is a virtue the entire world needs to emulate but who should we imitate – Nelson Mandela or Jesus Christ the Son of the living God who taught us to love our enemies more than 2000 years ago?

The difference between Mandela and Jesus Christ is that Christ said “without me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). It simply means that those who do not have Jesus Christ indwelling them through his Spirit, cannot do anything according to God’s will.

Mandela himself said: “I am the captain of my soul.” Who is the captain of your soul – you yourself or Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God?

The following report appeared in the Huff Post recently.

CANTEBURY, England (RNS) Few would deny Nelson Mandela’s greatness, but one of Britain’s best-known journalists, Dominic Lawson, has taken the media to task for comparing South Africa’s first black president to Jesus.

Writing on the eve of the departure of world leaders to Johannesburg to attend a memorial service for Mandela, who died last week, Lawson wrote in the Daily Mail: “He was a giant — but how absurd for the BBC to compare Mandela to Christ.” (Please continue reading here:  Stop Comparing Nelson Mandela To Jesus, Journalist Says and Mandela was a giant – but how absurd for the BBC to compare him to Christ)

THE OTHER SIDE OF NELSON MANDELA.

My meeting with Nelson Mandela

Note:  Peter Hammond is not a true gospel preacher, he is a Calvinist with strong ties to Dominionism. That said, what would we have thought if it was a journalist or a politician who do not believe in Jesus Christ who interviewed Nelson Mandela? I’m pretty sure that no one would have protested and said: “We can’t believe him because he is an unbeliever.” In that case, journalism and interviews with esteemed persons would have been a complete taboo with Christians. I sincerely doubt whether Dominic Lawson is a Christian (Correct me if I’m wrong). Even so, are we going to dismiss his articles on Mandela just because he’s an unbeliever or an Episcopalian or a Roman Catholic or member of the Emergent Church or whatever?

Mandela: Speaking to reporters after singing to kill whites

 

More...

27 comments to “Stop Comparing Nelson Mandela to Jesus”

  • George

    can you give proof of peter hamond being part of apostolic faith movement

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    George

    I could write an article on him, but for now you will have to do your own investigation on the following I provide:

    “Peter Hammond – he’s the Deputy Director of Hammond’s Frontline Fellowship, the Director of his African Christian Action, and a missionary with his In Touch Mission International organisation….Naturally, Hammond has links with the hard-core Christian dominionists of the Chalcedon Foundation.” http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/12/2/65451/3761

    He has also been in Joy Magazine a few times. Joy Magazine is Dominionist. Peter Hammond’s books are also prasied by Joseph Farah of WND (World Net Daily) who are Dominionist.

    [Edited: I am sorry. Actually I retract my statement. He is 100% Calvinist with serious dominionist undertones. I will edit the article]

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    Is Peter Hammond who is apparently 100% Calvinist- wrong about Nelson Mandela. Does his 100% Calvinist leanings make him incabable of getting it right about Nelson Mandela- does it somehow disqualify him. Nelson Mandela is who he is regardless of who is talking about him.

  • Peter CB wrote:

    I would like to know if Peter Hammond who is apparently 100% Calvinist, wrong about what he said about Nelson Mandela or is it the other way around??

    Is Peter Hammond who is apparently 100% Calvinist- wrong about Nelson Mandela. Does his 100% Calvinist leanings make him incabable of getting it right about Nelson Mandela- does it somehow disqualify him. Nelson Mandela is who he is regardless of who is talking about him.

    And I suppose you would also like to know if Nelson Mandela who was a Methodist (Calvinistic in doctrine) was wrong when he stood by some Umkonte we Sizwe members while singing “kill the whites” or was it the other way around, meaning that he was right in doing so?

    Your suggestion that Peter Hammond lied because he is apparently 100% Calvinist, is not only weak but insipidly and hilariously wrong.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    I was simply asking a question Thomas but if you found it hilarious I am pleased to have been able to entertain you!

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    Thomas as to your reply in answer to my first comment had I not seen who it was from I may have been inclined to think that it was Joseph Prasch who was replying.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    I was simply asking a question Thomas but if you found it hilarious I am pleased to have been able to entertain you!

    Your question is hilariously wrong because even Calvinists are quite capable of speaking the truth when they address matters such as pornography, homosexuality, abortion and the likes. Dr. Hammond would probably like to believe that Mandela is lost because he was not an elect person and therefore not chosen to be saved before the foundation of the world. The elect, as you know will all go to heaven. Only the non-elect end up in hell. Arminians, for instance, are also all hell-bound, according to Calvinists. It would be interesting to know whether Dr. Hammond believes that Mandela is in heaven because he belonged to the Methodist Church (Calvinistic in doctrine). Roman Catholics believe that Hitler is in heaven because he was baptized in the RCC and belonged to it until his death.

    I happened to stumble on an e-mail someone sent to Dr Hammond asking Him: AS A CALVINIST DO YOU PREACH THE GOSPEL OF FREE CHOICE OR THE GOSPEL OF ELECTION? One of the most startling things in his e-mail is his total agreement with Charles Spurgeon who said ““The longer I live, the clearer does it appear that John Calvin’s system is the nearest to perfection.” Anyone who busies himself with a system that is “the nearest to perfection” is NOT, I repeat Not, embracing the truth. If God’s Gospel is the Truth then it must be 100% perfect; It dares not be the nearest to perfection. If Calvin’s system is the nearest to perfection, it means that there are other gospels as well that are not as near to perfection as that of Calvin’s. Paul said there is only ONE Gospel and no other, and by saying so he categorically disqualified Calvin’s nearest to perfection system hands-down. An imperfect Gospel or even a Gospel nearest to perfection (which is NOT perfect) cannot save.

    However, as I said earlier, even a system nearest to perfection can speak the truth in matters such as pornography, homosexuality, abortion and the likes. And as you know, these were the issues Dr. Hammond took up with Nelson Mandela. It was not about Calvinism.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    Thomas – I have read your reply to my original Question, which was …

    Is Peter Hammond who is apparently 100% Calvinist- wrong about Nelson Mandela. Does his 100% Calvinist leanings make him incabable of getting it right about Nelson Mandela- does it somehow disqualify him. Nelson Mandela is who he is regardless of who is talking about him.

    I think you have misread what I was suggesting. I was not in any way trying to suggest that Nelson Mandela was right when he ” stood by some Umkonto We Sizwe members while singing kill the whites” If you take the time to read my third comment where I said ” Disregard my first comment” !I had relised that it had come out wrong.

    Your comment came over as high handed- and lacking in grace.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Peter

    Peter Hammond is pointing out FACTS on Mandela and they are true, however the FACT it he is a Calvinist and I don’t want people running off thinking they can now listen to Peter Hammond regarding the gospel because they can’t because he is 100% FALSE.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr wrote:

    Thomas – I have read your reply to my original Question, which was …

    Is Peter Hammond who is apparently 100% Calvinist- wrong about Nelson Mandela. Does his 100% Calvinist leanings make him incabable of getting it right about Nelson Mandela- does it somehow disqualify him. Nelson Mandela is who he is regardless of who is talking about him.

    I think you have misread what I was suggesting. I was not in any way trying to suggest that Nelson Mandela was right when he ” stood by some Umkonto We Sizwe members while singing kill the whites” If you take the time to read my third comment where I said ” Disregard my first comment” !I had relised that it had come out wrong.

    Your comment came over as high handed- and lacking in grace

    In a nutshell: No Peter, Dr. Peter Hammond is not wrong about Nelson Mandela despite the fact that he is 100% Calvinist because Mandela himself proved it in the video I posted together with Peter Hammond’s video. To emphasize what I had said, let me also say: No Peter, Dr. Peter Hammond’s 100% Calvinist leaning does not make him incapable of getting it right about Nelson Mandela and neither does it disqualify Him. Even the RCC is right about abortion, pronography and the likes.

    I hope my answer at last matches your view of graciousness and civility.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    Thomas – thank you for taking the trouble to enlighten me. I have no Idea who Peter Hammond is and prior to this conversation had no idea what his his leanings are. But I would like to make the point that I could well have been a person that was either a very new christian or one that was feeling his way I may have come away with the wrong idea of christianity altogether. I will leave you now with these few thoughts.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr wrote:

    Thomas – thank you for taking the trouble to enlighten me. I have no Idea who Peter Hammond is and prior to this conversation had no idea what his his leanings are. But I would like to make the point that I could well have been a person that was either a very new christian or one that was feeling his way I may have come away with the wrong idea of christianity altogether. I will leave you now with these few thoughts.

    Maybe a little advice could help to clear the air. When I am not too sure about something, I usually do a little research. The internet is a vast info monster and should be approached with caution. However, there are some wonderful sites that do tell the truth, especially the ones where the persons in question personally answer the public’s’ questions (for instance the one I referred you to) Now, that should have been a real eye-opener to you if you had just taken the time and the trouble to Google Dr. Peter Hammond. I did it and immediately came upon this particular article proving that Hammond is 100% Calvinist. Furthermore, don’t you think you were being a little unfair to assume someone is incapable of assessing an interview with an esteemed person and then arrive at a correct conclusion, just because he is a Calvinist?

    I may be wrong but I detected a little sarcasm in your question because I assume that you may have read some of my comments on Calvinism and thought that I suggested that Calvinists were always wrong. I would be crazy to think something like that. Calvinists, like the RC, believe in the death, burial and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ and for anyone to believe that they are incapable of being correct in regard to this doctrine, just because they are Calvinists, is crazy. You should know that.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr

    Thomas – I may have jumped to the wrong conclusion however when I came onto the site I immediately recognised Peter Hammond as I had previously listened tohim via a posting on F/B – I had concurred with what he had to say regarding Nelson Mandela, as I said previously I did not know who he was and had no reason to check him out as the subject was Nelson mandela and not christianity. Now he may be all you say he is but, but that is besides the point. I had no sooner come onto DW when someone wwas quick to point out that he was a calvinist -now maybe we think differently but to me it was as if I was to take Peter Hammonds comments with a pinch of salt so to speak. If I am wrong in thinking that then it is just a case of misreading the situation. Your subsequent comments went some way to making clear what you meant – may have been better mentioned before I even chose to make my enquiry.. otherwise what was the point of rushing in to be sure everyone knew he was a Calvinist.At this point I dont remember who it was that initially pointed out that fact (It may have been Deborah) For me this is not about who and what Peter Hammond is. It is about the way we should approach this sort of discussion – I am not judging your heart just how you responded to me in the begining.

  • Peter Caldwell-Barr wrote

    Thomas – I may have jumped to the wrong conclusion however when I came onto the site I immediately recognised Peter Hammond as I had previously listened tohim via a posting on F/B – I had concurred with what he had to say regarding Nelson Mandela, as I said previously I did not know who he was and had no reason to check him out as the subject was Nelson mandela and not christianity. Now he may be all you say he is but, but that is besides the point. I had no sooner come onto DW when someone wwas quick to point out that he was a calvinist -now maybe we think differently but to me it was as if I was to take Peter Hammonds comments with a pinch of salt so to speak. If I am wrong in thinking that then it is just a case of misreading the situation. Your subsequent comments went some way to making clear what you meant – may have been better mentioned before I even chose to make my enquiry.. otherwise what was the point of rushing in to be sure everyone knew he was a Calvinist.At this point I dont remember who it was that initially pointed out that fact (It may have been Deborah) For me this is not about who and what Peter Hammond is. It is about the way we should approach this sort of discussion – I am not judging your heart just how you responded to me in the begining.

    OK Peter. Thanks

  • Eddie

    [deleted]

    I know that this comment will not be posted. Enjoy.

    [edited – the history is most probably correct, but the anti-semitism because of it is totally evil]

  • Hester

    I did not know that Mandela was a Freemason?? This is news to me. I am placing a link Debs feel free to remove it but, I think it is quite an eye opener. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9pjwRGk0M8

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Hester

    F W de Klerk is also a Freemason, this I found out just the other day.

  • De Klerk’s Freemasonry does not surprise me, Debs.
    An excellent book by Dr Cathy Burns, called “Billy Graham and His Friends” deals with Freemasons in high places. (“Beyond the Brotherhood” by Martin Short, a secular writer is another excellent expose of Masonry.) Dr Burns’ book, though, is particularly aimed at Christian readers.
    In BG & F she aims at Graham’s Masonic, Catholic and other connections, with which Graham is fully in league.
    She deals with Mandela in pages 112, 231, 232, 233, 390. The book was first published in 2001 showing that there was a lot of knowledge around for those whose eyes were open enough to accept it. Dr Burns gives details of all her sources and sticks tightly to facts and logic.
    She compares Mandela’s actual beliefs and actions to what the media was telling us and they are poles apart.
    Sadly, too many Christians go to the media rather than God’s word for much of their beliefs. They don’t even see the contradictions and think we have much to learn from this world and doing so make gods of men. And they get very upset when their little gods like Mandela, Graham and the like are as much as questioned, let alone exposed for what they are.
    A friend told me that he never read books about the Bible but only sticks to the Bible per se. Yet he claimed that Mandela and Tutu were “Good men.” So much for only reading the Bible! The gentleman in question didn’t seem to take much stock by Jeremiah 17:9. I mentioned Dr Burns’ book to another Christian who told me she didn’t want to hear about it. Her great god Graham’s integrity was not to be doubted.
    We have to wonder: have such folk never heard of 1 Thessalonians 5:21 and 1 John 4:1? To my mind these are among the most liberating statements in the Bible. You could say they are the Christian’s Magna Carta!
    If people followed those Scriptures they would not have little gods. They would only have the ONE God!
    It can be very depressing to think that people actually want to be ignorant.
    Mandela was a very flawed man. Like his friend Tutu, he backed Arab terror against Israel. Why not? Arab terrorists backed Mandela–and found Tutu to be a useful tool/fool. Also, Mandela never renounced his communism. He was often seen giving the clenched fist salute, even as a so-called world leader. Cathy Burns shows in the above book how many of the communist world’s leaders extolled him.
    We are all flawed, of course, but at least those of us who are Christians know–or should know–that we are and that we constantly need Jesus Christ to bring us to perfection. We also ought to be aware of our enemies and their strategies, for they are ultimately the labourers for Satan. The devil loves darkness and deception so we should not be surprised when we see the rulers of this world work in darkness and subterfuge. Indeed, we should expect it. That’s why all nations have espionage. Yet, we have professing Christians who refuse to accept what should be obvious.
    The fact that Mandela was a politician shows that he was not only a liar but a professional one. I am not singling out Mandela with that label. For the life of me I cannot think of a single politician anywhere who is not a professional liar. If there are any who are not, what on earth are they doing in politics? All politics funtion on lies. They have to because the represent this world and true Christians know who the god of this world is [2 Cor 4:4].
    A lad,y with whom I corresponded on line, cut off all contact with me because I tried to explain how George W. Bush was not a man of God. And till then I was convinced that she was a genuine Christian. Other “Christian” correspondents agreed with her views that Bush was a man of God. That’s in spite of the fact that he has openly admitted that he was a member of Skull & Bones.
    This world is going down and politicians who think they can stop it are no different from those who built the Tower of Babel.
    Mandela and de Klerk were aiming at the same thing: building worldly kingdoms. And we have the Catholics, Calvinists and various kinds of Dominionists (all masquerading as Christians) involved in the same game.
    Jesus did not come to bring peace, but a sword. He said so [Matt 10:34; Luke 12:51]. But until He comes there will be no peace because it is He Who will bring it. Anti-Christ will destroy many by peace [Dan 8:25]. He’s the antithesis of Christ, promising peace but bringing destruction.
    Churchians who think they are Christians need to understand these things. If they follow those who cry “Peace, peace, when there is no peace” [Jer 6:14; 8:11] then they are following those inspired by the god of this world.
    Mandela was a shining example of one of those people. So was de Klerk, as his Masonry shows.
    Masonry states that all paths lead to God. That says it all.
    Scripture teaches clearly that there is only one path to God. Jesus Himself made that clear [Matt 7:13-14; John 14:6]. Jesus was not an ecumenist. All Masons are. So are most mainline churches. Small wonder that so many Masons are church attenders.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Amazing comment Martin, thank you for your insights.

  • Dan

    Martin, that is a very insightful comment. I looked at Dr Cathy Burn’s book on Billy Graham online. Something else caught my eye, her book called: Secure in Christ. Here is a quote from a review: “Secure in Christ cites approximately 1,000 King James scripture references which plainly show that a Christian must walk in holiness before the Lord in order to be assured of heaven”. Wouldn’t this be a gospel of works if that is indeed the case? I think if it’s our walk that gets us in heaven, then we’re all in serious trouble.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Dan

    You are right, Cathy Burns does not believe in Eternal Security therefore has to make sure she is 100% holy in order to make it into heaven. The snag is no one is holy, we are all sinners and sin daily. It’s the Holy Spirit that keeps us and chastises us to repent and He seals us that we can be assured that we will enter heaven.

    Having said that, her facts in her book are still credible, but thank you for spotting that!

  • Jean

    I believe that your witness speaks to this world and it will display your faith.
    When looking at Mandela’s witness I see the following:
    – Abortion law approved and signed into being by Mandela
    – New Film and entertainment law allowing pornography approved and signed by Mandela
    – Honoring Muslim, Hindu and Christian faiths together
    . . . etc

    He also wrote in his final Will that he wants to be buried according to the ataThembu custom.

    Wow, great witness . . .
    Now for another interesting tidbit. Apart from being a Free-mason (he was officially inaugurated into Masonry at the Cape of Good Hope Lodge 2 weeks after his Victor Verster release), he was also still influenced by his connection the the Animist faith.

    The following exert comes from the Eye-on-faith website:

    Although Nelson Mandela had been associated with Christianity during various periods of his life – he, like many other South Africans, also remained connected with the traditional animist beliefs of his people.
    Xola Potelwa of Reuters reports that Mandela “will be laid to rest on Sunday in an elaborate ceremony combining a state funeral and all its military pomp with the traditional burial rituals of his Xhosa clan…”
    These latter rituals include those that will welcome Mandela into “the world of ancestors.”
    They are also meant to insure that his spirit will be at peace.
    Mandela’s ataThembu (aka “Tembu”) people, whose ancestral land is on the Eastern Cape about 500 miles south of Johannesburg, will perform “salutations to the dead” for Mandela.
    They will slaughter oxen as part of the funeral rites, and “wash the spades” (that were used to dig his grave) a week after the burial.
    http://eyeonfaith.blogspot.com/2013/12/mandelas-ancestral-funeral-rites.html

    A man who for many embodied the Christian values of forgiveness, Mandela was the product of Xhosa traditional upbringing and Methodist schooling.
    In his autobiography ‘Long Walk to Freedom,’ Mandela spoke approvingly of the Xhosa rituals which his mother, a convert to the Methodist faith, resisted but his father followed, presiding over slaughter rituals and other traditional rites.

    Now we all know what God say’s about mixed seed…. it and it’s harvest/fruit is not suitable/acceptable to God.

    No, thank you, Mandela is not my savior . . .

  • Dan, I appreciate your statement. I haven’t read the book “Secure in Christ” and hadn’t even heard of it till now. But would like to read it as I’ve read reviews that take things in books out of context. I didn’t know that Cathy Burns did not believe in Eternal Security. Actually, the title of her book would make me think that she did. But you’re correct: If she did not believe in it but that we must walk in holiness to be secure then that would be a gospel of works and we would indeed all be in serious trouble. I must try and read her book to see if indeed she does believe that. And thank you for pointing it out.
    But, as Debs correcty states her points are all still credible. All of the ones she made about Graham and Mandela are facts that can be checked and are therefore true.
    Thanks for your comments too, Debs, and for allowing ours to be in print. Also, a quick thanks to Jean for informing us on a few other things I didn’t know about Mandela.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Strangely enough I came across a website this morning that is anti-Eternal Security (they have me listed on there as a heretic lol) and they list Cathy Burns as someone who is pro Eternal Security. Hmmm.

  • YvZ

    I know this article is quite a while ago, but bravo! It is a much needed article. The whole idolisation of Nelson Mandela makes me sick. And I don’t think it is going to end any time soon.

    Point is, the man was a Freemason (as is the ALL the leaders in this country) and part of the elite of this world. I also watched a video regarding his funeral, which states that it was a Satanic sacrifice, hence the fake interpreter, who was apparently throwing out satanic signs. Not sure if it is entirely true, but what are the chances that they would get a phony interpreter for the ‘Jesus’ of our country lol…

    By the way, why don’t our whole country rather pray to the REAL Jesus of the Bible for 67 minute, instead of bringing honour to Mandela every year??? Maybe that will turn things around…

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    YvZ

    >> I also watched a video regarding his funeral, which states that it was a Satanic sacrifice, hence the fake interpreter, who was apparently throwing out satanic signs. Not sure if it is entirely true,

    Not sure this is true either… I honestly just think the interpreter was a con-man conning the con-men.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    YvZ

    >> By the way, why don’t our whole country rather pray to the REAL Jesus of the Bible for 67 minute,

    If that ever happens I will wonder ‘what’ Jesus they are referring to. It’s the same at the ‘god’ they refer to when they sing our national anthem: Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrika ‘God Bless Africa’. Without Jesus Christ that ‘god’ is non other than Satan. When I speak to people I get told that the ANC are not evil because they would never have a national anthem that mentions God if they were…errr L O L.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  

  

  

Terms and Conditions for Submission of Comments

"Stop Comparing Nelson Mandela to Jesus"

Terms and Conditions:terms and conditions

Because this world is becoming more evil by the minute and Discerning the World is coming under attack more often from people with some very nasty dispositions, we now have ‘Terms and Conditions for Submission of Comments‘ which you need to agree too before you can comment – this is to protect us and you when you comment on this website.  If you are not here to harm Discerning the World and it’s authors, please by all means comment, however if you are here to cause harm in any way, please don’t comment.

The following conditions does not mean that the authors of Discerning The World permit only opinions that are in agreement with us. This also does not mean that we fear dissenting opinions or ideas that are contrary to the beliefs that we hold (and/or that of the revealed Scriptures of the Holy Bible).

The following describes the Terms and Conditions applicable to your use of the “Comments” submission service at the Discerning the World website.

BY CLICKING THE “POST COMMENT” BUTTON FOR YOUR COMMENT, YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND ABIDE BY ALL OF THE RULES AND POLICIES SET FORTH HEREIN. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, DO NOT SUBMIT YOUR COMMENT TO DISCERNING THE WORLD WEB SITE.

  1. Discerning the World owns and operates the DiscerningtheWorld.com site (the “Site”). Your use of the features on the Site allowing for submission of a “Comment” is subject to the following terms and conditions (the “Terms”). Discerning the World may modify these Terms at any time without notice to you by posting revised Terms on the Site. Your submission of a “Comment” to the Site following the modification of these Terms shall constitute your binding acceptance of and agreement to be bound by those modified Terms.
  2. By submitting a “Comment” you are accepting these Terms through your clicking of the “POST COMMENT” button.
  3. Discerning the World has the right, but not the obligation, to take any of the following actions, in Discerning the World’s sole unfettered discretion, at any time, and for any reason or no reason, without providing any prior notice:
    1. Restrict, suspend or terminate your ability to submit “Comments,” to the Site;
    2. Change, suspend or modify all or any part of the Site or the features thereof;
    3. Refuse or remove any material posted on, submitted to or communicated through the Site by you;
    4. Deactivate or delete any screen names, profiles or other information associated with you; or
    5. Alter, modify, discontinue or remove any comment off the Site.
  4. You agree that, when using or accessing the Site or any of the features thereof, you will not:
    1. Violate any applicable law or regulation;
    2. Interfere with or damage the Site, through hacking or any other means;
    3. Transmit or introduce to the Site or to other users thereof any viruses, cancel bots, Trojan horses, flood pings, denial of service attacks, or any other harmful code or processes;
    4. Transmit or submit harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, deceptive, fraudulent, obscene, indecent, vulgar, lewd, violent, hateful or otherwise objectionable content or material;
    5. Transmit or submit any unsolicited advertising, promotional materials, or spam;
    6. Stalk or harass any user or visitor to the Site; or
    7. Use the content or information available on the Site for any improper purpose.
  5. You retain the Copyright of any “Comment” you submit to Discerning the World. By submitting a “Comment” to Discerning the World, you agree to grant Discerning the World a irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual license to use the material or commentary that you have submitted, in any medium and in any manner that Discerning the World may, in its sole unfettered discretion, choose.
  6. By submitting a “Comment” to Discerning the World, you agree to comply with the following rules concerning such submissions:
    1.  You agree not to include in your “Comment”:
      1. Any false, defamatory, libelous, abusive, threatening, racially offensive, sexually explicit, obscene, harmful, vulgar, hateful, illegal, or otherwise objectionable content;
      2. Any content that may be seen as stalking or harassing of any other Site contributors;
      3. Any content that personally attacks an individual. (An example of a personal attack is posting negative comments about an individual in a way meant to demean that person. Note that posting your opinion about someone’s ideas, doctrine or actions is not a personal attack);
      4. Any content that discloses private details concerning any person, for eg., phone numbers that have not been made public, photos that are not in the public domain, residential address that is not public, ID numbers, Social Security numbers, email addresses that are not in the public domain, etc.;
      5. Any content that you know to be false, misleading, or fraudulent;
      6. Any use of profanity;
      7. Any content including advertisements or otherwise focused on the promotion of commercial events or businesses, or any request for or solicitation of money, goods, or services for private gain;
      8. Any content that contains software viruses or any other computer code, files or programs designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment; or
      9. Any content directly or indirectly soliciting responses from minors (defined as anyone under 18 years of age).
  7. FAIR USE NOTICE:
    1. If any part of the “Comment” is not your original work, it is your responsibility to add the name of the third party, name the book with page number or a link (url) to the website where you obtained the information.
    2. Your “Comment” may contain Copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. You are however allowed to make such material available in your “Comment” in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this Site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
    3. If you wish to use copyrighted material from a website or any other medium for purposes to add to your “Comment” that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. (Fair Use means you may quote from copyrighted sources, but you may not publish the whole article, book, etc., in your “Comment”.)
  8. You are solely responsible for the “Comment” you upload, post, transmit or otherwise make available to others using this Web Site. Under no circumstances will Discerning the World be liable in any way for any “Comment” posted on or made available through this Site by you or any third party.
  9. You understand that all “Comments” on this Site are pre-screened or moderated. That means that every “Comment” needs to be approved by Discerning the World before it appears in the “Comments” section.  This is not an automatic process.  Discerning the World does this for SPAM reasons.
  10. Discerning the World has the right (but not the obligation) in their sole unfettered discretion to remove any “Comment” that is posted on or available through the Site. Without limiting the foregoing, Discerning the World has the right to remove any “Comment” that violates these Terms or is otherwise deemed objectionable by Discerning the World in its sole discretion.
  11. You understand that Discerning the World in their sole unfettered discretion is not obligated and can not be forced in any manner, be it legal or otherwise to remove any “Comment” that is posted on or made available through the Site by you.
  12. When submitting a “Comment,” you will be asked to provide your name and your email address. While Discerning the World does not object to your use of a pseudonym instead of your actual name, Discerning the World reserves the right, but not the obligation, to reject, change, disallow, or discontinue at any time any submission name that, in Discerning the World’s sole unfettered discretion, is objectionable or inappropriate for any reason. Discerning the World requires the submission of your email address, but Discerning the World warrants that it will not publish your email address to an outside third party without your consent.
  13. Discerning the World does not sell or rent your personal information to third parties for their marketing purposes. From time to time, Discerning the World may contact you personally via email. Notwithstanding the foregoing, you acknowledge and understand that the “Comments” feature of the Site is designed to permit users to post information and commentary for public review and comment and thus you hereby waive any expectation of privacy you may have concerning any likeness or information provided to the Site by you.
  14. You are solely responsible for your interactions with other users of or visitors to the Site.
    1. Discerning the World shall have the right, but not the obligation, to monitor interactions utilizing the “Comments” facility of the Site, between you and other users of or visitors to the Site. You acknowledge and agree that Discerning the World, or any third party shall not be, and you shall not seek to hold them, responsible for any harm or damage whatsoever arising in connection with your interaction with other users of or visitors to the Site.
    2. Discerning the World does not verify any information posted to or communicated via the “Comments” sections of the Site by users and does not guarantee the proper use of such information by any party who may have access to the information. You acknowledge and agree that Discerning the World does not assume, and shall not have, any responsibility for the content of messages or other communications sent or received by users of the Site.
  15. The Site contains content created by or on behalf of Discerning the World as well as content provided by third parties.
    1. Discerning the World does not control, and makes no representations or warranties about, any third party content, including such content that may be accessible directly on the Site or through links from the Site to third party sites.
    2. You acknowledge that, by viewing the Site or communications transmitted through the Site, you may be exposed to third party content that is false, offensive or otherwise objectionable to you or others, and you agree that under no circumstances shall Discerning the World be liable in any way, under any theory, for any third party content.
    3. You acknowledge and agree that the Site, and the contents thereof, is proprietary to Discerning the World and is protected by copyright. You agree that you will not access or use the Site or any of the content thereof for any reason or purpose other than your personal, non-commercial use.
    4. You agree that you will not systematically retrieve data or other content from the Site by any means, and you will not compile a database or directory of information extracted from the Site.
    5. You agree that you will not reproduce, distribute or make derivative works of the Site or any of the contents thereof without the express consent of Discerning the World.
    6. You hereby agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Discerning the World, its affiliates and licensees, and all of their officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives from and against any and all liabilities, losses, claims, damages, and expenses (including attorneys’ fees) in connection with any claim arising out of your use of the Site or violation of any of these Terms.

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY/LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.

  • YOU EXPRESSLY AGREE THAT USE OF THE SITE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK. NEITHER DISCERNING THE WORLD, ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OR LICENSORS WARRANT THAT THE SITE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, TIMELY, SECURE OR ERROR FREE.
  • THE SITE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF TITLE OR IMLPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
  • THIS DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY APPLIES TO ANY DAMAGES OR INJURY CAUSED BY ANY FAILURE OF PERFORMANCE, ERROR, OMISSION, INTERRUPTION, DELETION, DEFECT, DELAY, COMMUNICATION LINE FAILURE, THEFT OR DESTRUCTION OR UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO, ALTERATION OF OR USE, WHETHER FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, TORTIOUS BEHAVIOR, NEGLIGENCE OR UNDER ANY OTHER CAUSE OF ACTION. YOU SPECIFICALLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT DISCERNING THE WORLD SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR THE DEFAMATORY, OFFENSIVE OR ILLEGAL CONDUCT OF USERS OF THE SITE OR THIRD PARTIES, AND THAT THE RISK OF INJURY FROM THE FOREGOING RESTS ENTIRELY WITH THE YOU THE COMMENTER.
  • IN NO EVENT WILL DISCERNING THE WORLD, ITS AFFILIATES OR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES, AGENTS OR LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, ARISING FROM, RELATING TO OR CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SITE OR ANY OTHER MATTER ARISING FROM, RELATING TO OR CONNECTED WITH THE SITE OR THESE TERMS.

16. These Terms constitute the entire agreement between Discerning the World and you with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any previous oral or written agreement between us with respect to such subject matter.

Thank you!