More evangelists appointed to Lords, Christians desperate to force their delusion upon my children

reply to post by NoSoup4U

Do you realize that you are showing your ignorance of the Bible by trying to use this verse to prove that the Bible says it is ok to kill someone?

Point out the author (s) so he may correct me if I have read his book in a manner that it was not meant.

Oops I forgot, the authors of the bibles are unknown, so who exactly ,made you the final authority on reading a bible eh ?

The "Old Testament" actually means "Old Covenant" and :New Testament" means "New Covenant".

Synonyms: attestation, confirmation, corroboration, documentation, evidence, substantiation, proof, testimonial, testimony, validation, voucher, witness


So what ? If you don't like the title phone the vatican ask then to change it

When Jesus Christ died on the cross and rose again, the "New Covenant" was instated.

Which jesus ?

If your talking about the one that appears in the bibles ? FYI clearly you are ignorant in relation to there being no proof that this particular jesus even existed.

Secondly even if the guy was real "he didn't die on the cross" they took him down pretty quick and he was back alive again in a couple of days.

Besides oh ignorant one how is it possible for a the alleged creator of all that is, was or will ever be to die ?

Grow up , the bibles give quite clear instructions on how to kill people, it's not my problem that you don;t like it and wriggle like the serpent to get out of it, learn to read the small print before you join a cult my friend!

reply to post by Equinox99

No you don't appreciate it because you bash on every Christian like I am responsible for 1 billion people.

What the hell does that mean ?

All you do is break down people's words to fit your delusion and try to trap them in your replies.

Nope I debate and use your own reasoning and scriptures, if there's any trapping it's the xtians doing it to themselves by not doing their homework.

However not to tar everyone with the same brush some xtians do provided a good debate and display a fair amount of intellectual ability and knowledge of the subject but they are few.

But it is clear you aren't trying to be civil and are trying to force your beliefs upon everyone else.

I'm a civil as my patience with allows me to be when debating some people who try and mix faith and lack of knowledge with reason in a discussion.

An example of this is your quote above how can I possibly force my beliefs upon someone else I'm an atheist for gods sake I have no beliefs when it comes to invisible men that live in the sky ?


I would like to respond to all of your points but time is not on mys side at the mo but will do so asap.

Re Lestweforget

(as an answer to your touching little story about children being excluded from Disneyland in the sky):

"Daddy, they say in sunday school, that you haven't paid yout tithes, so I can't come there anymore. And then I will go to hell and burn in all eternity".

"Son, this has been a tough month. We haven't got much money left"

"But Daddy, I read in the bible, genesis 12:15-20, that Abraham lent his wife to the egyptian pharao, who gave him a lot of animals and slaves in return. And Mommy is still pretty, and the man with all the oil money is loking at her in a funny way. Why can't you say Mommy is your sister, and lend her to him.

You know, it will only be for short time, because god will be angry with the oil-man and tell him to send Mommy back to us. And anyway she's just a woman, and must do as you say".

(Daddy thinking): "Darn it. Those morons at the sunday school let the kids read the bible again. What way of bringing up proper christians is that? Next they'll have whole seasons of 'South Park' lying around".

reply to post by bogomil

And Mommy is still pretty, and the man with all the oil money is looking at her in a funny way. Why can't you say Mommy is your sister, and lend her to him.

Ah, but that was the old testament nothing to do with us lol

Originally posted by sara123123
reply to post by The Djin

 

I would rather that man had not have murdered the mass murderer. You want me to find an atheist murderer so we can be even? Or do you think there are not any? I can find gay murderers too if it would help you dismount that high hourse, Djin.

I'd be quite dumbstruck if you could find me but once case of someone committing murder "in the name of atheism"

Re NoSoup4U:

You wrote:

"Maybe you can see now that when Jesus died on the cross that a new covenant was made with man kind."

My comment:

On what authority can this new covenant said to be true? The whole new-testament/new-covenant/Paulinism/a new, non-schizoid god hinge on the answer. Without such an answer, practically all western christianity is void.

And you wrote:

"I just wanted to try the best way I know how to tell you the truth of the bible. Hopefully, you understand a little better now."

You have just added to the confusion of 34.000 different interpretations of the bibles. But this doesn't add any sense or meaning to the problem of evangelist christianities trying to circumvent parliamentary procedures.

Re the Dude aka the Djin

You wrote:

"Ah, but that was the old testament nothing to do with us lol"

Well, I'll have to take your word on it, and if the christianities could make a break in their fighting each other, maybe some of them would take the time to agree with even such a godless heathen as you.

That would mean, that I can sleep peacefully at night again, with no original sin to repent. But then, what's the use of the story about the guy nailed up; was that all for nothing?

This kind of elaborate circle-argumentation is EXACTLY what children need to learn in school. Not all the nonsense about logic or efforts of objectivity. And let in indoctrinators from ALL christian denominations (and also the non-denominated, who are kind of ashamed of the official christianities) to eduactional systems. Around grade five or six, there may even be a bit of time left to teach simple multiplication (at least in very liberal schools).

Re NoturTypical

You wrote:

"No, your ignorance of scripture and Christianity is the issue at hand.."

No, it's not. That's YOUR issue, pretending to be the knower of 'real' christianity.


You wrote: " A "heretic" is someone who professes to be a Cristian yet is a false teacher"

And you decide what's what, and 'silence' those disagreeing with you. How christian.


You wrote: "Luther said "You can never be too gentle with the sheep and you can never be to harsh with the wolves."

In the true tradition of the christianities, Luther and Calvin then disagreed.


You wrote: "With fellow man Jesus said to treat everyone as we would like to be treated and to love and bless our enemies."

Where does your selfdesigned god's-army enlistment come into the picture? Do you ward off demons with 'spiritual warfare' in your sparetime (in which case you could have a future as an exorcist, if it functions), or do you generally 'enlighten' people to your own interpretation of the bibles.


You wrote: "You either can't read or you're purposely using a straw man argument."

Can't say about any straw man argument, as you very conveniently haven't said much about where you come from or where you want to go. I have only the few bits of your own declarations as a possessor of 'ultimate truth' to go from, and as far as I can see you're a: "Sieg heil and hallelluja" type, though I'm glad to hear, that it's only at the spiritual level.


You wrote: "I hate religion most passionately" ...and ...."Redemption says there are two kinds of people, unrepentant evil sinners and repentant evil sinners."

Again I take it, that all official interpretations of the bibles into (organized) religion are bad, while your personal version is the correct one. Isn't that a religion? (Albeit with only one member). And quite basically, aren't the bibles religious documents?


You wrote: "I'm a sinner BIG TIME"

So your regular appearances on ATS are either a form of making your own cosmic debt well known to everybody, or are you suggesting, that your existential shortcomings are universal, pushing them at people, who don't share your fantasies.


You wrote: "I'll be the first one to tell you I have no righteousness whatsoever of my own"

For a person with no righteousness of your own, you certainly are persistent in your efforts to act as spokesman for your subjective worldview.


You wrote: "Didn't Christ say when we are struck "to turn the other cheek" and not strike back?"

You could try to apply that selfchosen meekness in your posts on ATS.


You wrote: "No, the Roman Catholic church ruled Europe centuries ago, I most certainly reject Catholicism and the RCC. During the inquisitions the RCC was persecuting and murdering over a million of my 'ilk' thank you very much."

I'm quite sure you would avoid a lot of suspicion, dungtrowing and casting of doubt on your character, if you either presented your private 'ilk-iness' in a few words in the context of your joining a thread or make some lengthier explanation of it elsewhere. As I personally am allergic to cosmetic statistics, pseudo-science and 'one thousand proofs of bible prophecies', I'm sure, I would respond more friendly (or at least less aggressively) to something coherent and as rational as you can make it.


You mind, if we even slightly return to the topic of this thread in coming posts?

To glad attempt at returning the thread to topic, I thought I'd post this article:

www.washingtonpost.com...

I would also recommend reading Jeff Sharlet's new book "C-Street" He comes from an evangelical background, and came to see the darkeness in evangelical teaching. He is one of the US's foremost SME's on the evangelical threat posed to the world today.

Bogomil, your observations of the various evangelical terrorists who are posting here is also obvious in the way that these terrorists operate in Iraq and Afghanistan and Africa. In fields of combat, these evangelicals will often employ religiously offensive psychological tactics (Jesus Killed Muhammed scrawled in Arabic on tank bodies) and then respond with disproportionate force, often crossing the line of war crimes and crimes against humanity, when locals express their offense at the soldiers actions. I've seen entire neighborhoods leveled as a result of xtian rage against Muslim locals in middle eastern war theaters.

I really look forward to the day where there can be honest trials against these monsters. And I argue forcefully for the use of the trial structure for the simple reason that the only thing they would give me would be a rigged tribunal. I won't stoop to their levels.

By the way, Bogomil, I really appreciate your input to this thread. You are really one who is paying attention to what is going on and can explain it clearly. Humanity needs more like you in the intelligence analysis field.

reply to post by The Djin

Point out the author (s) so he may correct me if I have read his book in a manner that it was not meant.

Oops I forgot, the authors of the bibles are unknown, so who exactly ,made you the final authority on reading a bible eh ?

Here are the authors by Testament:
OLD: - Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, Mordecai, Hezekiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel

NEW: - Mathew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James brother of Jesus, Peter, Judas the brother of Jesus

Synonyms: attestation, confirmation, corroboration, documentation, evidence, substantiation, proof, testimonial, testimony, validation, voucher, witness

Main Entry: testament
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: tribute; last wishes

Synonyms: attestation, colloquy, confirmation, covenant, demonstration, earnest, evidence, exemplification, instrument, proof, testimonial, testimony, will, witness

Notes: a testament is a document in which something is testified to (will, covenant, book of the Bible); a testimonial is a written or spoken expression of regard for a person's service or accomplishments

So what ? If you don't like the title phone the vatican ask then to change it

The Catholic Empire has twisted the Word of God for a long time. I would have no reason to call them.

Which jesus ?

If your talking about the one that appears in the bibles ? FYI clearly you are ignorant in relation to there being no proof that this particular jesus even existed.

Secondly even if the guy was real "he didn't die on the cross" they took him down pretty quick and he was back alive again in a couple of days.

Besides oh ignorant one how is it possible for a the alleged creator of all that is, was or will ever be to die ?

Grow up , the bibles give quite clear instructions on how to kill people, it's not my problem that you don;t like it and wriggle like the serpent to get out of it, learn to read the small print before you join a cult my friend!

I am sure you would want to have some proof outside of the Word of God. First, there are many verses that refer to Jesus in the Bible. However, to provide some proof outside of the Bible, you can go to well known historical texts that talk about Jesus Christ of the Bible.

ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ARE NOT IN THE BIBLE

The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious “Christians” (from Christus, which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (Annals 15.44).

Flavius Josephus is the most famous Jewish historian. In his Antiquities he refers to James, “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” There is a controversial verse (18:3) that says, “Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats....He was [the] Christ...he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.” One version reads, “At this time there was a wise man named Jesus. His conduct was good and [he] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who became his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.”

Julius Africanus quotes the historian Thallus in a discussion of the darkness which followed the crucifixion of Christ (Extant Writings, 18).

Pliny the Younger, in Letters 10:96, recorded early Christian worship practices including the fact that Christians worshiped Jesus as God and were very ethical, and he includes a reference to the love feast and Lord’s Supper.

The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a) confirms Jesus' crucifixion on the eve of Passover and the accusations against Christ of practicing sorcery and encouraging Jewish apostasy.

Lucian of Samosata was a second-century Greek writer who admits that Jesus was worshiped by Christians, introduced new teachings, and was crucified for them. He said that Jesus' teachings included the brotherhood of believers, the importance of conversion, and the importance of denying other gods. Christians lived according to Jesus’ laws, believed themselves to be immortal, and were characterized by contempt for death, voluntary self-devotion, and renunciation of material goods.

Mara Bar-Serapion confirms that Jesus was thought to be a wise and virtuous man, was considered by many to be the king of Israel, was put to death by the Jews, and lived on in the teachings of His followers.

Then we have all the Gnostic writings (The Gospel of Truth, The Apocryphon of John, The Gospel of Thomas, The Treatise on Resurrection, etc.) that all mention Jesus.

In fact, we can almost reconstruct the gospel just from early non-Christian sources: Jesus was called the Christ (Josephus), did “magic,” led Israel into new teachings, and was hanged on Passover for them (Babylonian Talmud) in Judea (Tacitus), but claimed to be God and would return (Eliezar), which his followers believed, worshipping Him as God (Pliny the Younger).

There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.

reply to post by NoSoup4U

Here are the authors by Testament:
OLD: - Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, Mordecai, Hezekiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel

Add: Nebuchadnezzar (single letter), David, Solomon, Malachi, Hosea, Joel, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habbakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah

But the author beneath all the books is the Holy Spirit, these men above only provided their hands and writing utensil.

reply to post by bogomil


I'm not going to explain my beliefs a 4th and 5th time.

Either you have average reading comprehension of you're lacking it.

Finally, Control is a grown up, he/she is more than capable of replying to my replies.

reply to post by bogomil

On what authority can this new covenant said to be true? The whole new-testament/new-covenant/Paulinism/a new, non-schizoid god hinge on the answer. Without such an answer, practically all western christianity is void.

On the Authority of the Word of God. In the end, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ of the Bible is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Scoff all you want, but you will confess that Jesus did die for all the sins of the world. Some people think that when they meet Jesus, it will be a time of pure joy. I beg to differ because we all have sinned and He knows everything about us. We will see His awesome power and majesty and that will be fearful. His judgment is sure and perfect. Please, open your eyes and see what Jesus Christ has done for you!

I pray that God will show you the truth in such a way that is undeniable that Jesus Christ is real and that the Holy Bible is the living Word of God. What does it profit you to gain the world if you can not take it with you when you die? Everything on earth passes away, but your spirit is from God. Most of the things we have been talking about are absolutely concrete things we can see, touch, taste or smell. Can you explain the love inside you? How did that get there? That is your spirit in you which God gave you. I promise you that anything that is vain, hateful or in grief is not of God and is evil.

You might even come back with a question like, "What profit will you gain if Jesus is not real". We both know for a fact that we can not take anything of this world with us when we die. However, neither of us can prove that there is an afterlife, but there is more of a possibility of this than taking something of this world with us when we die. Having faith in Jesus is one of the main keys to the promise of salvation through the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for all of human kind.

Bless your heart, sir!

reply to post by NoSoup4U

"Judas the brother of Jesus"

? What the heck Bible are you reading, because I don't remember that being even apocryphal in the church I grew up in?

Main Entry: testament
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: tribute; last wishes

What dictionary are you reading, and don't just cut and past and "relevant" text, put the whole entry in with a link, as thus:

tes·ta·ment
noun \ˈtes-tə-mənt\
Definition of TESTAMENT
1
a archaic : a covenant between God and the human race b capitalized : either of two main divisions of the Bible
2
a : a tangible proof or tribute b : an expression of conviction : creed
3
a : an act by which a person determines the disposition of his or her property after death b : will
— tes·ta·men·ta·ry\ˌtes-tə-ˈmen-tə-rē, -ˈmen-trē\ adjective
See testament defined for English-language learners »
Examples of TESTAMENT

1. The success of the album, which is only available online, is a testament to the power of the Internet.
2. a person's last will and testament

Origin of TESTAMENT
Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin testamentum covenant with God, holy scripture, from Latin, last will, from testari to be a witness, call to witness, make a will, from testis witness; akin to Latin tres three & to Latin stare to stand; from the witness's standing by as a third party in a litigation — more at three, stand
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to TESTAMENT
Synonyms: attestation, confirmation, corroboration, documentation, evidence, substantiation, proof, testimonial, testimony, validation, voucher, witness
Antonyms: disproof

Link: mw1.merriam-webster.com...

The Catholic Empire has twisted the Word of God for a long time. I would have no reason to call them.

Just as you are twisting the Bible to suit your own needs and attempt to bolster an incredibly logically, rationally and intellectually outmatched argument. Badly, I might add, as far as rules of forensics goes but I myself have fallen as well into the more emotional side of things as this debate has progressed.

It is these debate tactics alone which should disqualify you or anyone who is of the same belief derivation (neo-fundamentalist, evangelical, "I know the Bible and everyone and everything else is wrong") from holding any political or governing power in any form to especially include military assets. It is not that this is the best debate tactic you know, it is that it is the only one that you know and these are not the debate practices that I wished practiced in a critical decision making environment. Nukes would be in the air in five minutes. No. Absolutely not.

I will simply link you here for my thoughts on Tacitus and Josephus as far as "accurate" history is concerned: www.jesusneverexisted.com... The passage on about the "flaming Christians" from Tacitus has proven to be a blatant lie, and much of what is attributed to Tactitus has long been suspected of being a forgery of the 12th Century.

From: www.oldandsold.com...

The boldest attempt in modern times to prove an accepted book to be a forgery is undoubtedly that of Ross (1883) and Hochart (189o), who both declared that the sole MS. of the early part of Tacitus's immortal Annals (Books i.-vi.) was written by Poggio Bracciolini, the Italian scholar of the Renaissance. The MS. is generally believed to be of the eleventh century, but it is well known that a revival of the style of that and (more usually) the succeeding century did take place in the fifteenth century ; and it is maintained that Poggio had not only practice in the imitation of old writings, but also opportunities in connexion with this particular codex.

It is undoubtedly remarkable that there is only one clear reference to any part of the Annals before the fifteenth century, namely, that Ruodolphus, a monk of Fulda in the ninth century, mentions him as writing of the river Visurgis (Annals, Books i. and ii.). But it may be remembered that Catullus also was entirely lost sight of for centuries together, and except that one of his poems occurs in a tenth century Anthology, depends altogether on MSS. not written before the second half of the fourteenth century.

As Furneaux, the most recent editor of the Annals, and the only one who has had to defend their genuineness, says, we ought to be satisfied with a few clear instances of facts unknown in the Middle Ages, mentioned only by Tacitus and confirmed by more recent epigraphical discoveries. Of these he gives a list, the nature of which can be gathered from the following samples. They may seem insignificant, but it is their insignificance which makes them for this special purpose of real importance. Nero, the eldest son of Germanicus, is stated by Tacitus to have been espoused to a daughter of Creticus Silanus. An inscription, discovered since the time of Poggio, confirms this, and supplies the name Junia. Tacitus again especially notes that Julia Augusta, in dedicating a statue to Augustus, gave offence to Tiberius by placing her name before his.

The Praenestine Calendar confirms the fact by giving the names in the same order. There remains one extraordinary proof of a kind hardly to be parallelled elsewhere. Tacitus writes in one place, referring to a Frisian insurrection, ad sua tutanda digressis rebellibus (the insurgents having moved off to protect their own quarters) ; but Ptolemy, who wrote in Greek only one generation after Tacitus, must have had the Annals before him, for in a list of towns in North Germany he gives the name of one as (Siatoutanda), which cannot be anything else than a mistaken idea that sua tutanda was the name of a place. Ptolemy gives the latitude and longitude of Siatoutanda !

Chew on that for a little while and do a little "spiritual warfare" and lemme know how that turns out for ya.

Originally posted by NoSoup4U
reply to post by bogomil

 

On what authority can this new covenant said to be true? The whole new-testament/new-covenant/Paulinism/a new, non-schizoid god hinge on the answer. Without such an answer, practically all western christianity is void.

On the Authority of the Word of God. In the end, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ of the Bible is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Scoff all you want, but you will confess that Jesus did die for all the sins of the world. Some people think that when they meet Jesus, it will be a time of pure joy. I beg to differ because we all have sinned and He knows everything about us. We will see His awesome power and majesty and that will be fearful. His judgment is sure and perfect. Please, open your eyes and see what Jesus Christ has done for you!

I pray that God will show you the truth in such a way that is undeniable that Jesus Christ is real and that the Holy Bible is the living Word of God. What does it profit you to gain the world if you can not take it with you when you die? Everything on earth passes away, but your spirit is from God. Most of the things we have been talking about are absolutely concrete things we can see, touch, taste or smell. Can you explain the love inside you? How did that get there? That is your spirit in you which God gave you. I promise you that anything that is vain, hateful or in grief is not of God and is evil.

You might even come back with a question like, "What profit will you gain if Jesus is not real". We both know for a fact that we can not take anything of this world with us when we die. However, neither of us can prove that there is an afterlife, but there is more of a possibility of this than taking something of this world with us when we die. Having faith in Jesus is one of the main keys to the promise of salvation through the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for all of human kind.

Bless your heart, sir!

This whole post you're basically "cussing" him out there, it's pretty obvious. There isn't even any real implied "love" in your tone at all. You're completely judgmental. Just like that bloody woman who does the Jesus Camp in South Dakota! Just like C-Streeters and Team B'ers. When you say "Bless your heart, sir" you might as well be telling him to go to hell and anyone with two brain cells left to rub together can see that plainly.

reply to post by Control

? What the heck Bible are you reading, because I don't remember that being even apocryphal in the church I grew up in?

He's talking about JUDE, a shortened form of Judas. Jude is the blood brother of James. Jude and James are Jesus's half-brothers.

The Jude/Judas he is speaking about is the same Jude that has a book of the NT named after him, the book preceding Revelation.

Re NoturTypical

Naturally people use their own ideology as a basis for posts on a thread, and perspectives from such ideologies will be interwoven with the thread's topic.

Your last post was completely irrelevant and off-topic; only a distracting maneuver. Please try to find your way back to topic (at least to some extent), if you want answers from me.

I don't find the odd explanatory or humoristic digression offensive. It's when the whole topic is redirected to something new, the suspicion arises of manipulative rhetorics for disarming threatening issues; or more likely in your case pushing your one-man-army crusade against un-named 'heretics'.

On my part, that was your last chance to explain yourself, off-topic; switch to a common communication platform instead of one-way street-corner oration.

Re NoSoup4U

Living in a liberal country and having a sound educational background based on rational principles, I have a big problem about understanding how mindsets like yours can exist. Even extremist christians must relate in some way to the 'relative reality' we all share. Do you close your eyes, ignoring traffic-lights, when you cross a heavily trafficked street, and pray to D-g, that he'll see you safely over?

Can you in the same vein, RELATE to the world outside your holy bubble, so as to give some meaning to those of us, who don't live in your subjective fairytales.

I asked you a simple question: On whose authority are all these covenants effectuated? In the broader context of this thread's topic, there is the basic similar question: On whose authority do the extremist christianities try to interfere with the running of society?

In my time on ATS, these questions have been put hundreds of times, sofar with the only answer which you also presented:

"On the Authority of the Word of God."

Packaged in a neat sermon, which probably would have passed unquestioned in your church or congregation, but (and you should be aware of this) for me only are the ramblings of a delusioned mind. Like I said in the post above, train your social communication skills and use at least some basic rational methodology.

While you sanctimoniously pray to your alleged 'god' to appear to you or me, so he can verify (and hopefully explain) his book of genocide, rape and commands of grovelling, my original question to you implied, that I in the absence of this schizoid entity, would be satisfied to know the name of the middleman, who has the (alleged) direct authority to perform the negotiations with the various fascist groups, who want to run mankind.

As you seem to be unable to answer, I'll give you a hint as to his identity. He (rather they) is a member of an 2-3.000 year old organization called the 'sons of light', which for the Abramic religions is, what KGB, CIA and SS have been for contemporary society. A document called 'the war scroll' is their ideological homeplace, and it contains commandments of all the atrocities later fascist movements have manifested in their aim of domination of mankind.

Brainwashed zombis are sent out in the world to nestle their way into key-positions, and the herd is bombarded with endless clichées and orchstrated 'problems', so it won't stampede. And you, faith-above-soupkitchens, has swallowed all that propaganda raw, with not a single question in your life about its worth.

By Jiminy, that really felt good. It's not often my inner conspiracy theorist gets aired. But after all, this sub-forum IS about religious conspiracies.

PS Please notice, that while the conspiracies seem to be a reality, their ideologies and 'ultimate truths' can still be hogwash.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Control

 

? What the heck Bible are you reading, because I don't remember that being even apocryphal in the church I grew up in?

He's talking about JUDE, a shortened form of Judas. Jude is the blood brother of James. Jude and James are Jesus's half-brothers.

The Jude/Judas he is speaking about is the same Jude that has a book of the NT named after him, the book preceding Revelation.

Hey guy, again, I don't lknow what Bible you're reading again, but I've come across even more Christians and non-Christians alike who would balk at that declaration as readily as I am.

And on the so-called Gnostic Gospels, I got kinda hooked into that too about 7 years ago and satisfied my own burden of proof that they are spurious in nature and were released into mainstream publishing primarily to make Dan Brown and Elaine Pagels money. Kinda like the whole "channeled seer" books like "Bringers of the Dawn."

It's people making stuff up so that gullible folks like you will buy into it. This is what makes this aq dangersous mindset in critical decision making environments....evangelicals and neo-fundamnetalists have already and are proving on a daily basis that can be swayed by any idea that sounds good enough to them, and they will defend that dodgy idea as though it were proven fact. This is not something we can afford when we are trying to make decisions on another nations nuclear program, or debating the merits of a new law.

In those circumstances, facts are what need to be dealt with, and that is something that you and everyone else like you have proven time again that you are unwilling to work with. This is why there MUST be a separation of Church and State. It must be a wide chasm between the two vestiges, never the two allowed to intersect.

Originally posted by bogomil
Re NoturTypical

Naturally people use their own ideology as a basis for posts on a thread, and perspectives from such ideologies will be interwoven with the thread's topic.

Your last post was completely irrelevant and off-topic; only a distracting maneuver. Please try to find your way back to topic (at least to some extent), if you want answers from me.

I don't find the odd explanatory or humoristic digression offensive. It's when the whole topic is redirected to something new, the suspicion arises of manipulative rhetorics for disarming threatening issues; or more likely in your case pushing your one-man-army crusade against un-named 'heretics'.

On my part, that was your last chance to explain yourself, off-topic; switch to a common communication platform instead of one-way street-corner oration.

This is also one of the most common evangelical debate tactics, and one of the most dangerous when it comes to how we deal with evangelicals and neo-fundamentalists. They will use this deflectionary tactic the minute they feel threatened, and the reason they have gone so far with it it our Western sense of politeness generally allows them to go right on ahead and change the subject because most people are fairly sensitive when someone feels threatened by a conversation topic.

If the topic slide (That's what that tactic is called) fails initially, then a bit of pressure is added to indicate that the conversation could turn emotionally violent if continued. Considering that most Westerners (particularly American and British civilians) will go to great lengths to avoid a conflict, the xtians usually get their way and don't have to talk about things that make them uncomfortable.

These debate tactics (topic sliding, and topic dilution, et al) are particularly dangerous when married to a CDM Environment (Critical Decision Making). The fact is that most evangelical and neo-fundamentalists are of an incredibly low cognitive level, and having one in charge of the Air Force and AF Academy are just dangerous.

Here's a scary little list of people that are just like the evangelical neo-fundamentalists on this forum....

US Air Force Academy
Brig Gen. Richard M. Clark - Commandant of Cadets, US Air Force Academy
Col Stella (Reni) Renner - Vice Commandant, Culture and Climate
Lt Col Andrew Simmons, Dir of Staff
Col Richard L Fullerton, Vice Dean of Faculty
Dr. Aaron R. Byerly, Associate Dean for Curriculum and Strategy
Lt. Gen Michael C. Gould - Superintendent, US Air Force Academy
Col Tamra Rank, Vice Superintendent
CMSgt Tom Salzman, Command Chief

US Strategic Command (Where the "button" is)
Gen Kevin P Chilton, Cdr US Stratcom
Col Gay M McGillis, Deputy Chief of Staff
CMSgt Thomas S Narofsky, Command Chief Master Seargent
Lt Gen Kevin T Campbell - JFCC Integrated Missile Defense
Mr. Kenneth B Myers III, Director, Defense Threat Reduction Agency
Maj Gen Blair E Hansen, Deputy Dir JFCC Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Maj Gen John M Howlett - Dep Dir USSTRATCOM Center for combating Weapons of Mass Destruction

Doesn't this just make you sleep soundly at night? Not me.

If you consider yourself Christian, but not evangelical neo-fundamentalist and not Catholic, then you are SOL at the USAF Academy. There are only 4 services at the Chapel. Combined Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Buddhist. Guess who is the pastor of the Combined Protestant services? Yup. A bloody xtian. So even if you are happy being a Methodist or a Baptist, then too bad because you will be force fed xtian beliefs because the only non-Catholic Chaplain you get is one of these evangelical neo-fundamentalists. A lot of folks convert from Christianity to xtianity in this way.

If you try and call it out, this is what they do to you:
www.washingtonpost.com...

Tasty tidbit from the article: "One staff chaplain reportedly told newly arrived freshmen last summer that anyone not born again "will burn in the fires of hell." " Now that is exactly what I want to hear when I am attending an educational institution for the purposes of garnering a military education. I can tell you that it really motivates me to memorize the 11 general orders of the watch stander lemme tell you....Let's see which is more important in a military setting? The 10 Commandments, or the 11 general orders of the watch stander? Hmm...

Here's an abridged list of famous converts to evangelical neo-fundamentalism:
A.J. Styles
Adam Clayton
Amy Grant
Andrea Yates
Anita Bryant
Barry McGuire
Ben Lummis
Benny Hinn
Bernard Ebbers
Bernhard Langer
Bettie Page
Betty Cuthbert
Bill "Bubba" Bussey
Billy Graham
Bono
Brian "Head" Welch
Brian Welch
Bryan MacLean
Candace Cameron
Carl Lewis
Charles Colson (Chuck Colson)
Chelsea Noble
Chris Tucker
Cliff Richard
Connie Sellecca
Cyndi Lauper
Dan O'Brien
Dan Peek
Dan Quayle
Daniel arap Moi
Darrell Porter
Darren Beadman
Darryl Strawberry
Dave Dobbyn
Dave Dravecky
Dave Mustaine
Dave Thomas
David Berkowitz
David Robinson
Dog Chapman
Dolly Parton
Donna Rice
Duane "Dog" Chapman - Now there's a prize to take home to your parents....
Edge
Efrain Rios Montt
Efrem Zimbalist, Jr.
Eldridge Cleaver
Eric Liddell
Eugene Terre'Blanche - Yeah? The neo-nazi south African? Really?
Evander Holyfield
Fred Barnes
Frederick Chiluba
Garnet Mimms
Gary Ablett
Gary Burghoff
Gary Busey
Gary North
Gavin MacLeod
George Foreman
George W. Bush - War criminal
George Wallace - Racist gubernatorial candidate who supported segregation...He frequently used his religion as a justification for his disgusting beliefs.
Glen Campbell
Guy Sebastian
Hansie Cronje
Heather Whitestone
Helen Shapiro
Herschel Walker
Hunter Tylo
Ivan Koloff
Jack Chick
Jake "The Snake" Roberts
James Ah Koy
James Irwin
James Watt
Jane Fonda - Who sold out the SSN's of our POW's to the Vietcong.
Jane Russell
Jason Robinson
Jay van Andel
Jayne Kennedy
Jeane Kirkpatrick
Jeff Gannon
Jeff Gordon
Jeffrey Dahmer
Jennifer O'Neill
Jeremy Enigk
Jeremy Vine
Jerry Boykin
Jessica Alba
Jim Bakker - Of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker fame.
Jim Reiher
Jimmy Carter
Jimmy Swaggart
Jodi Benson
Jody Miller
Joe Gibbs
Joh Bjelke-Petersen
John Ashcroft - War Criminal
John Corbett
John Davis
John DeLorean - coke addicted con man inventor of the DeLorean motorcar
John Tesh
Johnny Cash
Johnny Hart
Johnny Tapia
Jonty Rhodes
Josh McDowell
Jose Padilla - The guy who tried to Dirty Bomb Chicago for Al Qaeda
Judith Reisman
Julius Erving
Justine Bateman
Karla Faye Tucker
Kathie Lee Gifford
Keir Hardie
Kepler Wessels
Kim Alexis
Kim Fields
Kirk Cameron - Of "Growing Pains", and later "Left Behind 1, 2 and 3" fame
Kurt Warner
Larry Flynt - Porn king
Larry Lea
Larry Mullen Jr.
Laurence Tureaud
Lee Atwater
Leigh Hatcher
Linda Lovelace
Lisa Whelchel
Lynda Carter
MC Hammer - Don't wanna touch it, don't worry.
Mangosuthu Buthelezi
Margaret Court
Mark "Gator" Rogowski
Mark Farner
Marty Jannetty
Marvin Olasky
Mase
Mathieu Kerekou
Meadowlark Lemon
Michael Chang
Michael Hegstrand
Michael Irvin
Michael Jones
Mickey Rooney
Mordechai Vanunu
Mr. T
Niki Taylor
Nikita Koloff
Norma McCorvey
Oliver North - of Iran Contra/"secret" Continuity of Government plans
Olusegun Obasanjo
Oral Roberts
Orel Hershiser
Pat Boone - Who thinks it is a good idea to make concentration camps for Americas homeless
Paul Jones
Peter Popoff
Phillip Johnson
Pierre Nkurunziza
Rachel Scott
Randall Terry
Ratu Josefa Iloilo
Reggie White
Rich DeVos
Richard Kiel
Richie Furay
Rick Burgess
Robert Laidlaw
Roger McGuinn
Rollen Stewart
Ron Reyes
Roy Peacock
S. Truett Cathy
Samantha Fox
Shawn Michaels
Simon Mayo
Stephen Baldwin
Steve Burd
Steve Largent
Steve McQueen
Steve Mortimer
Sting
Susan Atkins
Syngman Rhee
T-Bone Burnett
Tammy Faye Bakker - Yup, Jim and Tammy Faye
Ted DiBiase
Terry Nichols - OKC Bomber? Gee, what Church did he go to?
Tex Watson
The Edge
Thomas Kinkade - You know? The painter guy with the 1-800 ads?
Tiffany
Tim Mander
Tom Hanks - I'll never think of Forrest Gum the same way again.
Tom Landry
Tommy Emmanuel
Tommy Maddox
Tony Hall
Tonya Flynt-Vega
Tully Blanchard
Vai'inga Tuigamala
Vanity
Victoria Jackson
William J. Murray
Willie Aames
Yoweri Museveni