|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 33 guests online !
|
|
|
|
|
Theories: Conspiracy and Prophecy |
Posted by
Devin on Wednesday, September 12, 2001 - 11:41 PM PST
This isn't going to be a big coherrant article, I've got a lot of little pieces that I've been posting at the top of the main page that I wanted to put in a post so everyone could comment.
1) False Prophecy
In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
Two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
While the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb,
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning
- Nostradamus, 1654
I wonder why people are so compelled to accept claims of prophecy in situations like this. I recieved the Nostradamus's "City of God" quatrain from a few sources so I posted it on the site, so I'm as guilty as anyone of this. I became suspicious when I saw the date was 1654. This is quite a while after Nostradamus died, but since he had stuff published in 1554, I figured it was a typo. That is until I started getting sent different versions - each version more specific than the last.
When I got one that said "Two Tall Brothers", I had to find out for myself. There's a few sites that let you search all of the quatrains, and I couldn't find anything even remotely resembling this one. Here's another version:
In the city of York there will be a great collapse
Two twin brothers torn apart by chaos
While the fortress falls the great leader will succumb
Third big war will begin when the big city is burning
Then I found this page which explains where this quatrain came from (the irony of the source amuses me):http://www.nostradamus-repository.org/cityofgod.html
2) Revelations:
When the kings of the earth who commited adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry: "Woe! Woe, O great city, O Babalon, city of power! In one hour your doom has come!"
- Revelations: 9/11
I don't know what to make of this one but it's been circulating around as Revelation 9-11 (the date this all happened). I can see why someone would get away with forging a Nostradamus Quatrain, since they're so hard to look up, but quoting something out of the bible and telling people exactly where to look, it seems kinda silly if it ends up not being there. This may still be somewhere else in Revelations, and if anyone knows anything about this one I'd like to know more about it.
3) Numerology
Flight numbers: 11, 93, 175, and 77
11 = today's date
9 + 3 = 12 = Tomorrow
1 + 7 + 5 = 13 = Thursday
7 + 7 = 14 = Friday
I have no clue what this is supposed to mean, but since we're on the subject I thought I'd throw it in. Any ideas?
4) Conspiracy
I've had a nagging thought in my head which I'm sure nobody's really ready to hear. Please don't argue about the validity of this theory. I know people will anyway, but that's not the question, so don't even tell me "There's no way". My question is "What's gonna happen IF". Since nobody in the mainstream media will even mention it, I have to put it here if I want to hear discussion of it.
All of this talk about ruling out no options in finding out who we should go after is ignoring one important option. Obviously this was a very secretive group that planned it. The best way to keep those kind of secrets is to keep the group small and not tell anyone. I'd say a small group would be 12 to 16 people. There were 3 to 4 people on each of the 4 planes. What if that's all there were? What if everyone who knew anything about this was on those planes? It's not any more far fetched than any of the other theories. And given enuf money (it really wouldn't take nearly as much as people are saying it would - the terrorist pilots were trained by US! at standard flight schools), 16 people could pull something like this off. Regardless of whether or not this is what happened or is possible, the question I have is - if this is the case, what do we do? Who do we kill? Where is the war? Where does a whole country full of anger direct this shmeng?
|
|
| |
|
|
This article has not been rated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conspiracy and Prophecy | Login/Create an account | 43 Comments |
| Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy
by Schizo on Sep 13, 2001 - 05:13 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
The correct location of the Revelation quote is Rev. 18:10.
Some more verses in the same passage:
18:11 - And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more
18:17-19 - For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off, and cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city! And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.
Didn't all the ferries rush to the other side of the river when the buildings collapsed? That caught my attention when I read the context of the verse. Also the mention of dust. Who can forget the sight of all that dust, on the ground, on cars, on people. I've heard that the dust was 3 inches thick.
And I like your theory, Devin. Or, anyway, I think it sounds possible. Can't say I actually LIKE it. If that's true, talk about the perfect crime!
Last night my boyfriend and I went out in the woods. We were far enough in to not hear any cars. Of course, we also didn't hear any planes. Nothing manmade at all. It was so peaceful. And so hard to believe that the peace we were experiencing was caused by destruction, pain, and death.
|
Prophesies by Maranda (saboneta@aol.com) on Sep 13, 2001 - 07:35 AM (User info | Send a Message) | One might also consider the idea of the self-fulfilling prophesy. IF the terrorists were Muslim-- and in my book, that's still an IF-- their holy scriptures include the Christian prophesies. Perhaps they saw New York as Babylon and decided to bring the predictions to fruition themselves.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Apocalyptic muslims? I don't think so by Arthegarn on Sep 13, 2001 - 09:43 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Mmmm... I am not sure about that. I recognise I am no expert at all in Islam, but I do know that there are two main streams inside it: those who accept the Sunna and those who not and limit themselves to the Coran. Sunnites might drink from christian sources, but I am sure Chiites don't. Also, even if Sunnites used some Christian stuff, I sincerely doubt it would be anything from the New Testament as we know it: The New Testament clearly states that Jesus was God or, at the very least, Christ, and to muslims he was neither. Revelation is an extremely deep book, of incredibly beautiful imagery (and which does NOT describe the end of the world, by the way) which can help any man of any religion in the quest for God, but it is so extremelt christian (look at the beginning and the end, just for instance) that I sincerely doubt that any muslim would use it so.
Arthegarn |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Apocalyptic muslims? I don't think so by Schizo on Sep 13, 2001 - 12:10 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Muslims believe Jesus was a great prophet. I'm not entirely sure, but I think they also revere His followers and their writings. As for Revelation not being prophecy, I answered that further up. Of course, that's not saying that it isn't also the story of the inner man. Prophecy often has both a physical and spiritual interpretation. That's why so many of the prophecies concerning Israel can also be applied personally to any follower of God. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Apocalyptic muslims? I don't think so by Arthegarn on Sep 13, 2001 - 12:20 PM (User info | Send a Message) | They don't revere his followers, that's for certain :-(. Christians and Jews are "People of the Book", and thus to be better treated than straightforward heathens. That's all. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Prophesies by Schizo on Sep 13, 2001 - 12:06 PM (User info | Send a Message) | I suppose it's possible. New York City has always been given a Babylon-ish character in my old church, and it wouldn't be surprizing if some Muslims saw it the same way. Even though the site of Babylon is located in modern-day Iraq. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Prophesies by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 13, 2001 - 12:15 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | hmmm i wonder...
didnt we blow up Iraq not too long ago?
and didnt they start rebuilding the temple not that long ago?
and didnt a bunch of impassioned young men have a battle on the step of the temple and one young man(a bull), a leaders son (with no "mixed blood" blood) die on the steps willingly (unyoked)
anyhoooo
my faith says that we have about another generation before the next age starts, and that the last age ended about 80-100 years ago. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Conspiracy
by feralucce on Sep 13, 2001 - 08:15 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://feralucce.vibechild.com
|
Well... 18 million in defense spending was CUT on the 10th... htis happens on the 11th... WE NEED TO DEFEND OURSELVES... sounds like a fund raiser to me...
Feral
|
religious quotes..
by VampCourt (Morbidchic@hotmail.com)
on Sep 13, 2001 - 09:43 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
i personally like this one..after tuesday? i really like this quote..
Revelation 21:4 And he will wipe out every tear from thier eyes and death will be no more..neither will mourning nore out cry, nor pain be anymore. The Former things have passed away.
I found this in a bible my mother had and i was reading through the revelations. I actually enjoy reading religiouse literature of all kinds. and you have to sit back and wonder.. how is it that these men from so far long ago.. know... see.. feel the anger that was to happen thousands of years ahead. I personally think these things will come true. how? we dont know. When? we dont know. but the thought of all the cruel people that hurt and kill randomly like this will be destroyed... sounds pretty damn GOOD to me...
|
Now, please, wait a second
by Arthegarn on Sep 13, 2001 - 10:29 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
Please, before we go on with this let's stop for a minute and look at Revelation from a distance and a Christian perspective.
Revelation is NOT a prophetic book. To begin with, the idea that there is such as prediction of the future is aberrant to serious jew-christians for a simple reason: God makes man free in Genesis, and if future could be predicted, it would mean that it is already written, and if it were written Man would not be free at all. I know this seems to be in contradiction with the Prophets of the Old testament, but actually it's not (loooooong story). It is written this way as a figure of speech and to resemble those prophets. Also, the general western interpretation comes from bad translations. The original texts talk in 1,3 that "the time for fulfillment is close", but it does not mean that these things will happen soon, but that if they don't happen soon, they will never happen.
Why? Because Revelations is NOT a book that talks about the end of the world. It is a book that talks about the inner journey of the religious man that leads to salvation. And it is wonderful (full of wonders). Think of the Seven Seals: They are the seven questions of the religious man: "If there is God why does It allow men to rule other men? Why is there violence? Why is there extortion? Why is there murder?" These four come together and all have the same answer, but then it comes "But if there is God, why do his followers suffer and die by the hand of men?" And after that has been answered, there is another "Why do we suffer by YOUR hand? Why are there natural disasters?". And after that, there is the seventh and last question, the most important: If you exist, why are you silent?"
Revelation is, probably, the most interesting book of the bible besides the Torah. But it did not predict this disaster. At least, not to me.
Arthegarn
P.S. But, hey, nice coincidence about numbers
P.P.S. Please accept my apologies everyone. This was supposed to have been posted here in the first place, but I pressed the wrong buttons... please somebody remove the other one, thanks.
|
Revelations is a prophetical book..by RAE (can't sign in) by Anonymous-Coward on Sep 13, 2001 - 11:05 AM | Unfortunately, I can not agree. Revelations is indeed a prophetical book. Even the highest scholars deem this book as such. I have even included scripture and verse that states this.
Revelations 1:3 "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therin: for the time is at hand." --King James Version
The thing here to keep in mind is that according to the bible, Revelations can not apply to what is going on at the moment. From what I have been taught, there is much that needs to happen before Revelations can even come into play.
Israel must have the temple fully restored, and something in relation to the red heiffer, which must be sacrificed in the temple. This heiffer must be flawless, it can not possess 1 white or black hair, it can not be "yoked" (in other words, led, yanked or pulled) I wish I knew someone who was well aware of the Hebrew faith to explain this further, but I do not. Maybe someone of this faith will come across this and be able to explain it better. But none the less, according to the christian faith, this has to take place, and not much longer after this incident, The second coming of christ (rapture) will take place..and THEN we begin going into Revelations.
It is in my most humble opinion that everyone should reference Matthew Chapter 24, not Revelations. Everyone is getting way ahead of themselves. But, to each their own. I just thought I would throw this out there in hopes that it would calm some of the panic stricken hearts. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Revelations is a prophetical book..by RAE (can't sign in) by Schizo on Sep 13, 2001 - 12:00 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Eschatology (the study of the ending of the world) is a complex thing. It seems that no two scholars agree on the time-line. I personally don't think the evidence is clear enough to set a definite order of when things happen.
The red heifer is needed to purify the Temple. The rebuilding of the Temple is one of the events that will take place before the end of the world. Different people place that event at different times. It's been a while since I really studied this out (I attended 3 years of Bible School, so I had to study it in - you guessed it - Eschatology class). The whole range of theories is mind-boggling. Pre-trib rapture, post-trib rapture, multiple returns of Christ, multiple fulfillments of prophecy, Millennium here, there, and everywhere - I'm not even going to begin to theorize. That passage in Matthew is a good one to keep an eye on, along with a lot of the Old Testament prophets, if that's what you're interested in. But I wouldn't necessarily rule out Revelation. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Now, please, wait a second by Schizo on Sep 13, 2001 - 11:52 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Interesting point, Arthegarn, but I disagree with it.
Prophecy is not control. You forget that God inhabits eternity. Eternity is to time as we know it, as the vastness of space is to a single line. We are travelling along a time line imbedded in eternity. God, who inhabits all of eternity, sees every point on that line simultaneously. But what He is watching is controlled by the people walking that line.
Or think of it this way - God is reading a book that we write. He has the whole book (remember, God is not limited by time.) Thus, He can skip to the end and read what happens there, and then skip to the beginning and read that, or wherever.
Or it could be like this - I know my boyfriend. I know him well enough to know what he is likely to do in a given circumstance. But that does not mean I am controlling what he does. He is free to do what he wants. God knows every one of us perfectly, far better than I know my boyfriend. He knows us so well of course He knows what we are going to do. He knows everyone, and all natural things that might affect us, and puts the pattern together (it doesn't confuse Him) and thus knows what is going to happen.
I realize none of these analogies are perfect. No analogy is perfect. Besides, I have never experienced the infinite. I don't know what it's like. My main point is, knowledge does not equate control. Thus, God can know the future, and it has nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of free will. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy
by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com)
on Sep 13, 2001 - 11:08 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://www.plynlymon.com
|
this is a littel off topic of this post, but fits with what we are all talking about.
We have been at war with many of the factions who's members live int he middle east for years. They declared war on us years and years ago for all the "evils" that America personifies and symbolized. Now we are going to bomb them because that country or the other country symbolizes "terrorism" to us.
I think the best "revenge" that we as a nation and as a symbol of capitalism can possibly have is to rebuild the towers, but make them even bigger and more ostentatious and have a HUGE wake in times square.
let the rum flow and the cigarettes burn (the foundations of the counties economy)
Let the barely dressed people dance in the streets( We are the number one producers of porn in the world)
Let there be a wave of abortions (a thing that is not allowed in the countries that hate what we symbolize)
let there be homosexuals dancing with senators! let there be cops barfing in the gutter from drink! let there be sex and noise and booze and people wearing tacky t-shhirts with glib innanities scribbled across them!
Let us live up to all that we symbolize and let us enjoy the hell out of it.
Terror crimnes are a cry for attention and a need to make some kind of impact that "devistates" what it attacks. We can make this attack fail, but no giving a shit about them, what they wanted, and who they are.
People will still be dead, wounded, and bereived. That wont go away. But let us treat this as a natural disaster, a hurricane or flood or earthquake.
Im not saying that ignoring the wars that we are in will make them go away. That is part of what brought this about ignoring the anger and militantism of the people with whom we are at war.
But we can make the terrorists fail by not letting thier act change how we act, by dancing instead of shaking fists int he air.
And for the record, yes i did have family and friends and friends' family int he towers when the went down. Most made it out safe, 2 are still missing. I sttod in the plaza at the towers 2 summers ago and marveled at thier high and size and the feel of being that small next to something that man made.
But i wont give in and let the hate make me hate.
|
What USA does symbolize. by Arthegarn on Sep 14, 2001 - 10:20 AM (User info | Send a Message) | OK. Let ti be said for starters that I don't think the USA symbolize anything at all, beyond capitalism, to anyone outside its borders. I believe the USA is as much an IDEA as a real country, and that the idea upholds and defends a number of principles, such as liberty, freedom, democracy, etc, but from upholding to being a symbol there is a loooong way (Hey, I uphold all these, and I am no symbol). And I mean the idea of the country, the dream of its foundators. Because, as we all know, the real country is as far from the ideal one, as thre ideal one is from being a symbol.
BUT, going along with callei's argumentation, I don't think that's what "America" symbolizes. "America" (God, I hate that) symbolizes freedom. Freedom to decide what to do and what to think as long as you respect your neighbour's rights (and don't colide with National Security...). According to that, the USA symbolize the freedom to sin. The same freedom to sin that God gave man in Genesis by putting that tree there. But to some people who are too afraid and have not read nor understood Mt 25, 14-30 (Lk 19, 11-18, the tale of the millions) (Which, by the way, is within Jesus's scatologycal discourse), allowing people to sin is sinning.
Many people are afraid of freedom, because if they were free they would be able to sin. They prefer to be told what to do and what to think so they are not responsable for their actions. It is a way of thinking and acting that makes these people the way they are, the first step to fanaticism: not thinking by yourself. They can not understand freedom, they would not know what to do with it. They would be so afraid as to get God's most magnificient gift and hide it, fearful of misusing it. And ithey would fear those who use it. And you know. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.
USA symbolizes freedom, not sin. What I have read here is exactly what they believe: that the USA symbolize ostentation, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and a huge orgy :-)... I am not a national of the USA, but I think the USA symbolize not sin, but freedom to sin. They are not Satan, they are the Fruit of Good and Evil. The American Way of Life brings these things in some degree, just as eating the apple brings evil in some degree, but it is the individual's actions what matters.
Tha American Way of Life is a highway to hell, true. But it's also a road to a brighter, clearer and more earned heaven. He is not brave who feels no fear, but who fearing, strives and controls. By the same token, he who can't sin isn't any closer to God. He who can and does not, is.
Well, I could go on for hours, but I think I made my point.
Arthegarn |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Christians christians everywhere, and not a brain to think! by Comedian (comedian@callatg.com) on Sep 14, 2001 - 03:38 PM (User info | Send a Message) | when did ostentation, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and a huge orgies become sinful? |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: What USA does symbolize. by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 14, 2001 - 09:28 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | I have a few questions for you? Have you traveled outside your country? I dont mean to one right next to you where they are used to people from your country and treat you the way that you expect to be treated by them. i mean gone somewhere far away from your home, stayed long enough to get a sense of life in that other country and lost yourself in that other culture?
Have you actually read the teachings of Buddha? IGNORANCE leads to suffering.
Your arguement that people fear freedom is specious at best. people fear the unknown, and for many freedom is unknown. It is not the freedom that they fear, but their own ignorance.
Also attempts to quote the bible to explain the actions of militant children of islam is strange. its like quoting Mickey mouse to explain Stonehenge.
And who are you to tell me,who has travelled, who is not Christian, who has lived in other cultures and passed as a native, who teaches French to Algerians, Moroccans, and Suddanese children, who are you to tell me what my country is symbolizes?
Have you studied international symbols and cultures? do you know how deep to bow and when to bow? Do you know how to sallom? do you know when to cover your hair? do you know why my hair is short?
Please understand that i am bashing you, that your snide and unthinking response was unwanted.
Before you go telling me what makes other people WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW tick, think for a moment. What can you teach me, what is lacking in my knowledge that you can supply?
In this case nothing and the subversion of my views to agrandize your own is both mean and rude.
I love blowing things out of proportion. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: What USA does symbolize. by Arthegarn on Sep 15, 2001 - 09:29 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Well, yes you do love blowing things out of proportion...
But, sticking to the discussion at hand, I do agree with you that one only fears the unknown. By definition, fear is to the unknown or, at best, to the unknown consecuences of the known. If a bear attacks me I might say I fear the bear, but as a matter of fact what I fear is the fact that I don’t know what will it do next, if I will be attacked, injuried and how seriously. I agree, so I accept the correction: They don’t fear freedom, they fear the unknown consecuences of freedom. The rest of my argument stands. And remember I am talking about what the USA symbolizes to me, and the people that I know of.
As for who am I to tell you... well, I am me, Arthegarn, who might not have traveled so far and for so long as you, but who has an idea and speaks it honestly. I never tried to impose my views, I just thought I saw facts from a different prespective and tried to share them. Share, not teach. I am no teacher, specially to those who don’t ask to be taught.
My response was unwanted? Why did you post? I thought this was a forum in which we all gave our opinion... And I did not try to subvert your views. Perhaps I did not understand... I never meant to be mean and rude, so if that’s how you feel I formally apologize.
Arthegarn
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Comedian (comedian@callatg.com) on Sep 15, 2001 - 03:50 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Sorry Callei.
Let's begin at the beginning!
"By definition, fear is to the unknown or, at best, to the unknown consecuences of the known."
By definition, nowhere in there is proper sentence structure, and your thoughts trail off alone without capturing the audience and bringing them along for the intellectual mind trip I'm sure you had planned. "fear is to the unknown?" Fear is to the unknown as scissors are to? This is no an analogy. Please complete this thought for me. I'm *very* interested in hearing it.
"If a bear attacks me I might say I fear the bear, but as a matter of fact what I fear is the fact that I don’t know what will it do next, if I will be attacked, injuried and how seriously."
No, that's not fear. That's thousands of years of evolution telling you that you can not kill a bear. Oh wait, Christians do not believe in evolution or reflexive adaption to one's enviroment, do they? You don't fear how badly you will be injured. You KNOW you will DIE. So, the old survival monitor turns on and tells you to run. Are you running on a pre-civilization neural connection? Instead of reacting to the bear and the thousands of years of instinct, the plague god appears before you and *frightens* you so greatly that you run?
"but who has an idea and speaks it honestly."
Paging Doctor Euphemism, Doctor Euphemism please report to the Opinion ward. If my sarcasm didn't it make it blatantly obvious, ideas and honesty do not go hand in hand. An idea is flawed by being tainted by the view of someone who fails to see all sides of the argument. SO what is an idea and speaking honestly? Why, that sounds like an opinion. Know what they say about people with opinions?
"thought I saw facts from a different prespective."
THOUGHT? THOUGHT? Obviously you never stoop yourself too low to think before you post anything. But, Let's get down to the core of that statement. "From a different perspective." And what, pray tell, is that perspective? That perspective is of someone who relies on a book 2,000 years old with 500 year old lies to run their life. That perspective is shaded with anger, mistrust, unguided zealousness and "fear of the unknown and the consequences thereof." Obviously you revile love between two people who might find it in the arms of the same sex. Obviously the concept of any large amount of people actually displaying open affection for eachother. "God" forbid YOU should ever get pregnant accidentally and have to go to an abortion clinic, Arthegarn.
"I never tried to impose my views"
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Remember saying this?
"Tha American Way of Life is a highway to hell, true."
What kind of guilt-ridden, fearful, hating creature believes in a hell? What kind of passive-aggressive revenge have you not purged of your soul that you feel other people should suffer for anything they do?
"And I did not try to subvert your views"
Then what DID you try to do?
"that the USA symbolize ostentation, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and a huge orgy :-)... I am not a national of the USA, but I think the USA symbolize not sin, but freedom to sin."
You know, with your clever use of the word "sin" right at the end there, you might have gotten away with NOT trying to make someone feel bad for wanting to have people feel love for one another and dress gaudily and have passionate love between one another! Why, you *are* a clever bastard, aren't you?
"My response was unwanted? Why did you post? I thought this was a forum in which we all gave our opinion.."
Yes, and she gave her opinion. YOUR opinion, however, belongs on jesus.com. YOUR opinion bashes her beliefs as a loving human. YOUR opinion is wrong, and flawed. The *wrongest*. She posted to express the view that we are giving in to the terrorists by feeling fear. You posted to express the view that you thought she was the wrongest. This sit
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 15, 2001 - 05:26 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | as always you rants are interesting, if not always to the point.
Im jelous that you were able to strech this even further than i did.
Have you ever thought of going into spin? might be just the career for you. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Schizo on Sep 16, 2001 - 04:53 AM (User info | Send a Message) | It's funny, Comedian.
You always seem to have a very violent negative reaction to the very mention of Christianity. You rarely miss a chance to post some rant or other when the subject is brought up. As far as anyone can tell by your comments, to you, Christianity is the ultimate evil.
Strange. You hate Christians for categorically denouncing such things as homosexuality and unwed sex. You say their minds have been made up for them, and their eyes are closed to the good in these lifestyles.
Yet you categorically denounce Christianity. I would like to present the theory that for some reason your mind has been made up for you and your eyes are closed to the good in this lifestyle.
I say your mind has been made up for you, because by your comments on Christianity, it is very apparent to one who has studied the religion, that you have not studied it. Your concepts of Christian theology are elementary at best, and generally twisted by hate.
I say your eyes are closed because despite any refutations of your comments by people who know more of the religion than you, you refuse to listen, and merely comb those refutations for more chances to insult and hate.
Why must you judge a person by their religion? Every person shapes their religion into a reflection of that person's true self. Every person practices Christianity a little differently. But you seem to think that because a person holds a religion that you don't approve of, that means the person is ignorant, and you don't have to practice basic politeness.
Every group in America seems to be protected except Christianity. For example, let's put other groups' names into the title of a comment you recently posted.
Buddhists, Buddhists everywhere, and not a brain to think.
Wiccans, Wiccans everywhere, and not a brain to think.
Native Americans, Native Americans everywhere, and not a brain to think.
Do you see what happens? Prejudice. America is a land of freedom. America is a land where every race and creed is welcome. America is a land where people are to be judged by their own merits alone, and not by their religion or place of origin.
But you have not been doing that. In your replies to Arthegarn, you do not limit yourself to what you know of him, but what you assume of him from your limited knowledge of his religion.
Did you forget that he is from Spain, and English is not his first language? Rather petty to disect his syntax. Could you speak Spanish as clearly as he speaks English?
The vast majority of humans on this globe would be afraid upon meeting a bear. It is not a failing limited to Christians. In fact, to meet a wild bear without at least a degree of fear would be a foolish thing. Wild animals are dangerous and are not to be trifled with.
It is true that many Christians do not believe in evolution. That is their choice. Many people forget that evolution is still a theory, unproven and unprovable. In fact, it is arguable that evolution is a hypothesis, since by definition a theory has been tested by experiment. No one has been able to experiment with evolution.
I am not here to make a debate about evolution. I am not a scientist. I am out of my depth. Might I also mention, Comedian, that you are not a theologian, and are also somewhat out of your depth? You are well on your way to showing yourself as an arrogant fool. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Rogue (judenouveau@yahoo.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 08:58 AM (User info | Send a Message) | By insulting only the Buddhists, Wiccans, and Native Americans you have offended the rest of us minority groups who now insist upon equal opportunity lashing-out-in-irrational-desperation.
Any 'violent reaction' that one has to Christianity is akin to the reaction one would have to the bear heretofore mentioned. The bear, as with Christianity, has been known to attack viciously. Maybe not this specific bear, but bears in general have been following a destructive trend since time immemorial, enough so that it is safe only to assume that each one will attack given the chance.
Upon confronting a bear or Christianity, one knows immediately that reasoning or other peaceful methods will fall on deaf ears and are likely to increase the severity of the attack. Options are limited at this point, you can either run or fight, but the bear/Christianity has enough size and practice at being vicious that one had best be armed if one expects to prevail, since our human protagonist in this extended analogy is not built for destruction as the 'bear' is, with weapons at the end of every appendage and a mind trained to kill over many years.
In this case, Callei and Comedian were armed with intelligence, wit, and a finely honed sense of sarcasm, so they struck in defence. It appears that the bear was wounded, because now it is rampaging and is further limiting the possible outcomes of the situation to its wandering off angrily or being put down.
'Wild animals are dangerous and are not to be trifled with.' |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Schizo on Sep 18, 2001 - 01:45 PM (User info | Send a Message) | If bears are so dangerous, then the best course of action is to leave them well enough alone, not to jump forward and attack. Comedian did not strike in defence, but in offense. Callei is always willing to hear logic, even from a Christian, if approached properly. Comedian hears nothing from Christians but fodder for more attack.
I would say that humans in general, and not just Christians specifically, are known to attack viciously.
If someone has a genuine, specific problem with Christianity, I have no problem with that. But it is obvious to me that Comedian tears things apart in a Christian's post, even if they have nothing to do with Christianity. For example, the fear of bears part of Arthegarn's post. If Devin had said it, or you, Comedian would never thought to comment on it. But because a Christian said it, Comedian felt he had to shoot it down.
I have no problem with arguments against Christianity. I do have a problem with heavy-handed bludgeoning of someone just because you don't like their religion. Comedian does not bother to argue or debate. He just rips his opponent to shreds in any way he can find.
Comedian is intelligent. He is even witty on occasion. But his sarcasm is not finely honed. It has the subtlety of a jackhammer.
Arthegarn, whether you agree with his post or not, did not attack anyone. He expressed his thoughts politely. Even when attacked by Comedian, he did not counter-attack, but instead made an attempt to defend his postition.
Since I have been a part of this website, only once have I witnessed a Christian attack the members. And that was Bill Gates. All other posts on the subject of Christianity have fallen into 3 categories: 1. Christians expressing thier views on a certain subject. 2. Christians defending their rights to express their views, and 3. non-Christians attacking Christianity.
I would say that, on this website, vicious attack belongs almost exclusively to the non-Christians.
Dislike Christianity if you will, but do it logically, please. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 04:13 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | I can see how you think that the Christian posts fall into three catagories. I dont agree since there are numerous posts from Christians that have nothing to do with thier religion or spirituality, but i can see where that comes from.
It is also difficult to understand what constitutes and "attack" when you are talking about another person. What i think is a slur on my intelligence may be meant as praise by the person giving it. What i see as praise may be meant as an insult. Just because it is meant as praise doesnt mean that is IS praise.
*crosses her fingers and hopes that this metaphor hold up*
If you tell a slave that they have done a good job, and that person doesnt WANT to be a slave, is that really praise? Or did you just insult them by telling them that they are good at being property?
Or if you tell a doctor that they are good at drawing blood, are you really praising them or can that be seen by them as deriding all the training and hard work that they have done to be more than a phlebotomist?
how about if you ask someone who is starving to death (and doesnt want to starve to death) how they stay so thin? is that praise?
my point is that things that mean one thing to one person may mean something totally different to another. what you see as christians expressing thier views can be seen as attacking by others. What you have seen as attacks on christians may in fact be defence in the eyes of the other person.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Schizo on Sep 19, 2001 - 04:30 AM (User info | Send a Message) | I see your point about praise meaning different things to the praiser and the praisee.
I can also see why Arthegarn's post could be found as attack on homosexuals, etc. Since he considers such behavior sin, then I can see reactions happening. I don't personally subscribe to Arthegarn's theology exactly.
What I was reacting to, however, was Comedian's method of reaction. Instead of attacking the doctrine of sin, he attacked Arthegarn himself. I found his approach childish in the extreme. There was no need to rip into such basic statements as being afraid of bears. And certainly his comments on opinion were uncalled-for.
The fact is, Arthegarn attacked unintentionally, in his attempt to express his view of what America stands for to him - the freedom to make the personal choice of right and wrong. But his religious phraseology ended up whiplashing people. His reply to your post showed his intentions. Comedian's reply was intentional attack, on Arthegarn as a person and not just on the views or ways of expressing them that he evidently disagreed with.
I know he is your brother, and I'm not saying he is a horrible person, but I reserve the right to have a problem with his mode of operation here. He has showed a pattern of blind attack on anything that bears the name Christian. Since our little fiasco a while ago, I understand better the violent inner reaction that most people here have to anything Christian. But the way you handle it and the way your brother handles it are two different animals. You are willing to set your guns aside to discover if there is an intelligent person under the repugnant label. Comedian seems to have a more itchy trigger finger, and doesn't give a damn as long as he can enjoy open season on Christians. There is no reasoning with him. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Rogue (judenouveau@yahoo.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 07:14 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Humans are a vicious lot, but in particular there have been more atrocities committed in the name of religion. Specifically, the armies of commoners directed by the 'heir to the throne of Peter' (that would be the Pope) have been the worst. When Jerusalem was conquered by Muslims during the 'Crusades', only the opposing army was driven out. When the Crusaders conquered, they killed all Muslims of any age and burned a synagogue wherein were hiding a congregation of Jews who didn't want to be mistaken for Muslims and thought that being recognised would save them. One of the generals even boasted about riding his horse through pools of blood that were knee-deep for his equine compatriot. The logical problems i have with Christianity (which is usually Paulism in practice, since more follow the words of Paul (not a prophet) than the direct or indirect words of Jesus) basically boil down to:
1)There can be no vicarious atonement, Moses asked and was refused. Each person must atone for their own sins and there are no substitutions, exchanges, etc.
2)Instant forgiveness gives rise to evil almost every time. According to Christian dogma, Hitler could have said a quick 'sorry dudes' (or is that 'judes'? :-D) before he put a bullet in his skull and he would sit at the throne along with the saints. That's just wrong. This is also why, according to Muslim dogma (spoken by religious leaders, not the actual words) you can do whatever you want, including killing innocents (a terrible crime) and will go straight to the good spot if you die in the struggle...and the struggle can be a suicide bombing despite suicide being instant damnation. So we have wars and violence and suicide bombs being perpetrated by people who believe that G*d told them it was fine. This was not the intention of that poor soul from Nazareth, nor was it the intention of our Meccan prophet, but it has turned out that way. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Samaritanism, and several other religions are wonderful, beautiful things on paper but have been lost in the translation.
In short, believe what you believe and don't believe anything anybody tells you. If were and not fed on the ear-poison of their local , everything would be fine. Trouble is, people are corrupt and corruption is contagious. Read and pay attention to the text of your and above all, believe only what feels right and leave it to everyone else to do the same.
What we have here (besides a 'failure to communicate') is a group of people from many states, a few countries, and almost every conceivable background. In this collection of souls we have most of the world's religions, and the last time we had a problem like this it was due to that billgates freak who was just hate looking for a direction. We shouldn't even be having a discussion like this, with its high relative thermal potential, but we did. Now everybody make nice and eat up the Jell-o™, shall we? |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Rogue (judenouveau@yahoo.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 07:26 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Okay, i mistakenly put some XML tags in that got removed. The sentence "If were and not fed on the ear-poison of their local , everything would be fine." should read "If (followers of religion) were (followers of religion) and not fed on the ear-poison of their local (religious leader), everything would be fine." and the sentence that reads "Read and pay attention to the text of your and above all, believe only what feels right and leave it to everyone else to do the same." should read "Read and pay attention to the text of your (religious text) and above all, believe only what feels right and leave it to everyone else to do the same."
These indicate a generic substitution.
Regarding Callei's post about perspective, how does Comedian know you are a Christian? Not saying you are doing anything wrong, but how often do i or anybody else get into flame wars about our religion? Either somebody really has it in for Christians and looks for every opportunity *or* it comes up disproportionately often. Just a thought.
C'mon Comedian, flame me about my religion. ;-) |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Schizo on Sep 19, 2001 - 04:54 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Thanks for the clarification!
I know the atrocities that have been done in the name of God. But are Christians today any more to blame for them than the Southerners today are to blame for slavery?
I am only reacting to Comedians war on Christians. He seems to want to categorically blow them all out of the water and obliterate them. That's prejudice. His definition of Christian theology is simplistic and twisted at best. I'm not saying that there aren't far to many people out there that believe that way, and I'm not saying that they shouldn't be blasted. But Comedian needs to learn a little discernment and realize that there is more to this religion than the nasty bit he has experienced, and he needs to wait long enough to identify his enemy. He needs to make sure he is getting the terrorists, and not the harmless little Afghan locals who have nothing to do with anything of the sort. Let alone people who could be his friends and allies, if he just took the time to look beyond the label to the person underneath.
Other people have mentioned their religions here. Everyone knows pretty much who is Wiccan, who is Satanist, and who is Jewish. But none of those religions ever get random posts bashing them. None of those religions, if mentioned by a follower of said religion, ever has someone rise up in holy indignation and declare jihad (or however you spell it) on them. And because this does not happen, the followers of those religions do not need to get unwisely hot under the collar and post a rant about how it pisses them off, thus attracting more bullets.
There ARE people here who have been genuinely mistreated by Christians. Or at least those who claim to be Christians. Now there are thousands of people in this country who have been far more violently mistreated by Muslims, or those who call themselves Muslims. I think we all unanimously condemn the targeting of Muslim Americans as the enemy, in spite of the enormity of this deed. Is it so strange that I ask the same courtesy for Christians who are not guilty of mistreatment of their non-Christian neighbors?
At the same time, I realize the doctrine of sin steps on people's toes. I realize that by bringing that up, Arthegarn has in a way brought it down on his own head. Very well. Attack the doctrine, but not in Comedian's uncontrolled manner. Calling an opinion "stupid" is childish in the extreme. If it is truly stupid, give the reasons and leave it there. Anything else is sheer taunting and jeering, and such behavior is unacceptable in a civilized, intelligent place like this.
Just because his target was a Christian does not mean that we should turn our backs or justify this behavior. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Repentance is not easy by Arthegarn on Sep 20, 2001 - 11:56 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Well, Rogue.
I agree with you in most things and particulary in a point that I find surprising to hear: Paulism. I don’t agree with Paul in most cases, he was not even a disciple, and has some letters which clearly show that he can’t bring himself out from his traditional jew way of life (I laugh my head off with all his story about the veil of II Corynthians). Also he was the first politican in the Church, and though he managed to spread Christianity inmensely... Well, I am too much of a politician myself.
There is something I’d like to (Arthegarn flips dictionary... shit, it’s not there! I’ll make it up) “outline”, so to speak. Not to correct but to define better. The matter of forgiveness. Well, it’s actually more of regretting, of realizing how wrong you were and changing your attitude, of not judging one by what s/he has done but by what s/he is now. Like “Bridge on the river Kwai”, that “My God, what have I done”at the end which returns Col. Nichols to his senses. Something like that. To us, you only sin when you willingly go away from God. If then you realice how wrong you were, regret what you have done and wish that you could return to It, you do.
For us, it’s just right. But it’s obvious why it is not to other creeds and people, you’d always get away with it. But it’s not that easy to really regret.
Arthegarn
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Repentance is not easy by Schizo on Sep 21, 2001 - 07:04 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Never been especially fond of the Pauline Epistles myself. Seemed to be a little too full of human opinion to belong in the Bible. Of course, they're valuable from a historical point of view, and there's a lot you can learn from them, but I don't put the same weight on them that I put on something clearly labelled "thus saith the Lord".
One thing I've found about forgiveness is that it doesn't fix things. It has its place, and it helps us from getting emotional blocks in the way of healing, but it isn't healing in itself. Just because person A has forgiven person B doesn't mean that everything is hunky-dory in their relationship. All forgiveness does is to put us at ground zero, to create a good relationship from there if desired.
Like you said, Arthegarn, it's judging someone by who they are, and not by what they have done. But if the person is still an asshole, forgiveness is not going to change them into an angel. If someone cheats you and you forgive them, it doesn't mean you trust them, if they haven't changed their ways. It just means you aren't out to get them back anymore. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Repentance is not easy by Rogue (judenouveau@yahoo.com) on Sep 21, 2001 - 08:10 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Forgiveness has been interpreted by the shallow and selfish far too often, and unfortunately it is not explained as explicitly as i would like and thus allows room for error. "You shall know the tree by its fruit" is about the best summation of my opinions on this subject. It may look like an apple tree and say it is an apple tree, but if it only bears holly berries you had better not eat them. Of course, if it bears holly berries one year and apples the next, you should not punish it for its past fruits if it has repented. That gets back to my earlier assertion about most religions being good 'on paper' but being turned into instruments of evil. My personal thoughts about forgiveness and repentance are that you must first realise that you have strayed, then correct yourself so that you will make an effort to never do it again, then you must do what you can to make right what you have wronged. If you have to actually apologise or repay or otherwise make right with a person you have wronged, you really think about it before you risk doing the wrong the next time.
The only question i have at this point, Schizo, is whether one can truly atone for a sin if one enjoys the punishment.... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Repentance is not easy by Schizo on Sep 22, 2001 - 04:16 AM (User info | Send a Message) | I like your definition of repentance. Feeling bad over something isn't repentance, and you can repent with out feeling bad.
And as for punishments, I've always suspected that you like whatever it is that the Mistress of Discipline hands out too much for true repentance! Maybe in your case, a more true punishment would be to abstain from punishment for a specified length of time! |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Repentance is not easy by Rogue (judenouveau@yahoo.com) on Sep 24, 2001 - 12:24 PM (User info | Send a Message) | Awww, that's no fun. The paddle and the cat-o-nine-tails, we go way back. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 04:16 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | You are so good at extended metaphors!
I prostrate myself in worship of your finely honed wordsmithing.
btw its nice to hear from you again |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Hulk ANGRY! GRRARR! by Arthegarn on Sep 20, 2001 - 11:52 PM (User info | Send a Message) | You know, Rogue, I actually like your comparison.
There is a point, though. Bears are actually quite peaceful and friendly creatures, with very strong family ties. They are omnivores but generally limit theselves to fish when talking about meat, they don’t attack other mammals. But they are terrible defending their ground and cubs. The only reason a bear would attack is if it were somehow provoked and had no other choice. Or had a mental disorder XD. So if you find a bear, run or stay still. If you attack, then it’ll cut you to pieces... uless you are armed, as you well say.
But the fact is bears have not a history of vicious attacks. They have been known to attack viciously, true, but that does not mean that every bear (or even most bears) would do so. The point is that everyone talks about the bear who viciously attacked him, or a friend, or a friend of a friend, or someone 29 years ago in this same place, but not so of the other ones. One rotten apple spoils the whole basket... look at the big bad wolf, the psycosis it created and the fact that wolves are almost extinct in Europe...
Now, as for Christians, I’ll be quick. There are people who call and have called themselves Christians who are as you describe. It’s true. But the fact is Jesus never imposed anything, never talked to those who wouldn’t hear, never answered unwanted questions, never forced anyone to do anything (well, there is that Temple skirmish...). Anyone who does, in my opinion, is not following His path. Period.
And thanks for the trust marging from “this particular bear” ;-)
Arthegarn
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Am I really that confusing? by Arthegarn on Sep 17, 2001 - 01:16 AM (User info | Send a Message) | O.K. begin at the beginning!
"By definition, fear is to the unknown or, at best, to the unknown consecuences of the known."
How would this be correctly expressed, then? I meant that you fear the unknown... and most likely it’s a bad translation. Sorry. I’ll try to say it another way, since you ask. I meant that by definition, fear is a response created by uncertainty, by the unknown. If you know what is going to happen you do not fear. You might get angry or sad, but you do not fear because the harm is unavoidable. Fear is a response of evolution that prepares your body to avoid harm, so if the harm is certain, there is no fear.
“No, that's not fear. That's thousands of years of evolution telling you that you can not kill a bear.”
Well yeah. That is exactly what I meant. It wasn’t that difficult.
“Christians do not believe in evolution or reflexive adaption to one's enviroment, do they?”
Wouldn’t it be “adaptation”? I can’t speak for all Christians like you do, but Roman Catholics do. To us it’s not a matter of belief. Holy shit! Does that turn the Pope into a heathen?
“You KNOW you will DIE. So, the old survival monitor turns on and tells you to run.”
If I KNEW I was going to DIE, I would not try to save myself since death is unavoidable. Otherwise I would not KNOW it that MUCH, would I?
Are you running on a pre-civilization neural connection?
I don’t get this one... are you calling me names?
An idea is flawed by being tainted by the view of someone who fails to see all sides of the argument.
I am learning more English here than ever. So, only God (oops, pardon me) who is omniscient, can have ideas, and we can only have opinions as we don’t have all the data. I get it... I did not know that was the concept expressed by “idea”, the pure, Platonian definition. I see... I will watch my language
“Know what they say about people with opinions?”
No. What do they say? I can’t wait to hear this pearl of wisdom.
And what, pray tell, is that perspective?
Mine. The one I tried to express in that comment
That perspective is of someone who relies on a book 2,000 years old with 500 year old lies to run their life.
Speaking of syntax... wouldn’t it be “to run his or her life”? And, how can a book 2,000 years old contain 500 year old lies? Wouldn’t they be 2,000 years old as well? Or was the book re-written 500 years ago? What is that book of yours anyway? No book rules my life, and if you mean the Bible I have news for you, it’s somewhat older than that
“That perspective is shaded with anger, mistrust, unguided zealousness and "fear of the unknown and the consequences thereof."
I love it when you speak ex cathedra.
“Obviously you revile love between two people who might find it in the arms of the same sex.”
Where did I say that, man? I think your perspective is shaded with anger, mistrust, and unguided zealousness... and prejudice, never forget prejudice.
“Obviously the concept of any large amount of people actually displaying open affection for each other.”
Speaking of syntax... what about the concept?
“ "God" forbid YOU should ever get pregnant accidentally and have to go to an abortion clinic, Arthegarn.”
Yep. God forbade I ever got pregnant, even willingly. And the point is I would not “have to go” that’s what freedom is for. I can choose going or not, to sin or not (hey, to me that would be sin)
What kind of guilt-ridden, fearful, hating creature believes in a hell?
a) You are taking my sentence out of context. I only meant as a symbol
b) You can believe in hell and still not be a "guilt-ridden, fearful,
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Am I really that confusing? by Schizo on Sep 17, 2001 - 04:30 AM (User info | Send a Message) | Hooray! Hooray! I get a piece of candy!
You are NOT that confusing. You are rarely confusing at all. I'd say your syntax is just as clear as Comedian's.
Don't let him get under your skin. There are a lot of people on this website who have been mistreated by Christians. Evidently, Comedian is one of them. But unlike almost every other person on this website, he cannot seem to grasp the concept that those Christians who mistreat others are individuals making their own choices, and in fact, they are disobeying their own creed. It makes me wonder what would happen to him if an African American mistreated him. But then again, he seems too trained in political correctness to ever categorize a minority. P.C. only allows open season on whites, males, and Christians.
I'm sure you, like me, found it rather amusing when Comedian denounced the use of opinion, and a limited viewpoint. I would challenge anybody to find someone outside the vegetable ward who does not hold opinions, and part of being human is being limited, and thus, of course, having a limited viewpoint.
So, as I said before, don't let Comedian get under your skin. I've decided the best way to deal with him is to use him as a sounding board for practicing logical argument. He DOES present so many juicy opportunities for developing a logical refutation, and you can pretty much trust him to categorically disagree with everything you say if you so much as mention the words Christian, God, or sin. |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: What USA does symbolize. by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 15, 2001 - 05:24 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | Thank you for you apology, and i formally apologize as well.
I am very glad that my post prompted a respose in you or anyone. I also understand that we come from very different worlds and that we use words differently from one another. My post was not about the terrorists and i felt that your respose was about them. My post was about healing and affirming or nationalism and our relationships with each other. I dont care about the terrorists, other than to feel sympathy for thier mothers and theier younger siblings and thier friends who have all ALSO lost a loved one. I dont care so much about thier motivations, or how your country or your friends see America. Heck, right now i dont care how I feel about America. I care about the people around me, the people that are suffering from the effects of a violent crime.
When i posted this I didnt know what kind of responses i would get, if any. I tend to assume (wrongly) that reponses to me will not have bible verse in them.
What i meant about using the bible to explain the actions of the terrorists was that you used the bible to explain why people hate America (either as the symbol or idea) and why they would be prompted to act. the main body of your post, and i paraphase "America stands for freedom, the bible tells us that freedom is a gift from god. America stands for the freedom to sin, the bible tells us that sinning is against gods law. people (those who do not read and understand that freedom is gods gift) fear freedom and think it equals sin, because the bible tells them so. people hate things that they fear, so people hate America". this is what i understood you to be saying.
to this i replied that MOST people in the world have not read the bible, nor do they believe in a Christian God. the people that are supposed to have done this thing are of a faith that tells them not to read the Christian Bible. The metaphors of the bible may help you understand thier actions, but those metaphors are differnt from the ones that these people were taught. they dont explain the motivation for these people's actions.
I had fun getting overly sensative about your response, its always fun to take something that was taken out of context and strech it even further out of shape. Surrealism is great fun.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy by Anonymous-Coward on Sep 18, 2001 - 08:22 PM | Three cheers for Anonymous Cowards. We exist in legion. You can call me Bumm. Maybe I'll register later.
Dear Callei,
I was really moved deeply by what you wrote. It really resonated with me. Like two musical notes in perfect harmony, I am there with you.
Or at least I was. I don't know. I have been there, but I'm not anymore.
Do you realize Callei, that in what you wrote you were in synchrony with the terrorists.
I don't say this lightly or to be cruel. I say it mostly because I've looked deep in my own heart of darkness and seen what's there, and know that I've written things almost identical to what you wrote. It had a certain unmistaken cadence and rhythm to it.
There is Yin, and there is Yang.
You, Callei, in that letter, were in Yang over drive. You were losing the context and shades of your own soul by screaming at us like a Mad General leading the forces to battle.
In the context of our lives, if smoking feels like the correct thing to do, then of course, we will do it. But should anyone do it just to prove YOUR point. (Have you ever seen a person you love slowly dying of lung disease on a ventilator in the intensive care unit. Their chest and stomach falling up and down, rising and falling to a mechanical rhythm. They keep the person sedated so as not to frighten them. But if they wake, they'll mouth words of panic at you, "what are you doing to me? Can't you just let me die?" They can't speak with the long plastic tube in their mouth, but they can look around frantically, they can cry. I have seen this. Up close with a chain smoker I dearly loved. And still I plead for people to back off. If people want to smoke it's THEIR CHOICE. Their Karma. But I don't holler at people like a Mad General to smoke as a sign of defiance. For me cigarettes are a small stick that's been tested by some cold man with a white plastic, flabby face and clammy hands in some sterile laboratory to be as addictive as possible so that he can get rich. A person who could careless if you fell off a log tomorrow, much less get a lung disease.)
America may have been founded economically on Tobacco, but as they say, that was then and this is now.
How about abortions. You call for a wave of abortions. (Most thoughtful pro-choice people still view abortion as a kind of failure of society. Why? Haven't you got it yet. It's got nothing to do with religion. It's got to do with MIND. Can I know anything about your mind. Can I really know your mind from the outside. Of course I can't, only from the inside. So where and when did you begin? I am personally anti-abortion, because that's life in that womb, and it's human life. If it's not human, what is it? If it's not life, then what is it? Don't presuppose to know it's mind. Don't presuppose to know if it's got a mind or not. You can't know mind from the outside. Yet, despite all this, I am pro-choice because I want people to choose. Because it's all a mystery and if people can't choose then how can they learn the power of that mystery. Yet, you like the Mad General holler at the troops for more and more abortions. Is defiance a reason for abortion?)
Have you ever seen an alcoholic? Have you ever seen a person you loved just having to have that first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and on and on strong Scotch and water, night after night. And crying again and again on your shoulders, that they want a better life, but just can't change things. Have you ever just got so frustrated that you wanted to pull the bottle away from then, kidnap them and keep them some place safe where they could never drink again. I admit, there are times when alcohol is okay. We need the freedom to choose. But you the Mad General want us all the drink and and drink and drink till we vomit in the gutter in defiance. Is that any reason to drink?
Sexuality is certainly one of the most greatest gifts in the world. And certainly there are no precise rul
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy
by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com)
on Sep 15, 2001 - 05:30 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://www.plynlymon.com
|
http://www.nostradamus-repository.org/
is down today. I was going to go looking for random words and see if i could find a quatrain that talked about any of the natural disasters that have happend in the last 5 years.
ah well, i guess that i'll do my homework instead.
|
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy
by Anonymous-Coward on Sep 18, 2001 - 05:40 PM
|
Just to clarify things. The concept of freedom and prophecy are not compatible.
It's one or the other.
For years we've lived like Fat Cat Americans, and basically ignored the rest of the world while our government ran roughshod over them. They just gave us a big wake up call and said, "hello", we're out here and we are poor and unhappy and don't like it.
Freedom means believing you can shape the future. It means believing there is one choice better than another.
You choose, and then you accept the responsibility for what happens.
To foist off our responsibility on a vague and confusing prophecy seems really pathetic to me. Instead we need to try to study what happened, learn from it, and take appropriate action.
If we negate the responsibility we all shared in this, we will likewise negate the freedom to change things in the future. We aren't puppets, and we aren't automatons.
Blast away at the machine and lets get back to our humanity.
If you want to read something really prescient, read the following:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/
|
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy by callei (plyn@plynlymon.com) on Sep 18, 2001 - 11:06 PM (User info | Send a Message) http://www.plynlymon.com | Thank you for propagating that idea that the rapist isnt at fault, that it is ACTUALLY the fault of the person that was raped.
Thank you for heaping the blame on those that died, even if they were from another country, followed some other ideology, and were here begging for money to keep thier countymen alive. No they held a gun the the weak-minded (because anyone with a strong mind would have taken death rather than harm so many) terrorists and MADE the terrorists kill them. Forced them to kill all those people, distroy all that property, and cause and international incident.
Yes all of us "fat cat" Americans are to blame for all the starvation in ALL countries, the war in ALL other countries, the rapes, diseases, natural disaters, all the bad stuff is America's Fault.
Can you actually tell me why? can you explain why the starving college students from other countries that were working as interns in the Towers were to blame?
Can you tell me why I am responsible for the my uncles broken arm and leg and the lose of his family house? can you tell me why my baby brother is to blame for this? Is it because he plays video games or wants to go to college? Is he such a terrible person for wanting to travel and see Japan? Do that make him a mass murderer?
Look Jerry Fallwell (or how ever you spell it) sell your car, house, clothes, and everything else. live on the street and send all your money to help some starving person, or back some democratic canidate in some repressed country, or hell, help someone in THIS country. Then tell me its my fault.
|
[ No anonymous comments ]
Re: Conspiracy and Prophecy by Anonymous-Coward on Sep 19, 2001 - 01:17 AM | This is Bumm again. Bumm because I'm Bummed out I guess. At least right now after reading what you wrote. If I was too inflammatory or simplistic in what I said, I'm sorry.
I know that there are people suffering everywhere. Paradoxically, I sometimes think people in America suffer from anxiety more than people in lesser developed countries do from their daily lives. Which does cause me to wonder what it's all about.
For some reason I look at taking responsibility as a positive thing, while you seem to look at it as a negative thing. For me it's an acknowledgement of my freedom, for you it represents guilt. Because I don't claim any religious pretensions, the notion of feeling guilty doesn't plague me.
I did see an article where some of the religious right did say some really hateful things, to the extent that they seem to suggest that God was punishing the west. I believe Jerry Fallwell said something like this.
That type of talk troubles me. Nor do I think it's helpful.
Can I put it to you like this?
Do you want what happened to not happen again? Ultimately ethics are feeling based, and can't be justified rationally. So how do you feel about this?
I'm not trying to be patronizing, it's just important to work logically from the beginning of my argument to the end.
If you are like me, you don't want it to happen again.
If you agree with that, you are faced at least 3 possibilities. (If you can think of more let me know.)
1. It has nothing to do with us on an individual level. It's beyond us in some practical sense.
2. It's fate and preordained, like a Nostradamus prophecy. Therefore in an absolute sense we can't do anything about it.
3. That your actions in some minuscule way will help it not happen again.
I don't believe in fate. That's why I don't believe in Nostradamus. Then between 1 and 3, I choose 3 because I believe we can make a difference, no matter how small. But it's an acknowledgement of my inherent optimism, not an attempt to make anyone feel guilty.
I probably did come on too strong and oversimplify with the term "Fat Cat." I'm sorry. But we as Americans use a lot of oil. And our use of this oil and the system we've come up for obtaining it has resulted in suffering and confusion in the middle ease. I know it's a complicated thing. Obviously we didn't want anyone to suffer.
I do feel the average America consumes oil the way he consumes a steak. He gets it prepackaged and conveniently on a store shelf. He doesn't have to go out and slaughter the cow and deal with all the brutality and blood. It's the same with America's world policy. It's done with the best intentions, but no one seems to realize how brutal it can be.
I don't think it's something we need to be guilty about. I'm not sure if guilt ever solves anything. I guess the term "fat cat" is kind of mean because it infers a bit of guilt. But clearly, we as Americans have to pay more attention to what we are doing abroad. We do, because something spectacularly bad just happened.
My admonishing was more in the vain of problem solving, not in guilt finding. Something went really, really wrong on September 11. We have to look at what it was.
What do you think it was that went wrong? Do you think it was just a random act that can't ever be dealt with? Or do you think there were things that in retrospect could have been done to prevent it? Or do you think it was just Fate?
Obviously you don't think it was Fate. That's too much like God's wrath and all that. I don't buy any of that either.
I am truly not sure what you believe about it.
Something else that's interesting to ask is:
Do you hate the terrorists? I guess I probably do. To be honest. But I don't want to. As you I don't want hate to win the day.
I would
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ No anonymous comments ]
|
|