11 Feb 06
Is there enough humanity left in the nations of the world today for sanity to prevail and a world emerge where the prevailing theme is to live and let live, or because of our troubled history are forces counterbalanced in such a precipitous way that we are just on the first part of the slide that is the slippery slope that will usher in the end game of the prophesied apocalypse?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by kmax87The world or the people in it?
Is there enough humanity left in the nations of the world today for sanity to prevail and a world emerge where the prevailing theme is to live and let live, or because of our troubled history are forces counterbalanced in such a precipitous way that we are just on the first part of the slide that is the slippery slope that will usher in the end game of the prophesied apocalypse?
Language matters.
You go on about sanity like it was real.
Define it. I say that killing people who kill innocent civilians is not only civilized but REQUIRED before one can become civilized.
What do you think about people who blow up a market place or a line of men waiting to become soldiers?
That is a trick question. In your mind... do you see blowing up the line of potential soldiers as "more right" than blowing up a market full of women and children?
Most people do. And this is why we are doomed to another hundred years of war. The correct answer is that "No! Both are wrong because the reason EITHER is being blown up is to force Islam on us all. The purpose of both explosions is to end WESTERN civilization and institute God's Government over all of mankind."
So... the earth is quite mature. Humans are quite silly. That is why I embrace war. We are five hundred years away from being smart enough to know that we enable evil by allowing evil. So why not embrace the stupidity that is inevitable?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by StarValleyWyBoth. Sanity is real enough for me and the people immediately around me. While I can accept that that may be a low probability event in the world we live in, what with the choices between relative degrees of evil to choose from as you point out, the point I was trying to make, is it just too late to do anything about the deterioration between competing world systems and philosophies?
The world or the people in it?
Language matters.
You go on about sanity like it was real.
If we all believe we are doomed, doesnt that prophesy then automatically self fullfill?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by kmax87I don't believe I'm doomed, K. Each man creates his own universe. If you believe you're doomed then doomed you are.
Both. Sanity is real enough for me and the people immediately around me. While I can accept that that may be a low probability event in the world we live in, what with the choices between relative degrees of evil to choose from as you point out, the point I was trying to make, is it just too late to do anything about the deterioration between competing world ...[text shortened]... hies?
If we all believe we are doomed, doesnt that prophesy then automatically self fullfill?
11 Feb 06
2 edits
Originally posted by kmax87Well stated and much more readable than the original post.
Both. Sanity is real enough for me and the people immediately around me. While I can accept that that may be a low probability event in the world we live in, what with the choices between relative degrees of evil to choose from as you point out, the point I was trying to make, is it just too late to do anything about the deterioration between competing world ...[text shortened]... hies?
If we all believe we are doomed, doesnt that prophesy then automatically self fullfill?
The thing about "competing world systems and philosophies" is that fewer and fewer people are willing to take sides. Very Smart , Sophisticated, Wonderful teachers and professors teach us that it is not "sophisticated" to believe in "good and evil". So we don't. It is a rare person today who can differentiate between "raping and killing a ten year old girl" and "killing the rapist killer who did.."
So we have a world which sees the war of philosophies as extraneous and dangerous. If we just all "learn to get along" none of the insanity can prevail. This is absolutely true.
The only thing for sure as far as "doom" is concerned is that failure to face evil WILL doom us. It always has and it always will. It ain't sophisticated and it ain't cool, but evil does exist in the heart of may. Some say that I am so infected. So be it. My evil is directed against bullies pure and simple. I ain't ashamed of my evil in that effort. It is a duty that is not easy to satisfy because I would rather be discussing the ways to build colonies at L5.
BTW... competition is good. Without learning it in youth and actually keeping score, kids get the notion that it is ok to just play for the sake of playing. If you always face benevolent enemies, then it's ok to not keep score. If you face evil killers, then winning becomes everything.
I use Nehru and Gandhi as examples. They won by using peaceful "strikes and public dissidence" against the Brits who were benevolent. What would have happened if they had faced the Nazi's instead of the Brits? I'll tell you what would have happened. The protesters would have been machine-gunned in the town square, the leaders would have been rounded up and shot and the "protesters" who failed to show up for work on monday would have been lined up and every third man shot in the back of the head.
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by StarValleyWyCorrect, there are too many people (on all sides) who are unable to see other people's viewpoints and too shallow to consider that their actions, provoked or not, are perpetuating this situation.
The world or the people in it?
Language matters.
You go on about sanity like it was real.
Define it. I say that killing people who kill innocent civilians is not only civilized but REQUIRED before one can become civilized.
What do you think about people who blow up a market place or a line of men waiting to become soldiers?
That is a tric ...[text shortened]... that we enable evil by allowing evil. So why not embrace the stupidity that is inevitable?
Until this lack of awareness is eradicated from the population, we are condemned to cyclical violence.
How can we reach that point ?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by kmax87In my mind there are two competing philosophies right now.
Both. Sanity is real enough for me and the people immediately around me. While I can accept that that may be a low probability event in the world we live in, what with the choices between relative degrees of evil to choose from as you point out, the point I was trying to make, is it just too late to do anything about the deterioration between competing world ...[text shortened]... hies?
If we all believe we are doomed, doesnt that prophesy then automatically self fullfill?
1. The western philosophy that embraces freedom in all it forms. Much blood has been shed to get this freedom and the west will not easily part with it.
2. The Islamic philisophy derived from its culture and reliigion, and notorious for limiting ones freedom and hellbent on inflicting its philosophy on the rest of the world.
Kmax, I dont which culture you refer to as 'evil' but here are some quotes from the Koran ;
- "Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:29)
- "The only true faith in God's sight is Islam." (Surah 3:19)
-"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)
It is the opinion of many muslims that Islam will one day rule the world and all will have to bow to the God of the Muslims.
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by Rajk999Kinda like some muslims feel about christianity now then ?!
In my mind there are two competing philosophies right now.
1. The western philosophy that embraces freedom in all it forms. Much blood has been shed to get this freedom and the west will not easily part with it.
2. The Islamic philisophy derived from its culture and reliigion, and notorious for limiting ones freedom and hellbent on inflicting its philo ...[text shortened]... Islam will one day rule the world and all will have to bow to the God of the Muslims.
Thank you for proving my point. Any ideas how to solve the problem ?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by fooeyBefore we get to the problem solving, are you saying that Christians and Muslims behave, and react the same way to preceived threats to their religion ?
Kinda like some muslims feel about christianity now then ?!
Thank you for proving my point. Any ideas how to solve the problem ?
11 Feb 06
Originally posted by Rajk999I think history shows us that either side have used similar tactics, whether that be the crusades, or the inquisition or when the Ottomann and AustroHungarian empires butted up against each other.
Before we get to the problem solving, are you saying that Christians and Muslims behave, and react the same way to preceived threats to their religion ?
My view is that evil is not inherent in the religions per se. I dont disagree that you will find exhortations towards violence against unbelievers in Islam but the history of Israel as told in the Old Testament is also littered with stories of decimating the "heathen" neighbours cutting off foreskins as proof.
The truth as far as I can see is that there is a much greater emphasis in either religious system to live at one with God. I think my opinion of religion is moulded by Ghandi's comment that the problem with Christianity is christians.
I think that real evil usually comes wrapped up in individual packets, and that these individuals usually recognise organised religion as a ready made audience that can usually be easily swayed by jingoistic hate filled oratory. It doesnt usually happen overnight, but once the balance is tipped in the favour of conflict, then succeeding manipiulators and power whores simply keep up the pressure until we have the current state of affairs that pits the rhetoric of ultra right wing hawks in the US who use religion to mask the actions of a state sponsored terrorism and the flip side of that is the islamic extremism that has its followers strap on bombs.
If you investigate either religion though you will find that their is enough advice and exhortation in either to promote and foster peace. It seems as so many leaders have realised, its easier to manipulate people with fear and hatred, than raise their consciousness and start them on the pathway of forgiveness and reconcilliation.
11 Feb 06
1 edit
Originally posted by kmax87My question was in the present tense Kmax, so if you start talking about history the discussion goes nowhere. You are using unfair debating tactics AGAIN. Are you implying that Christianity should wait for the muslims to 'catch up' and be 'understanding' while they threaten to kill and destroy the west?
I think history shows us that either side have used similar tactics, whether that be the crusades, or the inquisition or when the Ottomann and AustroHungarian empires butted up against each other.
My view is that evil is not inherent in the religions per se. I dont disagree that you will find exhortations towards violence against unbelievers in Islam but t n raise their consciousness and start them on the pathway of forgiveness and reconcilliation.
The simple and truthful answer to my question is NO .. Christian do not respond in any shape or form the way muslims do ? Are you honest enough to admit that ?
And there are NO exhortations to violence in the Bible and you cannot be so biased to claim that a historical description of the origin of the Jewish nation which was violent is an exhortation to be violent today. There are clearly such exhortations in the Koran and it applies today. Have you read either of them. I have read the Bible at least 20 times in the last 10 yrs and since 9/11 I started reading the Koran and the contents are shocking to say the least.. it reads like a War Manual. So get your facts straight.
12 Feb 06
3 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999All biblical references from the KJV
..You are using unfair debating tactics AGAIN. Are you implying that Christianity should wait for the muslims to 'catch up'.....And there are NO exhortations to violence in the Bible and you cannot be so biased to claim that a historical description... ....(the Koran), it reads like a War Manual. So get your facts straight.
Num 10:9 And if ye go to war in your land against the enemy that oppresseth you, then ye shall blow an alarm with the trumpets; and ye shall be remembered before the LORD your God, and ye shall be saved from your enemies.
Deu 4:33 Did [ever] people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?
Deu 4:34 Or hath God assayed to go [and] take him a nation from the midst of [another] nation, by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes?
Deu 4:35 Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he [is] God; [there is] none else beside him.
The above two commendations to the children of Israel found in the Old Testament bible, took all of 5 min to find using the terms God and war in a search engine called blue letter bible. If I start refining the search I have no doubt that I will find a lot more similar such examples of the leaders of the children of God comforting them because God would prevail on their behalf if they went into battle. Now call me old fashioned, but if that does not encourage some sort of licence to view their enemies as being disposable, then I dont know what does.
I’m not sure why you feel you can call foul anytime anyone would look to history to provide some context. In your view, what sort of time frame do you consider long enough for past events to no longer have any meaning in the current context. Why I ask, is because it is very easy to whitewash the record of a particular nation if you apply a statute of limitations on their past sins. You say, should we wait till Islam catches up, which implies to an extent that the west is reformatting itself at a faster rate than the Arab world. Just because the US is more willing to let go of its tarnished past in the middle east as well as Korea,Vietnam, Nicuaragua, Guatamala, Afghanistan etc, should not qualify as a rational excuse for others to just get over it and get on with it.
Why should the parts of the world that have been dealt with prejudicially by certain US administrations acknowledge that that just happened to be a particular bias of a certain American mindset operating out of a particular party and be thus willing every 4 years to just wipe the slate clean and start all over again. The fact that many Americans seem to use this strategy to be able to sleep at night should in no way assume that somehow the rest of the world simply forgot what had just happened. Other parts of the world, only too clearly see this sort of advice given to the children of Israel instead as their recurring reality.
Exd 17:13 And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword.
Exd 17:14 And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this [for] a memorial in a book, and rehearse [it] in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.
Exd 17:15 And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi:
Exd 17:16 For he said, Because the LORD hath sworn [that] the LORD [will have] war with Amalek from generation to generation.
12 Feb 06
Originally posted by kmax87WHAT ?? So the rest of the world want to live in the past. Good for them. Well there is no point in talking about solutions to the current problems then. And if you want to put those tame OT passages on equal footing with those quoted from the Koran earlier in this thread .. well all I can say is .. "You Win" Congratulations.
All biblical references from the KJV
Num 10:9 [b]And if ye go to war in your land against the enemy that oppresseth you, then ye shall blow an alarm with the trumpets; and ye shall be remembered before the LORD your God, and ye shall be saved from your enemies.
Deu 4:33 Did [ever] people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, a ...[text shortened]... ORD hath sworn [that] the LORD [will have] war with Amalek from generation to generation.[/b]
FYI Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ so the OT does not have any influence on the behaviour of a Christian. Isnt the evidence glaring ?
12 Feb 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Most people tend to slag off Muslims as a collective and in the same way my view of the behaviour of organised Christianity over the ages has little to do with the words of Christ.
....FYI Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ so the OT does not have any influence on the behaviour of a Christian. Isnt the evidence glaring ?
How in the world can we go forward if at every turn its just a one eyed, our group are spotless and your group are the problem style of rhetoric. In the name of Christ conquistadors converted south americans under pain of death to Christianity. In the name of Christ the Dutch and English used the rationalisation of Noahs one son being made a servant of the other to justify enslaving black africans and starting a golden triangle of trade that established the economic basis of the modern world and set up the colonial model of commerce that placed Europe and the US at the head of world industrial activity to this day.
If the western world was so Christian then why do you have a legal system that upholds an eye for an eye. Thats way OT dude. The NT says turn the other cheek, love those that revile you, if a man sue you for your cloak give him your shirt as well, love your enemies, love those that persecute you...... please do not do the words of the greatest revolutionary ever to have lived, Christ, a disservice, by suggesting that any western power in the last 2000 years has ever embodied his teachings. Every so called Christian power has invariably turned to precedent set in the OT to justify why they could act aggresively towards another nation.