Mark of the Beast: Legitimate Concern?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
That's because you lack insight.

?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Yes, but when I posted that, the conversation was talking about monitoring devices, such as cameras on every street corner. Even George Orwell could not foresee smart phones with GPS. Soon, governments won't have to declare martial law, they'll be able to monitor us and control us no matter where we are.

That was part of the book in 1984 where the TV could watch you as you watched it. I do
believe your right he did not see all the communication devices we have to day, but he
write about the PC police changing language to what could and could not be used. How
history was being rewritten to suit the powers that be, how villains were used to keep the
masses in check, real or not. The control here is subtle but getting stronger all the time.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
It was a vision of what would happen in the future...from the perspective of people living in the first century CE.

From our perspective two thousand years later, it happened in the past.

And a perfect excuse to blow off the most prophetic book of the Bible.

You remind me of a child running around with fingers in his ears singing, "La la la la la la la, I can't hear you..."

Originally posted by Suzianne
And a perfect excuse to blow off the most prophetic book of the Bible.

You mean Revelation? Why do you believe it's really Jesus speaking in it?

Originally posted by KellyJay
That was part of the book in 1984 where the TV could watch you as you watched it. I do
believe your right he did not see all the communication devices we have to day, but he
write about the PC police changing language to what could and could not be used. How
history was being rewritten to suit the powers that be, how villains were used to keep the
masses in check, real or not. The control here is subtle but getting stronger all the time.

Consider this, from the Wikipedia entry on "doublespeak":

The term "doublespeak" probably has its roots in George Orwell's book Nineteen Eighty-Four. Although the term is not used in the book, it is a close relative of one of the book's central concepts, "doublethink". Another variant, "doubletalk," also referring to deliberately ambiguous speech, did exist at the time Orwell wrote his book, but the usage of "doublespeak" as well as of "doubletalk" in the sense emphasizing ambiguity clearly postdates the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Parallels have also been drawn between Doublespeak and Orwell's classic essay Politics and the English Language, which discusses the distortion of language for political purposes.

Edward S. Herman, political economist and media analyst, has highlighted some examples of doublespeak and doublethink in modern society. Herman describes in his book, Beyond Hypocrisy the principal characteristics of doublespeak:

"What is really important in the world of doublespeak is the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program."

In his essay Politics and the English Language, George Orwell observes that political language serves to distort and obfuscate reality. Orwell’s description of political speech is extremely similar to the contemporary definition of doublespeak;

"In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible… Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness… the great enemy of clear language is insincerity. Where there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, ..."
===============

It seems that there are some "forum combatants" who have studied Orwell and Herman right here in this forum. The similarity is no coincidence, I wager.

Originally posted by Suzianne
It seems that there are some "forum combatants" who have studied Orwell and Herman right here in this forum. The similarity is no coincidence, I wager.

You reckon there are forum posters who have a similarity to George Orwell and Edward S. Herman?

Originally posted by FMF
You mean Revelation? Why do you believe it's really Jesus speaking in it?

Well, mainly because it says so.

Why do I believe Exodus is about the Hebrews leaving Egypt? Yeah, that's right, because it says so. Why do I believe the Gospels are about Jesus Christ? Yeah, because they say so.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Well, mainly because it says so.

How is that anything other than mere circular logic?

You believe it's really Jesus speaking in Revelation because its writer says so?

Originally posted by FMF
You reckon there are forum posters who have a similarity to George Orwell and Edward S. Herman?

Nice try. Must you twist every single thing anybody says?

No. I said that there are no doubt those who have studied Orwell and Herman among the forum combatants here.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I said that there are no doubt those who have studied Orwell and Herman among the forum combatants here.

Including some of your fellow Christians?

Originally posted by FMF
How is that anything other than mere circular logic?

You believe it's really Jesus speaking in Revelation because its writer says so?

What are you even on about?

A swing and a miss. Have you ever read any book? How would you say you know what it's about? Because you read it and it says so. Duh.

Originally posted by FMF
Including some of your fellow Christians?

Sorry, I don't have time for the third degree tonight.

Level your charge, or shut up.

Originally posted by Suzianne
What are you even on about?

You believe Revelation is divinely inspired because its writer says so. Why should anyone else believe you are right to do so?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Sorry, I don't have time for the third degree tonight.

Level your charge, or shut up.

Surely the "charge" being made here is yours?

"...the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program."

Does this apply only to people you disagree with or does it apply to people who have similar beliefs to you as well?

Originally posted by FMF
You believe Revelation is divinely inspired because its writer says so. Why should anyone else believe you are right to do so?

I can't really be bothered to give a flying rat's ass what anyone else believes about my right to do anything.

Again with the twisting. You asked about my belief that it is Jesus speaking in it. And now you conflate that with the idea that it is divinely inspired. The entire Bible is divinely inspired. What does this have to do with what anyone else believes? I think you're struggling here, and frankly, I don't have time for this sort of nonsense tonight.

As I said, level your charge, or hit the road. Or was that the charge? "Why should anyone else believe you are right to do so?" Incredibly weak, man, as well as nonsensical. Non-sequitur. "It does not follow."