|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,818 Year: 4,075/9,624 Month: 946/974 Week: 273/286 Day: 34/46 Hour: 6/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Smelling The Coffee: 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Yes, you are quite right. What I meant to infer was that he (Saddam) was not an international terrorist that buz implied, then recanted.
Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people -Carl Sagan For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.-Carl Sagan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." - Francis H Wade.
And anyway you are still missing the point - Both GWB and the Islamic terrorists under discussion are both claiming to have had direct communication with God of some sort. They are not saying that they inferred their conclusions from biblical/Koranic interpretation. So are they both wrong about their divine revelation? Or only one of them? Or is God a sadistic arse playing with both of them for his own amusement (or some other such divine and inscrutable motive)? What do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Iblis Member (Idle past 3922 days) Posts: 663 Joined: |
I'm not the one missing the point. The Bible supports your theory that God is a lying bastard. Telling different people different things to foment strife and kill off redundant leadership is his frigging SOP, man.
Here
Exodus 7:13 writes: And he hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said. and here
Deuteronomy 2:30 writes: But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as [appeareth] this day. and this
Second Samuel 24:1 writes: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. resulting in this
Second Samuel 24:15-16 writes: So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning even to the time appointed: and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men.And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite. And David spake unto the LORD when he saw the angel that smote the people, and said, Lo, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly: but these sheep, what have they done? let thine hand, I pray thee, be against me, and against my father's house. note also
Second Kings 6:33 writes: And while he yet talked with them, behold, the messenger came down unto him: and he said, Behold, this evil [is] of the LORD; what should I wait for the LORD any longer? and thusly
Second Kings 21:12 writes: Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Behold, I [am] bringing [such] evil upon Jerusalem and Judah, that whosoever heareth of it, both his ears shall tingle. and so
First Chronicles 5:26 writes: And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day. and this one ought to be on bumper stickers and t-shirts everywhere
Jeremiah 7:4 writes: Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the LORD, The temple of the LORD, The temple of the LORD, [are] these. and so on, it gets to the point that when he tells someone to say something, they tend to run away to try to avoid the inevitable stoning to come.
Jonah 3:10-4:2 writes: And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did [it] not.But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry. And he prayed unto the LORD, and said, I pray thee, O LORD, [was] not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? What do I think? LOL, I think sending our fundies to fight theirs to the death isn't a totally bad idea. Edited by Iblis, : more verses, demonstrates the lack of water-boarding
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
I'm not the one missing the point. The Bible supports your theory that God is a lying bastard. Ah I see. Yes I do appear to have missed your point. I guess technically I wouldn't say God was a lying bastard because it seems very unlikley that he is actually behind these self proclaimed godly experiences. Rather I would say that those claiming to have conversed with him are engaging in dangerous wishful thinking at a minimum and are quite possibly lunatic deluded fanatics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Granny,
Granny Magda writes: I don't care whether your chosen definition is the original meaning or whether you simply pulled it out of your ass. Your definition is unable to correctly identify the Pope as a Christian. therefore, you are wasting my time with meaningless noise. So it doesn't matter to you what the meaning of the word is. You have your mind made up as to what you believe and the truth will never change your mind. Fine that is your choice. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
ICANT writes: So it doesn't matter to you what the meaning of the word is. It matters what the meaning of the word is in the sense of everyone meaning the same thing. Of less importance is your attempt to apply your own personal meaning that is contradictory to what everyone else means in order to prop up a failed argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2978 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
BTW, I've been predicticting the Nuking of Vatican City for decades, including here at EvC. (Iran/Pakistan/North Korea etc nukes? They all hate the Vatican) It will happen; perhaps not for a decade or two and perhaps very soon, but it will happen. I'm using both logic and Revelation 17 and 18. I'm also applying the prophecies that Islam will prevail as a global dictatorial power. To do that Vatican has to go. This will eliminate that age long rival of Islam. The two politico-religious entities have kept each other at bay all of these centuries but Islam is fast leaving the Vatican in the dust so far as prolifically populating the planet and recruiting converted children. (Buz passes the joint to, Oni) Oni: Yeah! And then, once the Vatican has been nuked, it's nuthin' but a party for Islam after that! Burka's are coming off, Zeppelin blasting from their iPod's - we'll start filming 'Girls Gone Wild - Saudi Arabia style'. It's gonna be great. Oh, and Israel is in on the whole thing, don't be fooled. Islam and the Jews hate Catholics equally. Especially catholic school girl outfits - totally off putting to 'em. The US will be fine because, well, we have the rights to all the Mc Donalds and Burger Kings - and everyone them Muslims LOVE their McD's & BK.
(Oni takes another drag.....) Soon after that, the UFO's start showing up, bring all the Mayan's back that they abducted years ago. We'll finally get hoverboards, flying cars, virtual porn, 4D IMAX movies. It's gonna be great, right Buz?
(Oni turns to pass the joint to, Buz. Buz is passed out, having smoked more than anyone past the age of 70 should smoke - unless you're Willy Nelson. Oni robs Buz for the $20 in his pocket and is off to buy more pot. Tomorrow, when Buz is curious about where the money went, Oni will tell him that a group of radical Islamic fundamentalist stole his cash and took all the pot. Buz will believe him and claim to have predicted it would happen) - Oni
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
hooah writes: What, Buz? What's that? you changed your mind so quickly? Hi Hooah. You know, I often appreciate your debate MO as a counterpart. Most, (I say 'most) of your reaponses are heavy on substance and light on yada. On the surface, you have cited a contradition in my position. My response is that as per the name and scope of the title, i.e. War On Terror is global since Islamic related terror is relatively global. It is inconceivable that after 9/11, that Nato would immediately attack all major fronts on terror. It must begin on one front, which happened to be the Taliban in Afganistan. There happens to be two major opposing sects of Islam, both involving a violent contingent as per the Koran and especially the Haddiths and Sunnah's, regarded equally for Islamic law and doctrine as the Koran. Thus all 30 or so fundamentalist Islamic polito-religious totalitarian regimes systematically and inherently involve an element of terror and violence. This has been the case since the 7th century when Mohammed wrote the Koran. At the time Islam originated there happened to be another politico-religious system, also not sactioned by NT scriptures which was the Roman Catholic Church in which the popes and bishops of the RCC, as was the case with Mohammed's relatively new religion had already become violently oppressive globally, calling the shots, so to speak in all of the major civilized nations, brutally torturing, imprisoning and killing dissidents. If there is anything good to say about either of these oppressive ideologies, it is that for centuries they kept one another at bay. Then, finally came the reformation, which essentially relatively peacefully kept both at bay via evangelization, particularly in Europe, publishing and dispensing the Bible to propagate a more fundamentalist gospel, as per the tennants of the Christian New Testament As per Jesus and his apostles, particularly Paul and John (Revelation) in the latter days, global apostacy, i.e. departure from truth would prevail, essentially corrupting the fundamentals of New Testament scriptures. Now, to get to my point, having explained the above, with the significant decline of RCC violence and the mediocrity and apostacy of all aspects of Christianity, as per the Biblical prophets, the violent systemic fundamentals of aggressive and organized factions of Islam emerge, essentially unchecked outside of military action. Thus, the at large War On Terror involves, to a lesser or greater extent all politico-religious Islamic totalitarian regimes. Hooah, I hope this helps for now. It's all I have time for at this time. I've gone at length to explain this, hopefully, in order that you don't take this as an excuse rather than a reason (as the TI back in USAF basic training would put it) for what could be construed as a contradiction.
Hooah writes: . How many Iraqi terrorists do YOU know? Sure, Saddam did some fucked up shit to his own people, but what business is that of ours? He was not an international terrorist OK, guilty; a bonafide Buz contradition ( that I was finished for now). Here in the US, where the Saudis are applying multiple millions building (trojan horse) mosques across the land; where our borders are essentially open, where secreted Islamic training camps proliferate, where 19 non-profiled nice looking Semetic looking young men, after eating in our resturants, attending our schools, shopping in our malls and all that ordinary citizens, enjoyed all of the blessings of the free world, all the while plotting the advancement of and massacre of as many infidels among us as possible in single fell swoops. In short, to answer your question, none of us know how many stealth terrorists we have rubbed shoulders with or seen. Unlike any war in history, the front line terrorist enemy combatants mingle freely among the politically correct sheeple of the free world, pathetically apprehensive to profiling in protecting populations. Providentially, one aware profiling, itty bitty isolated nation, stands alone, effectively holding at bay terrorism as per ancient Biblical prophecies.. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
onifre writes: (Buz passes the joint to, Oni) ..........
(Oni turns to pass the joint to, Buz. Buz is passed out, having smoked more than anyone past the age of 70 should smoke - unless you're Willy Nelson. Oni robs Buz for the $20 in his pocket and is off to buy more pot. Tomorrow, when Buz is curious about where the money went, Oni will tell him that a group of radical Islamic fundamentalist stole his cash and took all the pot. Buz will believe him and claim to have predicted it would happen)- Oni Oni, gotta run for now but in the meantime my response is: BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Straggler,
Straggler writes: It matters what the meaning of the word is in the sense of everyone meaning the same thing. So the popular opinion poll is more important that what the original word means.
Straggler writes: Of less importance is your attempt to apply your own personal meaning that is contradictory to what everyone else means in order to prop up a failed argument. So if I use the dictionary meaning of a 2,000 year old word how is that my personal meaning of the word? What difference does it make what everyone wants a word to say or the definition to mean. If you change the definition of a word in the English language today to suit yourself it does not change the meaning of a Greek word of 2,000 years ago. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
So the popular opinion poll is more important that what the original word means. During a discussion, yes!
What difference does it make what everyone wants a word to say or the definition to mean. Buz's claim contained the word "christian" with a certain definition. For you to argue for the use of a different definition is ridiculous. You're not even participating in the discussion. You're quibbling over the definition of one word when its definition is assumed by the context already.
If you change the definition of a word in the English language today to suit yourself it does not change the meaning of a Greek word of 2,000 years ago. Of course not. But we are suiting ourselves to having a discussion here and it depends on words having meaning so you're just getting in the way. Beat it. And grow up already.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
If you wanna talk 2,000 year old Greek then you do that. Although you might have a problem finding people to converse with.
But don't be suprised if the rest of the English speaking world treat the word you are using with it's modern meaning and include the context and consensus formed over the past 2,000 years as a given. Anyway what term would you use to describe what everyone else means by the term "Christian"? Communication is the key yes? Just to be clear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Anyway what term would you use to describe what everyone else means by the term "Christian"? A Christ Proponent?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I have to admit, after some research, I see where ICANT is coming from. It is due to christians not being able to properly identify themselves as christians. They, in their own circles, judge one another and determine who is a REAL christian. Now, us atheists, we lump "christians" in all the same category.
a) reads, and believes in, the christian bible? check, you're a christian b) believes in jesus christ as the saviour? check, you're a christian c) believes in the god of said bible? check, you're a christian It really SHOULDN'T be any more complicated than that. however, christians THEMSELVES complicate matters. let's just look here, at http://www.christianity.com/.... Christianity.com writes: So, how do I know if you are a Christian? How do you know if I'm one? There must be evidence. Jesus said, "By their fruits you shall know them" (Matthew 7:20). If someone examined your life, would they find any spiritual fruithard evidence to prove that you are a true follower of Jesus Christ? So we see that, while ICANT intends a literal interpretation of a christian, us satanic atheists are using the term generally. If you go to church, read the bible and believe in YHWH, you're a fucking christian.....maybe just not a good one. Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people -Carl Sagan For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.-Carl Sagan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
No. Buzsaw was clear enough with his context for us to know what he meant by the word "christian". For ICANT to come in and derail the thread by arguing over the definition of a word is uncalled for, childish, and unacceptable.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024