1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

The sad end of William Tyndale

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by daniel, Mar 6, 2010.

Page 2 of 2
  1. TonyPSchaefer

    TonyPSchaefer Your Friendly Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    14,816
    2,498
    66
    Location:
    Far-North Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    That wasn't supposed to be.
     
    #21 TonyPSchaefer, Mar 7, 2010
  2. jayman

    jayman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    13,439
    640
    0
    Location:
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    :eek:

    Um .... WOW tough crowd there, Tony

    BTW my Emergency Fund To Get Daniel Laid now stands at $537. It *would* be at $844, but a certain forum member and medical doctor VERY conveniently forgot to sign or date his check

    Cute
     
    #22 jayman, Mar 8, 2010
  3. octavia

    octavia Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    968
    137
    10
    Location:
    Beautiful Oregon
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    III
    I've been trying to stay out of controversial threads. Hell with that.

    Sure it has. When people were being burned at the stake, religion and politics were intermixed. They were the same. Today they are not, but I think few would disagree that if todays politicians could figure out some way to scare the general public into burning their opponents at the stake and get away with it they would. Those guys in the medieval days were geniuses. Political geniuses. As Daniel so eloquently points out they got people to think that translating an extreme pacificst, socialists story into new languages was bad. They convinced people that sharing information about good things was bad.

    There are many many other groups of people throughout history that have been equally or more blood thirsty. My guess is that the blood thirsty part is a reflection of the humans involved and where any particular society is in the process of evolving. I think you will find that universal, regardless of religious doctrine.

    Again, not a Christian specific thing. Many of our soldiers that are being "admired" are not Christians. We live in a country that supports freedom of religion.
    Some Fundamentalist Muslims believe you get extra kudo's for killing more people that don't believe as you do. I could quote tribes, cultures, and societies both past and present, and bore you to tears showing examples of how people, regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof, work to justify killing each other.

    He's my favorite socialist for sure.
    Maybe Carl Marx read that same book Tony,

    "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
    ~Marx
     
    #23 octavia, Mar 8, 2010
  4. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Agreed. But where the Jewish scriptures are full of god telling the Jews to attack a city and kill every man, woman, child, and animal in it, and the Qur'an seems to say war is an acceptable way to make converts, Jesus's message was clearly and explicitly a message of peace, and then this dipshit Paul comes along and says "Ignore everything Jesus said and just believe he was god," and for the most part, Christians follow Paul instead of Jesus, and are as bloodthirsty as all the religions whose scriptures tell them to kill people. They figure a mass rapist-murder-child-molester will go to heaven if he believes that Jesus was god, and they tell me I'm going to hell for believing in evolution!!! (Yes, I was told exactly that by the Pentacostal chaplain at Sandstone FCI!) That is just WEIRD!!!

    Most Americans, raised on the anti-communist propaganda of the cold war, are unaware of this, but Karl Mark actually felt that religion was a good thing. He called it "the heart of a heartless world." It was churches, as repressive institutions that he hated.

    The full quote is:

    That quote is misunderstood today because the general view of opium has changed. In the 1800's opium was seen as a miracle drug for both physical and emotional pain. It was considered a good thing. Today we understand the negative aspects of addiction. But when Marx wrote that line, he was writing under the universally-accepted notion that opium was good.

    So now anti-communists quote the first half, and leave off the last half, and in our modern context it looks like Marx is disparaging religion, when in fact he was praising it. As long as we keep in mind the difference between religion and institutional churches that manipulate people and take their money and brainwash them into accepting an unjust economic system.
     
    #24 daniel, Mar 8, 2010
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2