God? Part 2

[Azkaban]

"I do put words in my mouth. That's why I ask you not to."

Cute. But by being cute you only ignored the point I was making about your behavior. Yuor actions.

"At no point have you explained the purpose of this "trap"."

Go back and read precisely what I wrote, as it is not what you appear to think I wrote.

"I've had the usual babble from Rainman "

More mocking. And what in Rainman's explanation did you not understand? Not that I am going to further clarify, as it seemed quite clear.

"Please, please limit yourself to arguing against things that I actually do say and believe, not things that I don't. "

Your theatrical tone and overly dramatic presentation quickly becomes annoying, and increases your appearance of arrogance. I cannot figure out why you think I should care enough about your beliefs to refute them. They are merely your beliefs.

"FWIW, I believe that Koresh most probably was an abuser of children."

Thank you, this validates the only point I was making all along. This was one of the differences between Christ and Koresh, viz-a-viz their actions. It was you who constantly wanted to talk about government actions, not I. If you go back to the beginning of this discussion you will see I was only focused on the difference between these men in light of their actions. If I had wanted to discuss whether governments were justified in their persecution, I would wish to bring in facts about Rome and Herod.

"I really do hope that that's now clear for you, as I'm getting tired of repeating it, and I'm not sure how many more ways I can paraphrase it."

Yes. Now that you have agreed with me that the actions of Koresh with respect to the actions of Christ are quite different from a moral stance, I have completed the only point I was trying to make. I was never interested in discussing government actions, only the actions of these two men.

"You have been trying to prove me wrong."

I have done nothing of the sort. I have merely wanted you to admit the significant difference in moral stances between Christ and Koresh. I noticed you never attempted to refute (with evidence) that Christ never called for his followers to kill people, or to die with him. Please, PLEASE stick with my point, not the point you have twisted this thread into.

"He spoke to women in public, he ate without washing his hands, healed on the Sabbath, he disrupted a temple...he was not a law-abiding citizen."

Ha ha. That is quite a stretch, wouldn't you say? Koresh killed people and asked his people to die with him. Christ healed people (as you, yourself admit) and never asked his people to die with him. That is the significant difference. I am done.

Are you so sure this was not another trap? Examine your own actions. We judge people by their actions, not their beliefs. Koresh's actions in 1987 were also questionable, regardless of whether he was ever convicted. Those actions would lead anyone to believe he was dangerous and could inflict harm on others.

 

[trollface]

To stop you before you state that symbols inherently dont have any meaning of significance, it was placed into the writings by the authors.

Do you know that that was the meaning placed there by the authors? Maybe that bit was supposed to refer to something else?

But, even if we assume that that is what the authors meant, I'm still left with "so what?" M*A*S*H was really written about the Vietnam war. That was the author's intent. But, what does that tell us, other than that the author wanted to refer to the Vietnam war by writing about the Korean war? It certainly doesn't tell us that Hawkeye and Trapper were real people.

You are certainly capable of understanding the difference between Koresh and Jesus.

In some ways, yes. In terms of their divine inspiration and being the son of God, no.

I have never claimed them to be identical. Having looked back over the beginning of this thread, maybe I wasn't as clear as I should have been when I said that I thought the main difference between them was the circumstances surrounding them and the times in which they lived - I was mainly refering to their beliefs and their followings. When all is said and done, I do believe that that was the main difference between them. Were Koresh not abused as a child, I doubt he would have been a child abuser. He also might not have believed that he was the son of God. Who really knows what happened over the course of Jesus' life to make him act in the way he did? The one thing I don't think it was was divine intervention.

We can't even say for sure everything that Jesus did. His life is hardly exhaustively documented. There is much contention over whether he had and brothers and sisters or even a wife - let alone who else he may or may not have had sex with. I would not rule out the possibility that Jesus had sex with children. The evidence seems to suggest that Koresh would have sex with girls from the age of about 12 or so. In the times when Jesus lived this kind of thing was not seen as a bad thing. It was considered commonplace, normal and healthy for elder men to have a child of this age who they spent time initiating into the world of sex. Wives were for breeding and love, young boys were for pleasure and housework.

Now, I'm not saying Jesus did have sex with children, or even anyone at all, ever. But I will say that we cannot discount the possibility. And we must remember that just because it is seen as wrong nowadays, it doesn't mean that it always was seen that way. In Roman times, Koresh's actions with regards to the children would be seen as normal. Lenient, even.

Context is everything. I still believe that, 6 pages later.

I can see the reasons for defending yourself with Azkaban, but dont sink to an inane level by dismissing the obvious.

I don't think I am dismissing anything. I have repeatedly stated that I do not believe Koresh and Jesus to be the same. I have always acknkowledged that there are differences between the two. But I have maintained, and I still maintain that there are also striking comparisons that can be made between the two. You cannot tell me that this is not a valid viewpoint because there are certain ideas about Jesus, and because some might find it a difficult subject to approach dispassionately.

If you use the Ruby Ridge affair as an example, it is a demonstration of acting without understanding the dynamics of whom you are trying to "arrest".

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. I'm not trying to "arrest" anybody, and I don't really understand your application of the word in this context.

However, Koresh was simply an example typed off the top of my head. Had I known that it was going to turn into this huge issue, I might have stuck with Ike and said Rev. Moon initially and not mentioned Koresh. The truth is, though, that the 1st 3 names that occur to me when I think of people who are self-proclaimed sons of God are Jesus, Ike and Koresh. And, as that's my honest opinion, I'm not going to back down on it when challenged, just for an easy life. It's what I honestly believe and, as such, I will defend it as rationally and as articluately and explain why it's what I beleive until I am presented with something that causes me to change my mind. If you can rationally attack the basis for my beliefs, then I will re-examine them. But if all I encounter is people saying that Koresh broke the law, then that means nothing to me. What other people believe is entirely up to them.

Azkaban said:
Cute. But by being cute you only ignored the point I was making about your behavior. Yuor actions.

Can you quote me where I've put words in your mouth?

Go back and read precisely what I wrote, as it is not what you appear to think I wrote.

I know what you wrote. And the fact still remains that you have not explained the purpose of your "trap".

And what in Rainman's explanation did you not understand?

I didn't say I didn't understand any of it, I said it was babble.

The laughable thrust was, if I remember correctly, that by haveing something that was blatantly nonsense that I used as a metanym because it was the most obvious and amusing example to hand, the most illustrative, you seem to think you have somehow proven that I am purely selective about what I attack, and wouldn't have dreamt of touching any of the other plainly silly assertations that were made.

Would this be in any way similar to the way that you have only challenged me about my comparison of Jesus and Koresh, yet haven't once challenged my repeated assertation of exactly the same comparison between Jesus and David Ike and Jesus and the Rev. Sun Moon? Wow, look at that, i wasn't even making a trap, and yet I still managed to make an exact duplicate of yours. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker. What's more, I "fell for it" precisely once, where I was fully expecting to be able to expand and elaborate the points and scope during the process of dialogue over the next 3 or 4 posts (until I found out that it had all simply been a lie and I could no longer trust anything Rainman said to be the truth). You, on the other hand, have fallen for your own clever trap repeatedly over 6 pages of a thread.

If my "failing" speaks badly of me, then it must speak terribly of you.

Not that I am going to further clarify, as it seemed quite clear.

So you not only send other people to do your dirty work for you, but you then don't have the balls to justify your actions? It was your trap. I want you to explain your thinking behind your trap. Not the monkeyboy who did your bidding, but the "brains" behind the operation. I'm not interested in speaking to Jaws, I want to hear why Blofeld told Jaws to do what he did.

Your theatrical tone and overly dramatic presentation quickly becomes annoying, and increases your appearance of arrogance.

Then stop reading my posts, if you find it so unpleasant.

I cannot figure out why you think I should care enough about your beliefs to refute them.

The clue is in where you've spent 6 pages trying to do exactly that.

Thank you, this validates the only point I was making all along.

No it doesn't. You can read part of why above in my answer to OvrLrd.

Unless your only point was that Koresh and Jesus weren't identical, which is something that I have never claimed and have conceeded and agreed with time and time again. If it's taken 6 pages of me agreeing with that for you to finally see that I've agreed with that, then I wonder how much you even read the posts you're replying to.

It was you who constantly wanted to talk about government actions, not I.

You cannot seperate your original charge of Koresh "doing nothing to save" his followers from the subject of government actions. I initially mentioned the government actions because of the fact that Koresh tried to give himself up peacefully the day before the stand off to save the lives of his followers in any potential firefight. He wasn't allowed. That was the initial jumping-off point for all this hoo-ha. Koresh did not act in a vaccuum. You cannot discuss his actions in that instance without discussing those he was in dialoge with - who created the context fopr his actions. It's just far too simplistic an approach to a terribly complicated situation.

You must also remember that I'm discussing this subject with 2 people here. I may reply to things that are said by more than just you.

Now that you have agreed with me that the actions of Koresh with respect to the actions of Christ are quite different from a moral stance, I have completed the only point I was trying to make.

Oh, good Lord, I would never agree to that. I don't think that there is such a thing as a moral absolute, for a start. I think everything has to be judged in context. Secondly, as I have explicitly stated already, I think that Koresh and Jesus both believed in what they were doing at the time. Whose morals are we judging this by? Koresh's? The law of America's? Plato's?

I have done nothing of the sort.

It's exactly what you've been doing.

I noticed you never attempted to refute (with evidence) that Christ never called for his followers to kill people, or to die with him.

Well, of course not. I'm not stupid enough to get caught up in your silly and petty Strawmen. Of course I'm not going to try to prove something that I don't believe to be true. Wherever did you get the silly notion that I would?

I have never made that claim, and if you're seriously telling me that that's all that you've said, then you've just admitted to being blinkered enough to carry on a 6-page argument where you're not actually disagreeing with anything that the other person is saying, without even realising it. That would make your entire argument pointless.

Please, PLEASE stick with my point, not the point you have twisted this thread into.

Dear heart. Bless you, but no. If you remember, it was me who brought the subject of David Koresh up. If you're finding that the subject that you brought up in relation to him doesn't have anything to do with what I'm saying, then I'm afraid that that would make you the one who is "twisting" things for their own ends. Not that I would ever be childish enough to level such a petty accusation at you.

Koresh killed people and asked his people to die with him.

Did Koresh kill anyone? Do you have evidence to back that acusation up? And, as for asking his people to die with him, we have both said that we don't know what happened inside that house. You have no idea whether Koresh threatened people to stay, or begged them to go. All we do know is that his followers wanted to stay with him, and that the children who were released asked to be let back inside. So you can't say that as fact, either.

Are you so sure this was not another trap?

I couldn't give a toss. If it was, then it was about as effective as the other one. In other words, it will have seriously undermined your credibility, made it so that nobody can assume that anything you say is true, and made you into something of a laughing stock, and a petty one at that.

I honestly don't care if that happens or not.

 

[KerrTexas]

 

[KerrTexas]

Do you know that that was the meaning placed there by the authors?

Yes.

In terms of their divine inspiration and being the son of God, no.

I think one accomplished more than the other, and also as mentioned before, Jesus did fulfill many prohecies that you have not had the time to research.

Now, I'm not saying Jesus did have sex with children, or even anyone at all, ever. But I will say that we cannot discount the possibility.

The reference to Jesus having sex with children is an insult and you should have thought more carefully before even typing any suggestions to such an idea. You may have placed a disclaimer in your sentence, but you are still infurring the idea as a possiblity. This is totally unacceptable, Trollface. I am not a Christian per say, but my respect for Jesus is far greater than for Koresh.
The statements you have made regarding any similarities are far-fetched and just is a demonstration that you havent a clue as to what you are saying.
If you dont have the time to do the research, than you have absoulutely no basis to make any assertions on the subject.

 

[trollface]

Yes.

How?

I think one accomplished more than the other, and also as mentioned before, Jesus did fulfill many prohecies that you have not had the time to research.

One did accomplish more than the other. But that doesn't make him the son of God.

As for the prophechies, you're right that I've not had time to examine them properly. I do, however, have some views on fulfilled Bible prophecies that I don't really have time to go into right now.

The reference to Jesus having sex with children is an insult and you should have thought more carefully before even typing any suggestions to such an idea.

It's not intended as an insult and I'm sorry if you took it that way. The facts remain, though, historicaly, we know very, very little about Jesus at all. Scholars can't even agree on whether he existed, let alone details of his personal life. And it was commonplace in that day and age. It wouldn't even have been cause for comment.

I know that this is a touchy subject, but I hope that we're all mature enough to discuss it in a calm and rational manner.

I am not a Christian per say, but my respect for Jesus is far greater than for Koresh.

As is mine. Let me re-iterate, in that day and age such things were commonplace, not seen as "wrong" at all. 50 years ago the rules on relationships were different again. An interracial relationship would have been seen as wrong. These days it's fine. Morality changes with the time. In context, there would ahve been nothing wrong with Jesus having a young lover or two. How do you feel about Plato? He had young boys that he mentored. And that included having sex with them.

The statements you have made regarding any similarities are far-fetched and just is a demonstration that you havent a clue as to what you are saying.

And yet I have seen no refuting evidence. Granted, there is the question of prophecy which I haven't addressed yet, but other than that I have nothing but people's say-so.

Do you deny that both Koresh and Jesus claimed to be the son of God and gathered followers to them? That is a similarity. You cannot claim that there are no similarities between the two, because it's simply not true.

If you dont have the time to do the research, than you have absoulutely no basis to make any assertions on the subject.

I have done plenty of research over the years. Just because I have not had time to look at the link you provided about prophecy does not mean that I have never looked ionto Bible prophecy.

 

[trollface]

I'm doing this as an additional, as I'm not sure how much time I've got, and if I have to come back to it later, it makes more sense for this to be a seperate post.

Okay, to give a couple of quick illustrations as to what I mean about context with regards to Jesus, sex and children.

First let's look at those stupid "countdown" sites that existed about the Olsen Twins. They were counting down to the twins' 18th birthday, where the theory was that they would then be "legitimate" to perv over. However, I'm British. The age of consent here is 16. So I could have lusted after them when they were 16, if I'd have had a mind. It wouldn't have made me a paedophile. A dirty old man, for sure, but a paedophile, no. Were I american, though, it would have made me a paedophile, even though there would be nothing different about it at all.

Morality is not absulote and we have to examine actions in context of the society in which they were (or potentially were) carried out.

For the second illustration, let's talk about slavery, shall we? Jesus condoned slavery. Look at Luke 7, Jesus healed the slave of a Roman officer, and spoke approvingly of the officer. Jesus condoned slavery. Now, in the context of the times, where slavery was commonplace, this is no big shakes. But if you take it in the context of modern Western morality (although almost all countrys of the world condemn slavery these days) it's utterly reprehensible.

Do you think Jesus and the Apostles were reprehensible human beings for the fact that they endorsed slavery? Or do you think that they were products of their time? Try thinking about the "sex with children" issue in that light, not with the eyes of a modern man.

 

[KerrTexas]

we know very, very little about Jesus at all.

"We"?

You exist in an awefully small world and I want no part of it.

As far as any further research on your part, dont bother.

You are attempting to justify your remarks, of which there is no justification

As far as the rest of your post; It is an insult and I LOVE Jesus. I am NOT going to lower myself to your level of blasphemy.

 

[trollface]

It's always a problem to have rational discourse about matters of religion when the question of blasphemy raises it's head. I would say that it's an impediment to true, objective research, too.

But before you get too worked up about blasphemy, consider two things. Firstly, all I've said is that we have no historical reason to deny the possibility. And secondly, you have said that your beliefs would be considered blasphemous by your church. Pretty much any stance on the subject of religious thought will be considered blasphemous by someone else. I will not start censoring what I say or pretending to believe something other than that which I do for fear of causing offence, because then I might as well simply never say anything. Obviously you feel the same way, otherwise you wouldn't share your beliefs, when you know there are those who would find them blasphemous.

 

[Azkaban]

You've really outdone yourself on this one, troll. Is your ego comforted? Do you feel protected? Even if you do, it will only be temporary, and you will need to find new victims. I hope, for the sake of your soul, that you someday seek enlightenment and ascension. You will now take your parting shot at me, since your ego always needs to have the last word.

 

[KerrTexas]

...you will need to find new victims.

For the record I am not a victim. There certainly is a victim, but we all know who it really is.
You can lead the horse to the water, but.....

 

[creedo299]

He put so much in at a certain point, then steppped back.

He had to do this, as the project became so big, it had developed a life of its own.

 

[Roel van Houten]

There certainly is a victim, but we all know who it really is.

No, please do tell me.

 

[creedo299]

Roel and Overlord said, The project became so big, that the victem assumed a life of its own.

How did it evovled on its own?

 

[Rho]

sooo foolish.
does anyone else find language fascinating? imagine if you just felt what another person was trying to convey?

these arguments bring you absolutely no where. youre so off the subject that the point of obtaining knowledge on the subject is loooong gone.

story of humanity though.

 

[trollface]

Okay, so I know the boundries of discussion now, at least. Those who believe can say what they want and make fun of and generally disparage those who don't believe, but you'd better not entertain any possible notion about Jesus that doesn't fit in with their world view, otherwise you'll be accused of blasphemy. Of course, to millions of Jews worldwide taking the Kabbalah out of a Jewish context is blasphemous. To millions of Christians worldwide the Kabbalah is magic and therefore evil and blasphemous. To hundreds (maybe thousands) of Branch Davidians, saying that David Koresh was not the Messiah (or a Prophet at the very least) is blasphemy.

So is it only bad to blaspheme against the particular version of Christ that some here believe in? Or should we all avoid saying anything because everything is blasphemous to some? Should it be that none of us are allowed to type the word "God", as many Jews find that blasphemous?

Seems like a classic case of "one rule of the rich, and one rule for the poor" to me. Shame. I had thought better of this place.

Just out of interest, can anyone tell me what the age of consent is, as layed out in the Bible? I must have missed that chapter. And I see that nobody has answered my question about Jesus' stance on slavery. The church's official stance seems to be that what was accpetable in that day and age is not necessarily acceptable nowadays. If the Orthodox Catholic Church can accpet this, then why is it such a hard concept for other to grasp?

[Edited to add]Oh, BTW, for those who are either concerned for my soul or gloating for how I've condemned myself, I wouldn't worry, were I you. Jesus has had long and bloody wars fought in His name. He has had people tortured to death over the course of more then a month in his name. He's a big boy, and I suspect he can look after Himself. I honestly don't think he'd be too concerned about an atheist stating the fact that there is little historical documentation of his life, and that that that there is doesn't mention his sex life, and therefore it's not impossible to think that He would have behaved in a manner which was commonplace in the time in which He existed. I think He's probably got enough intestinal fortitude to take that one on the chin and not get his knickers in too much of a twist about it, don't you?

 

[nicknack]

What's the point of having to continue this debates? I have stopped replying to at least 2 debates, reasons being, it is not that I do not have any now answers. But rather a reasoning to actually answer the question non-rhetorically and a roundabout.

Also the debates has continually been replied in a very much sardonical tone and mostly is an ego battle instead of seeking answers. What's the point? I rather have an enjoyable debate, make friends instead of typing furiously long answers that make no sense. Now that I know. I am going to reply with more intelligence next time. Also, I have been reading up on books from CS Lewis and am going to post later.

 

[KerrTexas]

When faced with my demons,
I clothe them and feed them,
and I smile as they're taking me over.

What happened to Beleth is a Bell-end?

 

[trollface]

What happened to Beleth is a Bell-end?

I got bored of it. And, as I've had nothing but good luck since I changed it (well, today was a bit of a bummer, but it looks like it's all fine and funky again now) and I didn't know if I'd managed to offend you to the point where you weren't speaking to me any more due to this thread, it felt like time to give it up. I've also just worked out that song on guitar (to be fair, it's not very hard) and have been playing it a fair deal of late, and as it seemed somehow appropriate for the heathen that I am, there it is. I also just think that the lyrics are nifty. It's a nice bit of imagery.

 

[KerrTexas]

I got bored of it. And, as I've had nothing but good luck since I changed it (well, today was a bit of a bummer, but it looks like it's all fine and funky again now) and I didn't know if I'd managed to offend you to the point where you weren't speaking to me any more due to this thread, it felt like time to give it up. I've also just worked out that song on guitar (to be fair, it's not very hard) and have been playing it a fair deal of late, and as it seemed somehow appropriate for the heathen that I am, there it is. I also just think that the lyrics are nifty. It's a nice bit of imagery.

I was considering the idea of withdrawing, but then realized that I had become bored beyond reason. Even though we have quite abusive debate(s) , the dynamics are filled with alot of energy and provoked a tighter thought process.

I had to get a breath of fresh air for a bit before returning to the table.

As far as being the Heathen you are, I think this had been established way before this event. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I was working on a country song long ago. Actually used to "hear' it in dreams sometimes. About a fictional country western singer named Nicky Stroub.

Then there is the Mr. Ranger song....

" Mr. Ranger, Mr. Ranger,
When he's around your lifes in danger...

Or even...Floor Surfing...

" I stayed up way too late, and had way to much to drink..
the floor has begun to move, The carpet has begun to curl
Surfs Up! I am floor surfing


( The ending of the lyrics..)
Wipe Out! Here I lie, on the floor, losing conciousness, my face upon the carpet
as my eyes begin to close,
I know that I'll be dreaming..
Dreaming of Floor Surfing

I would have to find the notebook they are written in, since I cant remember the rest of the words to the songs.

 

[creedo299]

Song lyrics Tobor The Eighth man http://www.alphalink.com.au/~roglen/tobor.wav

Web site, for Tobor The Eight man http://www.alphalink.com.au/~roglen/tobor.htm

Notes, when you first hear the theme song for Tobor, make sure you adjust your hearing to hear Tobor The Eighthman, so you don't think its Tobor The Ape-man?

Do his friends call him Tob?