I’ve just seen the news that Charles Colson has died. He was most famous as one of President Richard Nixon’s henchmen but spent more of his life building a Christian evangelical ministry — which, long ago, was my only contact with him.
From Slate: Watergate Figure Charles Colson Dies at 80…
Charles Colson, often described as the “evil genius” in President Nixon’s White House, died Saturday likely due to complications from brain surgery, reports the Associated Press. He certainly lived a full life. Colson joined the Nixon administration as special counsel in November 1969 and immediately gained favor because of his win-at-all-costs attitude. He once famously said that he would “walk over my own grandmother” to ensure Nixon’s re-election.
Colson was instrumental in running the Committee to Re-elect the President that gathered intelligence on opponents. He called himself a “hatchet man” and compiled Nixon’s enemies list, notes the Washington Post. He ended up serving a seven-month prison sentence after pleading guilty to efforts at discrediting Pentagon analyst Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers.
To say he died a different man would be an understatement.
“He had this reputation as being this ruthless guy. Even Richard Nixon thought he was ruthless,” Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, tells the Los Angeles Times. “That is so different than the Chuck Colson I knew. He was the least ego-driven and one of the most friendly, kind people I’ve ever known.” …
RIP.
– P
From the arrogance of power at all costs to the humility of facing his own issues, to the redemption of countless prisoners – what a great man!
He made an impression on me. – P
Does that really ever make up for the countless lives destroyed by the nonsense he and others helped perpetuate?
Doesnt everyone on death row or hoping to get parole turn to Jesus.
Great man – no i dont think so.
Only to god botherers perhaps – who may see such a person as proof of their particular skewed theology.
Any good Colson did – is nothing less than he owed to others for he and the nixon administrations mistakes.
That goes for many other governmental administrations also. Even a certain NZ Prime Minister/s have blood on their hands too.
That’s a cheap shot, Ivan.
Chuck Colson did the crime, did the time (no pardon for him) … then showed with the rest of his life his conversion wasn’t get-out-of-jail-free ploy. On balance, I think he put things right.
Can I suggest you read one of his early books, as I did. The guy really turned a corner, IMO, regardless of your perhaps fully-justified disdain for his style of ‘god-bothering’.
– P
Not cheap Pete – i’ve seen worse – including on this paepae.
Its a fully justified opinion – and i stand by it.
God bothering is the source of so much misery.
Its a fact
And just like many – he made money, publishing fees, notoriety out of it.
Who ever criticises someone who sees “i’ve found Jaaaaysusss bruthas and sistaaas and aaaaaa’mmmm sorrry … praise jaaaaysssuuss!!”
Not many – if any …
Pete – Christianity and Islam and Judaism – are in my opinion the three most foul things to come into this world. A 3 legged stool of disgusting proportions – that is a testament to the mistake of monotheism and its corrupt heart.
I get uncomfortable when I read condemnation of groups as if they were monolithic instead of merely collections of individuals.
It reminds me of the words of Martin Niemöller …
Niemoller is ultimately not to do with religion or the monoliths of monotheism. Its to do with what is just and right – that isnt the sole property of religions or monotheism.
Other peoples platitudes are all well and good – but they arent legal justification for the crimes of monotheism
ivantheterrible,
Jewish – “And what does the Lord require of you But to do justly, To love mercy, And to walk humbly with your God.”
Christian – “Forgiveness is divine… We are redeemed by love.”
Muslim – “In the name of God; The Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.”
Incendiary stuff indeed. Now that we have found religion, what are we going to do with it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCAULqVQOiY&feature=related
Rgds,
*p*
Probably tell it to fuck off.
Is that too direct …???
I could produce other quotes under each heading you have dutifully churned out PMY – you know – about leaving not a woman or child alive (ammonites, canaanites, perrizites, and other unfortunates) – the absolute condemnation of Christian and Judaic belief as non-valid – etc etc etc …
Do you really, honestly swallow all the monotheists bullshit.
Watched a bit of the link you gave in your post … jah maan – do you smoke da holy weed PMY ….
The vid is almost a comic representation (as is rastafarianism) of the ultimate guiding force of monotheism … overtaken by a rabid band of ex hippies – to produce de hybrid revolution jah …
Its like the UN – without being on speed ..
ivantheterrible says:
“Christianity and Islam and Judaism – are in my opinion the three most foul things to come into this world. A 3 legged stool of disgusting proportions – that is a testament to the mistake of monotheism and its corrupt heart.”
Personally, I think intolerant people are typically ugly, be they fundamentalist nutjobs or fanatical athiests.
I quite like Einstein’s take on religion:
“What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos,” he explained.
In fact, Einstein tended to be more critical of debunkers, who seemed to lack humility or a sense of awe, than of the faithful. “The fanatical atheists,” he wrote in a letter, “are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who–in their grudge against traditional religion as the ‘opium of the masses’– cannot hear the music of the spheres.”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298-3,00.html
Mind you, ivantheterrible probably doesn’t like Einstein, because he was a Jew.
Rgds,
*p*
Still chucking accusations of anti semitism around PMY – all that mountain air is getting to you in the home of the 3rd Reichs Bankers. Rewriting of reality is an industry in the land of the gnomes.
If i ever need a cliche (that i cant google for myself) quoting a famous person (jewish or otherwise) i know where to come.
Have you ever looked at your own particular brand of fanatacism PMY …. i mean you use the “royal we” prerogative (or is it purgative) quite frequently … a fascination with reference to oneself in the 3rd person perhaps??
Is the “music of the spheres” akin to swedish love balls yanked out of ones fundamental orifice. I make that comment simply because when such platitudes emanate from the holy throne – it seems much the same thing.
Fizzy Boubelaiz …
Mr K-nish
Re “God bothering is the source of so much misery. Its a fact”
Actually, Ivan, God-rejecting has killed 100’s of millions in just the last 100 years, inflicting misery on many, many millions more. I think you need to find some facts 😉
Well Graeme – state some facts then. I respectfully suggest you are the one who may be bereft of facts but perhaps unfortunately, full to the brim with belief??. History teaches otherwise. That history reaches back more than a paltry 100 years too.
God – rejecting ?? which god – by whose definition – by what proof.
I suggest Graeme – that you find some facts – fast … (i would leave a smiley face but i dont know how to do it … hail satan instead …)
I limited myself to the last “paltry 100 years” because I find people often try to avoid this issue by saying “But that was so long ago…”
Here’s two to start with, Ivan: the Soviet regime between 1917 and 1987 killed a total of 61,911,000 (of these it’s estimated that Stalin killed 43,000,000 before he died in 1953); the Chinese Communist regime killed 76,702,000 between 1949 and 1987, though this may rise by another 7,000,000 once the research is finished (before Mao died in 1967, he was responsible for an estimated 45,000,000 between 1958 and 1962). Notice, the Chinese deaths were all in peace- time.
Yes, I am full to the brim but all too often with deeply disturbing facts…
Not sufficient Graeme – you isolate the issues that support your case. What about the church – maybe not your particular present stream of “belief” – but nonetheless fairly representative of same. You simply cant make the assumptions you do.
The british empire – The Belgian Congo – The USA genocides on native americans, phillipinos and anyone else who blunders into their paths …. The French colonies … all nations full of god botherers – espousing democratic principles and god bothering. The turks and the armenians – and the greeks – and the christian allies stood by and watched it happen. Is it all a matter of volume then that supports your assumptions.
You may perhaps be full to the brim with something slightly browny-greenish and odiferous in the extreme. But it isnt deeply disturbing facts. You take yourself and your views much too seriously it would seem. They just dont hold water.
Ivan, sorry if I’ve hit some kind of button in you but may I suggest that if you want to have a rational discussion, you drop the bluff and bluster approach? It may feel good to pour it all out but that’s not the same as offering a fact-based argument.
For example, the Belgian Congo. If you’d bothered to fact-check, you would have found that the slaughter of 10 million and maiming of countless others one hundred years ago by god-rejecting thugs was only stopped because the god-bothering missionaries there raised awareness in the West. Mark Twain’s famous efforts quoted their reports.
You’ve yet to offer one fact showing that god-rejecting has been less destructive. I’ve shown 155,613,000 deaths caused by just 3 god-rejecting regimes in the last 100 years alone. I didn’t want to give too many details but I could easily have added the 15,265,000 killed by Hirohito’s regime, the 4,100,000 killed by the North Korean’s tyrants and the 1,800,000 killed by the Khmer Rouge. And these are just the most obvious in the 20th Century.
If you want to go back further than a hundred years, we could have considered the 36,000,000 killed in 8th Century China; the 30,000,000 killed in the 12th & 13th Centuries by the Mongolians; the 15-20,000,000 by Tamerlane in India & Central Asia and 30,000,0000 by the Ming dynasty in China in the 14th Century; the 25,000,000 by the Manchus in 17th Century and 20-30,000,000 in the 19th Century.
I’m perfectly willing to confront the brutal facts of church history – in fact, I teach on them when trying to train the next generation on how to avoid the same mistakes as our ancestors. All I’m saying is that the god-rejectors are not the lily-white saints you seem to believe they are.
One of the chief protagonists who lobbied against the atrocity of the belgian congo – was not a god botherer – and frankly your fact checking is all one-sided.
Thats a distinct untruth to assume or imply that i have painted ‘god rejectors’ as lily white .. and so it is begorrah. I never used the term god rejectors or rejection … you did – you set the terms of reference and i responded to your unbalanced viewpoint. Simple.
With you – its a volume equation … at least thats the way you stack the findings or so it seems.
You didnt hit any buttons Graeme – dont flatter yourself. You still havent declared your interest in God Bothering … which god – and by whose definition?
And i didnt suggest ‘god rejecting’ was less than destructive – i didnt even use the term god rejecting – you drew the comparison and made a spurious assumption .. quite arrogantly i felt.
I simply dont view evil as god rejecting or god accepting.
Gandhi wasnt a christian … or do you have some means of claiming him for that particular way of thinking (just guessing here). I admire him – not so much a god botherer – as a hell of a principled decent guy.
Cant resist a crack at the “bluff and bluster” statement also … apart from being a bullshit comment – i could perhaps equally challenge yourself (so i could) to drop the poncy, holier than thou attitude. This is not a wet behind the ears congregant seeking the pearls of wisdom dropping from the dribbling corners of your mouth (so i’m not) … reasoned debate has to start with a basis of reason to begin with. Not blind belief in a fairytale kingdom – and weaving a fabric of facts around it as a support.
Who is your God – and by what authority does he she or it – claim to be the one rejected in the case we are discussing??
Spell it out …
Re the Belgian Congo, I was simply responding to your bizarre claim that the misery there was caused by god-botherers. Instead of acknowledging that the slaughter and maiming was indeed by god-rejecters, you argue that “one of the chief protagonists who lobbied against the atrocity of the belgian congo – was not a god botherer”! You’ve completely missed the point, Ivan – who conducted the slaughter? God-botherers?
Re “– and frankly your fact checking is all one-sided.”
I’m still waiting for you to present a fact so that I can check it for you. And I’ve yet to hear any refutation of the data I gave you as you requested – as I see it, ad hominem attacks don’t count as factual.
No i didnt make such a ‘bizarre claim’ … but they were / are a supposedly christian nation – and many missionaries from all the great empires have assisted and abetted the slaughter, genocide and misery.
You arent reading any of this correctly because you are coming at it from a one eyed viewpoint.
I have no obligation to exchange volume figures with you Graeme … i know my history and i dont need your biased viewpoint. Im not attempting to either engage with you – or convince you. You are welcome to your viewpoint even if it is rubbish.
I’ve challenged you to define your standpoint and you dont do it. How can you define your approach as factual – i could produce figures out of thin air if i wanted to. And who the hell was around in the time of Tamerlane to produce hard data?? Sounds a little “protocols of the elders of zion” to me.
Of course god botherers conducted slaughter – in all sorts of place – so did atheists and among the god botherers were Xtians, muslims, sodomites, Jews – and lets not forget all that lovely “smiting” in the old testament.
You said that God rejecters were the main example of mass deaths etc etc etc .. you need to define what you mean by Godbotherers.
Who is the god you turn to – and you recommend as the one who will save us from future mass murder and atrocity. Is it Allah – Jehovah – or the Easter Bunny.
By what definition do you make your claims.
You seem to have forgotten your bizarre claim so I’ve copied it for you – “What about the church… The british empire – The Belgian Congo – The USA genocides on native americans, phillipinos and anyone else who blunders into their paths …. The French colonies … all nations full of god botherers – espousing democratic principles and god bothering”
So, were you or weren’t you saying the genocide in the Belgian Congo was caused by “god-botherers”. If not, why don’t you say what you do mean?
Re “I have no obligation to exchange volume figures with you Graeme … i know my history and i dont need your biased viewpoint.”
Since you obliged me to come up with some facts for our discussion, I would have thought you’d at least present some evidence for your case. Put up or shut up, as they say?
Re Tamerlane figures etc, these were established using population records from the time. Does your view of history not need data?
Re the God I serve, I’m a disciple of Jesus of Nazareth, trying to follow His commands that we love even our enemies. My interest in genocide is based on my interest in what happens when we don’t.
If thats a bizarre claim graeme – then i’m a monkeys uncle. Its very clearly worded and it doesnt imply whay you say it does.
I say again – you are not reading correctly and thats the stone end of it. Accept it as such and move on. I suspect you have a problem with not being the ‘one on top’ in any given circumstance.
You are clearly angry and pissed off and thats your problem not mine. If you have direct access to population records of the time of tamerlane and accept them as accurate thats ok by me. “Gentle Jesus meek and mild” is an often used front for something far less than tolerant. I cite your old testament as an example and Saint Paul as a more recent archetype as well.
And Graeme – you challenged me at the outset saying i “needed some facts” or words to that effect.
I didnt oblige you to produce “facts” – you instigated the exchange … i simply challenged you in turn to find some of those facts (as yet unpresented) that you said i didnt have (my head hurts already).
Figures – like much on the net and in wikipedia are not qualified by quotation as undeniable fact.
You’ve already previously informed me that i’ve apparently implied that….” the god-rejectors are not the lily-white saints you seem to believe they are.” – when in fact i said nothing of the sort. At that point – you hadnt even done me the courtesy of spelling out exactly what god you followed – and therefore – what your definition of god-rejector was??
Confused – you probably are.
Dont blame me – thats all.
Ivan, have you noticed how often you dodge questions? All I asked for was clarification – “were you or weren’t you saying the genocide in the Belgian Congo was caused by god-botherers?” So, were you or weren’t you?
And I’m not at all angry – I’m a little surprised that someone as smart as you seem to be would be satisfied with using ad hominem attacks rather than any kind of factual rebuttal.
Re “i simply challenged you in turn to find some of those facts (as yet unpresented)”
If I haven’t yet presented any, why did you reply “I have no obligation to exchange volume figures with you Graeme”? Are “volume figures” non-factual in your world?
Re “you challenged me at the outset saying i “needed some facts”. Do you think that might possibly be because you had just said,“God bothering is the source of so much misery. Its a fact”? That your claim to be factual might oblige you to produce one or two as evidence? Or should we just accept your dogma as authoritative?
Re “Figures – like much on the net and in wikipedia are not qualified by quotation as undeniable fact”, I agree. My data is based on the published research of Rudolph Rummel, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Hawaii. If you were to present any facts, what would yours be based on?
Re “Gandhi wasnt a christian… [but] a hell of a principled decent guy.”
I wholeheartedly agree with you. He said it was due to his seeking God and trying to live out what Jesus taught. That seems great to me.
Graeme – and this is the last response i will give simply because you seem to be on the ropes and clutching at straws …..
#1 Dodging Questions – take a look at yourself mate … how long did it take you to define your God and definition of same. You had to be forced to do so – you knew the ground you were on and that it was shaky
#2 Your query regarding belgian congo … i will not clarify anything for you according to your quite strange request … it is very clear in my responses and in the original statement – i am surprised you cannot see it. I refer to the length of time it took you to pluck up the courage to outline your belief system – although i see in a reference pete has provided you have been more forthcoming in 2010 than you seem to be in 2012
My statements are clear – if you cant see it im not going to waste my time clarifying further. What do you think each word and sentence i’ve offered on the subject means Graeme … “break it all open” and let us see your superior skills at correctly dividing the words as it were …
#3 Your eventual citing of facts – which i presume will be backed up by a bibliography that is traceable and verifiable …. is neither here nor there. it wasnt what i was really saying and you know it – you are now choosing to focus on jots and tittles – and frankly more tittles than jots.
You are perhaps a spider Graeme – you weave a web for others based on doctrine, preconceptions and distinct interpretations … that can be re-moulded at a moments notice if a person happens to spot the inconsistencies of your stance. You complicate your viewpoint (or so it seems) to trap the unwary. Much like a pollster does – ‘massaging’ his figures and his spin. Layer upon layer of carefully constructed thinking – all based ultimately on a fairytale kingdom. You are a pollster – a sampler and massager of data for god perhaps – only you know the truth – and you rewrite history for the unwary.
Ghandhi – so was he a christian Graeme – give me chapter and verse – the full and good oil. Was he then a god-rejector – or otherwise. Or is that covered by the statement “he is who is not against me is for me…” Doesnt that mean also that some of the so called god rejecting situations may also have mitigating factors?? Or does it all become too complicated for you.
You may be a “line upon line – precept upon precept” practitioner or so it may seem?
Have you ever noticed how you dodge questions Graeme?
I have.
Give us all a complete verifiable bibliography of the genocides you provide figures for. While on that project – give us corresponding figures for those genocides under the auspices of supposed godbotherers – or tell us all why you think that doesnt apply or never happened?
So – ad hominem attacks – not at all.
I suggest you go back – read it all again and simply admit defeat. your practiced skills avail you naught in this instance …
Why is this the last comm with you directly … anyone who wants to waste their time trading data with you (and i could if i was bothered) is doing just that – wasting their time. You have a religiously biased and driven, volume based approach – linked to questionable research – and i really cant be bothered explaining that assertion any further. One could (I suspect) waste hours and days fruitlessly dialoguing with yourself on such issues i sincerely believe … and i trust my instincts.
Its a pointless exercise.
Think about it Graeme – think about it very carefully.
Re #1, I’ve happily answered every question you’ve asked, Ivan, starting from your initial demand for facts, and more facts, and more facts, right through to my faith. You’ve not answered one, either to support or clarify your dogmatic assertions with one, single, tiny, little piece of evidence. Just read the thread and show me one, but given your behaviour so far, you won’t do that.
Re #2, why don’t you just answer the question instead of trying to pretend that your bluff isn’t a bluff? The cards are there for all to see, Ivan.
Re #3, my “eventual citing of facts” actually began as soon as you asked for some. It’s just your continuing denial, that “figures” are not “facts”, that caused you not to see them for so long 😉
Re “Ghandhi – so was he a christian Graeme – give me chapter and verse”, no, not when he wrote his autobiography in 1929. “M.K. Gandhi, An Autobiography”, Penguin Books, 1983, p. 17, 156-157. As I said earlier, he sought God (which I understand you label god-bothering) and tried to live out what Jesus taught. However, he wasn’t assassinated until 20 years later so who knows?
Re “Your eventual citing of facts – which i presume will be backed up by a bibliography that is traceable and verifiable”, yes. I’m about to publish a book literally full of these facts with a bibliography.
So, I’ve once again answered all your questions while you’ve avoided all of mine. Do you think you could at least answer this one – is your claim to be a monkey’s uncle just because you’re a devout evolutionist or is there some falsifiable evidence? 😉
Well i promised myself – “self” I said “I will not engage this fanatic any further…” but inner monologues dont always win …
Graeme – if i took the time to answer every single one of your deliberate misinterpretations, narrow conceptions etc etc – i would be trapped on a merry-go-round. You like to pull the strings … thats quite obvious.
You havent happily answered questions Graeme. You feel distinctly threatened – and you are reacting accordingly.
Gandhi …. im an admirer of the man. I asked you to define what you termed a “god-botherer” if you will recall – i didnt venture too much by way of description. You still havent and you never will – because you have a template already mocked up that everything must fit into. You can never be engaged with … unless one is willing to submit to your blindness. There is a distinct darkness and retreat into a deathlike state about your approach Graeme. Your views are without hope – simply because they are based on a fairytale and a requirement that one should believe as you do. One must “do the soviet norm” as the Graemes of this world view it to be so.
Or thats how it appears.
Monkeys uncle is a humorous turn of phrase – to define a certain state of being … just so we are both clear on that issue.
You are threatened Graeme – and you are now carrying some very clear questions in your own mind i suspect. Mop your brow – lick the top of your lip – and put it all down to experience. Your sense of certainty is the very thing that lets you down.
And no amount of smiley faces will convince me that you are not deep down – as ruthless in pursuit of your aims as any fanatic that ever lived – even if it flies in the face of reality.
I’m no admirer of wikipedia.
I would be very interested in an interpretation of the text however … if some guru could interpret and bring light to my lack of understanding …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi
Do i trust whats on the net … no – do i trust assertions made on net or on blogs as gospel (pardon the expression) – no.
Gandhi is to me – a living saint and always has been. To you Graeme – he is merely a means to an end … or so it seems to me … yet another notch in your arrogant and unseemly godbothering ‘belt’. A living breathing way of you misrepresenting reality to people willing to swallow your bullshit and propaganda.
Re “You havent happily answered questions Graeme. You feel distinctly threatened – and you are reacting accordingly.”
When you’re writing your c.v., Ivan, I wouldn’t include mind-reader 😉 I love a good discussion as it provides great opportunity for us all to understand ourselves.
For example, have you noticed how you’ve once again studiously avoided questions and giving any evidence at all for your dogma while accusing me of doing so? This is called projection, a “psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people”.
So when you define me as “feeling distinctly threatened”, this can mean that is your own situation. Since I don’t feel threatened at all, this may help you understand yourself better.
Re “I would be very interested in an interpretation of the text” about Gandhi, I would suggest using Wikipedia only as a means of tracking down original sources. Nothing beats reading a man’s thoughts as he expresses them rather than second-hand. His autobiography is a great place to start as well as a thoroughly enjoyable read.
And Graeme – lets never forget the extremists of the dutch reform persuasion (quite fundamentalist and evangelical) in South Africa.
The “Children of Ham” i think it was … hewers of wood and drawers of water or somesuch thing.
They didnt give many people the ‘deep six’ like Mao or Stalin – but hell – would you kill your enslaved workforce.
Pull the other one graeme – its got bells on. You are advocating for your own particular narrow viewpoint. Just like “Saint Cyril” all those hundreds of years ago – to justify your view of what constitutes “God”. Be honest – and spell out exactly what your viewpoint of God is and what you stand for. Dont just hint at it with soundbites – tell us what you really mean by “God”.
Alleged “god rejection” is no reasonable argument to provide a reasoning for the evil perpetrated by men and women in pursuit of ideologies. Thats all religion and godbothering is – fanatical one-eyed ideology. The politics of faith.
Truth has nothing to do with it – or so it would seem.
And my own “own particular narrow viewpoint” is…? I find it astonishing that before you even ask me what I believe you’ve already condemned me. You would may made a great Grand Inquisitor, Ivan 😉
Well i was just casting about here – you may need to look closely mate at the implications of your own veiled pronouncements with a heavily moral imperative attached to them.
Your viewpoint does appear narrow .. god rejection (as yet undefined – particularly as related to your own brand of god bothering – also undefined) is the epitome of evil – with outcomes to boot … or thats the way you paint it. then you weave “facts” to support same?
No condemnation – just an observation.
Sorry if I sound “heavily moral” to you, Ivan – it’s just that I can’t see how hundreds of millions being killed by their own leaders or governments is a good thing.
Graeme – mate – i NEVER said hundreds of millions being killed is a good thing. Quite obviously it isnt – just be careful where you lay the blame thats all!. I dont believe in your type of God (of which point im fairly certain) … give you an example … i’ve been accused of anti semitism on here twice now, simply because i used an analogy of me spraying my barbecue each summer and seeing cockroaches coming out helter skelter – and applying that to what was at the time happening with the Key Regime when certain matters were exposed … ie like scuttling cockroaches…
Both Pete and Poormastery were convinced i was a budding anti semite as a result, despite my best attempts at further explaining my comments??
And by the way – the inquisition and the post of inquisitor was a christian invention – and not just by the catholics either.
And as per the anti semitic issue … im suggesting that the ‘assumption’ by parties of anti semitism is akin to “having a dirty mind – and making the wrong assumption of a dirty outcome…” or similar.
Spraying flyspray (Gassing) Cockroaches (undesirables per the nazis .. ie Jews and the holocaust).
Political Correctness (or to quote poormaster “ignorance” – has a lot in common with narrowminded religiosity i think.
And – as a footnote … i understand that during the rise of the 3rd Reich … that the Lutheran Church was hand-in-glove with the Nazis barring some who stood for truth (such as Niemoller) – and indeed surprisingly – many Catholic brethren also stood against the regime. But …. and it is historical fact – many of Christian and faith based persuasion supported the regime.
What about Bosnia – and the balkans both after the First War and particularly in the 20th Century … Christians massacring Muslims and so on??
Are these God-rejecters by definition – or are we now forced to split hairs – make angels stand on pinheads and begin the circumlocutions of christian apologetics perchance? It then becomes a situation where only the stupid apparently dont understand the pronouncements of those much more wise than we are. Much like Key and his cronies present to the electorate currently.
Truth is – the world is full of nasty bastards who like to murder, rape and pillage. They all generally all have a god – its just you have to work out what and or who that God is.
“Truth is – the world is full of nasty bastards who like to murder, rape and pillage. They all generally all have a god – its just you have to work out what and or who that God is.”
Now we’re getting somewhere – I wholeheartedly agree with you. My point is that virtually everywhere we have rejected God, we have worshipped gods, especially atheistic political leaders and killed hundreds of millions.
Got to disagree there – we havent rejected god everywhere at all. What is defined as god. We’ve rejected right thinking and right behaviour in SOME instances.
God isnt interested if he in fact even exists. Your assumptions are always heavily loaded with a bolt on doctrine that just leaves me cold.
It cant be reasoned debate when you already have readymade conclusions that are unquestionable in your own mind.
I think I can help you here, Ivan. If you’ll just let go your readymade conclusions, receive some new data, we could have a discussion… 😉
Readymade conclusions Graeme are not my stock in trade.
And of course the pilgrims of pocahontas fame and the Mayflower era. Christian Godfearing folk – of the fundamentalist genre escaping religious discrimination in Mother England … came to the New World and proceeded to discriminate against, and indeed,to eventually commit genocide on men women and children – because they were illiterate heathens … savages.
God has a lovely record to bear testimony too. God is a murderer and a sadist by the testimony of history. A ruthless bystander chuckling over human degradation and misery. And all people like you seem to do – is provide a John Key type of spin that makes him look better than “he”deserves. Shame on him and you.
I once heard a man tell me and a group of others – “karl marx got his template from the Gospels …. etc etc” The man that said that – was a prominent Christian Preacher.
ivantheterrible, you ask,
“Do you really, honestly swallow all the monotheists bullshit.”
I am not personally religious.
Nonetheless, poormastery simply finds intolerant people (funda-mentalist athiests) a monumental bore and also ignorant, to boot.
Out of interest, ivantheterrible, can you hear the the music of the spheres?
Rgds,
*p*
Self analysis is always a recommended option PMY. Pots and Kettles – GlassHouses and all that jazz.
What do you define as the music of the spheres (laying aside swedish loveballs as an interpretation)?
Let me quote a favourite passage of mine from Wordsworth …
“The Sounding Cataract
Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,
The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood,
Their colours and their forms, were then to me
An appetite; a feeling and a love,
That had no need of a remoter charm,
By thought supplied . . .”
Who said i was an athiest. Just because i dont embrace monotheism doesnt define me as an atheist.
Naughty, naughty, presumptuous PMY … tsk tsk ….
Ivan, you said here
“Both Pete and Poormastery were convinced i was a budding anti semite …”
Convinced? That’s news to me.
I asked you if you were ‘trying to float an anti-semitic boat’, based on your comment in the ‘Teflon John Key under pressure over tape’ thread.
You said no. End of ‘controversy’ from my POV.
You do, if I may say so, seem to like poking around in that anti-semitic neighbourhood, but given your overt declaiming of such bigotry, I read it as provocative or mischievous … which is also, I confess, how I read your engagement on this ‘Religion: a force for good or ill?’ question I so innocently seem to have engendered by marking Chuck Colson’s passing.
Peace.
– P
The engagement on any of these issues has not been of my instigation.
However i have in both cases responded when queried.
The anti semitism issue has been raised again – in this thread – by implication – by poormastery – not me.
Provocative – no – mischievous – no.
As a footnote – i did respond to you (in the thread quoted by you) re the Anti semite thing with a rounded explanation – you responded quite cryptically at the time … and soon after that poormastery commented that ‘he too was alarmed (paraphrase) at my anti-semitic comments…’ to which i also responded with a rebuttal reference … but no response from you. So i sort of feel perhaps with some justification its not quite resolved. Maybe i am poking around in that area – maybe its because as with Graeme … its not really about whats said (or written) but more – what is left unsaid that really may matter.
From Bryce Edwards’ digest NZ Politics Daily today (emphasis added):
Heh, I can see what he means…
– P
Having said all i have said thus far – to both Poormastery (PMY) and Graeme i’ll venture in closing the following observations from my own point of view and pure opinion (all i have ever ventured are opinions – nothing more…) …
#1 I believe something extraordinarily evil and “engulfing” is approaching our world – and it will affect NZ
#2 That great evil is exemplified and demonstrated in our current Government and its conduct – and was also exemplified by the Clark Regime as well and the previous Governments ranging right back to the Lange Govt of 1984
#3 Anyone with reasonable intelligence should look at what is happening in Greece currently and discipline themselves not to reach immediately for the wrong conclusions (as the NZ right wing will do …straight away like fools and lemmings). ie Socialism did not cause what has happened at all – we should all – i believe – be taking very careful note of what is now beginning to unfold
#4 Intolerance is about to rush in like a philosophical tsunami – but for very good reasons that are indisputable. It all begins and ends with blocs of people believing that they alone have the correct religious and cultural and racial imperatives for how life and politics should be outworked.
We are back in the years between 1919 and 1939 once again. I’ll leave it to others to determine which part of that continuum we are now on.
To quote the German movie “Stalingrad” … in a scene where a wehrmacht padre is addressing a group of soldaten about to depart from leave in Italy to the Eastern Front – the Padre states that the motto on the soldiers belt buckles is “Gott mitt uns” (God with us) … to which one of the veteran members ex the Afrika Korps retorts “Nein Scheisse…” (no shit).
That about sums it up.
Thanks for sharing.
Here’s a blog post I wrote in 2010 about the “God is on OUR side” and “Holy warriors” aspects — sparked a bit of discussion at the time:
http://www.thepaepae.com/god-is-on-our-side/8882/
– P
Thanks Pete – i should have added into this para …
#4 Intolerance is about to rush in like a philosophical tsunami – but for very good reasons that are indisputable. It all begins and ends with blocs of people believing that they alone have the correct religious and cultural and racial imperatives for how life and politics should be outworked.
“… religious and cultural and economic and racial imperatives ….”
The right wing and the neo liberals wont see themselves as part of the cause with their thatcherite, reaganite bumbling and meddling, creating monsters like Pinochet etc … they’ll most likely come out of it all on top again just like they did after WW1 and WW2. Or just maybe – someone or something will finally tell them to get their grubby mitts off humanity.
And i have to admit i find Colin Craig nauseating. Patronising Godbothering arrogant prick and other expletives and vivid colourful descriptions spring to mind.