 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> I realise, of course, that world peace is improbable, we as humans will
> always have something to squabble about.
As soon as you have more than two people in the world, you need a third:
a lawyer.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> clipka wrote:
>
> > Read John's Apocalypsis, particularly the sections about the Big Bad Beast
> > apparently conspiring to unite all nations against God's Good Guys.
>
> Er, right... because we can't have all nations uniting to bring world
> peace, or something like that. It just doesn't make sense that the
> altruistic goal of peacful unity could be considered evil.
>
> I realise, of course, that world peace is improbable, we as humans will
> always have something to squabble about.
That's not the way those particular type of christians you were talking about
are thinking.
They do interpret John's Apocalypsis to be a prophecy, and they expect things to
happen as described there (or as they read them to be described there).
This, most particularly, includes a world-wide government by the bad guys
persecuting God's chosen ones; only after that most glorious battle at
Harmagedon would this be overthrown, and replaced by another world-wide
government of the Messiah himself.
So whatever first world-wide government there would ever be, according to
fundamental christian's interpretation of the bible, those must be the bad guys
mentioned in John's Apocalypsis.
That's the answer to your question. Not my invention, so don't shoot the
messenger.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> As soon as you have more than two people in the world, you need a third:
> a lawyer.
I'd prefer a judge...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> This, most particularly, includes a world-wide government by the bad guys
> persecuting God's chosen ones; only after that most glorious battle at
> Harmagedon would this be overthrown, and replaced by another world-wide
> government of the Messiah himself.
Then, if the end result is a world-wide government of the Messiah, why
wouldn't they welcome this, instead of fear it? Sure, things will be
tough, and an epic battle will be unpleasant, but the final result is
positive, right?
> That's the answer to your question. Not my invention, so don't shoot the
> messenger.
Never ;) No, I fully understand that. I just don't fully understand the
rampant paranoia by certain sects of the religion...
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This, most particularly, includes a world-wide government by the bad guys
> > persecuting God's chosen ones; only after that most glorious battle at
> > Harmagedon would this be overthrown, and replaced by another world-wide
> > government of the Messiah himself.
>
> Then, if the end result is a world-wide government of the Messiah, why
> wouldn't they welcome this, instead of fear it? Sure, things will be
> tough, and an epic battle will be unpleasant, but the final result is
> positive, right?
Yeah, but even while welcoming it as a necessary step, they as the good ones
(And after all, who does *really* want to live in the times of Tribulation, if
they're not *perfectly* sure they'll be strong enough to stand the suffering?)
> > That's the answer to your question. Not my invention, so don't shoot the
> > messenger.
>
> Never ;) No, I fully understand that. I just don't fully understand the
> rampant paranoia by certain sects of the religion...
You'll never will, unless you really and unconditionally open up to their Gospel
teachings. Or brainwashing lessons if you like. Abandon questioning all ye who
enter here. I know what I'm speaking about: Been there, done that.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
>
> You'll never will, unless you really and unconditionally open up to their Gospel
> teachings. Or brainwashing lessons if you like. Abandon questioning all ye who
> enter here. I know what I'm speaking about: Been there, done that.
>
Yeah, I've had more that the requisite experience with these types.
Quite common where I live. They have a way of identifying themselves
with a key question that sends me looking for the nearest exit or escape
route.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Then, if the end result is a world-wide government of the Messiah, why
> wouldn't they welcome this, instead of fear it?
The same reason they wear seat belts.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
back to version 1.0."
"We've done that already. We call it 2.0."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-7-2009 18:33, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> I realise, of course, that world peace is improbable, we as humans will
>> always have something to squabble about.
>
> As soon as you have more than two people in the world, you need a third:
> a lawyer.
a midwife?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-7-2009 18:33, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> I realise, of course, that world peace is improbable, we as humans will
>> always have something to squabble about.
>
> As soon as you have more than two people in the world, you need a third:
> a lawyer.
a snake?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > As soon as you have more than two people in the world, you need a third:
> > a lawyer.
> a snake?
What's the difference?-)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
