Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just 
browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently 
zeroing in on a new enemy?

Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified 
mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.

In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been 
entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.

Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in 
general or Germany in particular.

Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian 
fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite 
alarming.

Post a reply to this message

On 21/09/2014 16:44, clipka wrote:
> Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just
> browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently
> zeroing in on a new enemy?
>
> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified
> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.
>
> In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been
> entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.
>
> Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in
> general or Germany in particular.
>
> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian
> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite
> alarming.

Oh Yes, I've noticed that too.
Definitely the EU and the masters of that abdominal country. France gets 
it too. Anyone who criticises America is in the Devils pocket. And as 
Germany is the financial power of the EU (can you believe that the EU 
takes American companies to court?). You are Evil incarnate. England 
(I'll let the wanton ignorance pass for once) is okay because they like 
poodles with teeth. But if we deign to disapprove then we are a wee 
scumbag of an island.

In my opinion.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:44:52 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

> Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just  
> browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently  
> zeroing in on a new enemy?
>
> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified  
> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.
>
> In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been  
> entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.
>
> Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in  
> general or Germany in particular.
>
> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian  
> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite  
> alarming.

I see these "Beast" identifiers in the same light as Rapture Date  
Prophets. They keep changing their target. I think they're just looking  
for attention because their churches are running empty or something.

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message

On 21-9-2014 19:14, Stephen wrote:
> On 21/09/2014 16:44, clipka wrote:
>> Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just
>> browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently
>> zeroing in on a new enemy?
>>
>> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified
>> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.
>>
>> In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been
>> entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.
>>
>> Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in
>> general or Germany in particular.
>>
>> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian
>> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite
>> alarming.
>
> Oh Yes, I've noticed that too.
> Definitely the EU and the masters of that abdominal country. France gets
> it too. Anyone who criticises America is in the Devils pocket. And as
> Germany is the financial power of the EU (can you believe that the EU
> takes American companies to court?). You are Evil incarnate. England
> (I'll let the wanton ignorance pass for once) is okay because they like
> poodles with teeth. But if we deign to disapprove then we are a wee
> scumbag of an island.
>
> In my opinion.

you mean that the US is noticing that its influence in the world is 
rapidly declining, so if they want to attack everyone that has influence 
in the same ballpark, the number of targets is increasing?

Another explanation: a post hoc justification for spying on the 
bundeskanzler and other European allies?



-- 
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.

Post a reply to this message

On 21/09/2014 20:57, andrel wrote:
> On 21-9-2014 19:14, Stephen wrote:


>
> you mean that the US is noticing that its influence in the world is
> rapidly declining, so if they want to attack everyone that has influence
> in the same ballpark, the number of targets is increasing?
>
> Another explanation: a post hoc justification for spying on the
> bundeskanzler and other European allies?
>

Christian fundamentalists, in the States. You know, the real fruit loops.
As for the American government spying on their friends. They need to 
know that they are friends. I am sure that most governments would do the 
same if they could. The crime is getting caught.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:44:52 +0200, clipka wrote:

> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified
> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.

The thing that I find really interesting is that one of the things that 
was perceived to be wrong with John Kerry (similar to the issue some had 
with JFK as a candidate) was the idea that their Catholicism meant that 
they would be controlled by the Pope.

Yet look at the makeup of SCOTUS, look at the rulings, and tell me that 
the biggest issue of this nature is actually isn't the appointed justices 
on the highest court in the US.

Jim
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

Am 21.09.2014 19:59, schrieb Nekar Xenos:

>> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian
>> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite
>> alarming.
>
> I see these "Beast" identifiers in the same light as Rapture Date
> Prophets. They keep changing their target. I think they're just looking
> for attention because their churches are running empty or something.

Nah, I think they're just as alive, kicking and crazy as they've been 
ever since the Pilgrim Fathers; so if (or when?) another crackpot from 
among their ranks makes it into the Oval Office, I think I'd like to 
know whether I should better move to some more rural area.

Post a reply to this message

On 21-9-2014 17:44, clipka wrote:
> Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just
> browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently
> zeroing in on a new enemy?
>
> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified
> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.
>
> In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been
> entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.
>
> Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in
> general or Germany in particular.
>
> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian
> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite
> alarming.

That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most 
to be feared (probably more for its Faustian temptations than for its 
fearful aspect, despite all iconography), this tells us a lot about the 
changing role of the EU in the world, compared to the US. Alarming? 
Maybe. Changes in the balance of power are always globally unsettling 
indeed. And, Fundamentalist Americans discovered recently that there is 
an outside world beyond their doorstep. I would be frightened indeed ;-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Le 2014-09-21 11:44, clipka a écrit :
> Is it just a biased perspective caused by a poor sampling method (just
> browsing YouTube), or are Christian fundamentalists in the USA currently
> zeroing in on a new enemy?
>
> Before 9/11, "the beast" of Revelations seems to have been identified
> mostly as either the Vatican or the UN.
>
> In the decade after 9/11, Christian fundamentalists seem to have been
> entirely focused on Islam as their favorite Evil Incarnate.
>
> Now I find videos on YouTube that identify "the beast" with the EU in
> general or Germany in particular.
>
> Did I just chance upon a small subset of US-American Christian
> fundamentalism, or is this an actual trend? I'd find the latter quite
> alarming.

In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible represention 
of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any 
more.

While some of the older ones may fear a powerful Germany rising from its 
ashes, most are mostly fearful of things like paid maternity leaves, and 
4+ weeks of vacation per year that Europeans get, because talk show 
hosts tell them this is a bad thing.


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 22/09/2014 13:39, Francois Labreque wrote:
> In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible represention
> of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any
> more.

Do you want to look again? ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 22.09.2014 15:57, schrieb Stephen:
> On 22/09/2014 13:39, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible represention
>> of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any
>> more.
>
> Do you want to look again? ;-)

The Russians, maybe. The Soviets, certainly not :-P

That said, Putin may be considered /evil/ enough, but is he an adversary 
to be /feared/?

I don't think the average US-American citizen considers him a threat; 
it's not like he shows any intentions to invade the US. Europe maybe, 
but who cares...

Actually, even as a German, at this point I'm more worried about the 
potential future course of America than I'm afraid of Vlad Putin. (If I 
lived in the Ukraine - or anywhere closer to Russia than Poland, for 
that matter - that would be entirely different of course.)

Post a reply to this message

On 22/09/2014 15:15, clipka wrote:
> Am 22.09.2014 15:57, schrieb Stephen:
>> On 22/09/2014 13:39, Francois Labreque wrote:
>>> In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible represention
>>> of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any
>>> more.
>>
>> Do you want to look again? ;-)
>
> The Russians, maybe. The Soviets, certainly not :-P
>

True, unless you are bored to death at one of their council meetings. U+270C


> That said, Putin may be considered /evil/ enough, but is he an adversary
> to be /feared/?
>

I would say so.
Who would have thought that the death of Archduke Ferdinand would have 
caused so much trouble? For instance.

> I don't think the average US-American citizen considers him a threat;
> it's not like he shows any intentions to invade the US. Europe maybe,
> but who cares...
>

1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29288277 GPS/Sat Nav went down?
2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?

> Actually, even as a German, at this point I'm more worried about the
> potential future course of America than I'm afraid of Vlad Putin.

Yeah, scary as in the OP.

> (If I
> lived in the Ukraine - or anywhere closer to Russia than Poland, for
> that matter - that would be entirely different of course.)
>

There but for the grace of geography, go I.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 22.09.2014 16:49, schrieb Stephen:
> On 22/09/2014 15:15, clipka wrote:
>> Am 22.09.2014 15:57, schrieb Stephen:
>>> On 22/09/2014 13:39, Francois Labreque wrote:
>>>> In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible
>>>> represention
>>>> of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any
>>>> more.
>>>
>>> Do you want to look again? ;-)
>>
>> The Russians, maybe. The Soviets, certainly not :-P
>>
>
> True, unless you are bored to death at one of their council meetings.
> U+270C
>
>
>> That said, Putin may be considered /evil/ enough, but is he an adversary
>> to be /feared/?
>>
>
> I would say so.
> Who would have thought that the death of Archduke Ferdinand would have
> caused so much trouble? For instance.
>
>> I don't think the average US-American citizen considers him a threat;
>> it's not like he shows any intentions to invade the US. Europe maybe,
>> but who cares...
>>
>
> 1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29288277 GPS/Sat Nav went
> down?

------------------------------------------------------------
They entered what is known as the Air Defence Identification Zone 
(ADIZ), but did not enter US air space.

The planes, two of which were MiG 31 jets, left the area without incident.

Officials said this type of incident was not uncommon, and happens up to 
10 times a year.
------------------------------------------------------------

So nothing to be alarmed there. Actually, similar incidents regularly 
occur between Greece and Turkey, without anyone in Europe (except maybe 
for the Greeks ;-)) being seriously worried that one would anytime soon 
invade the other.


> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?

Which of the two do you mean - Putin or Uncle Sam? :-P

The Americans haven't seriously pushed Vlad for decades now. They, too, 
have more important stuff to do than to protect Europe's gas supply.

Post a reply to this message

On 22/09/2014 16:19, clipka wrote:
> Am 22.09.2014 16:49, schrieb Stephen:

>> 1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29288277 GPS/Sat Nav went
>> down?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> They entered what is known as the Air Defence Identification Zone
> (ADIZ), but did not enter US air space.
>
> The planes, two of which were MiG 31 jets, left the area without incident.
>
> Officials said this type of incident was not uncommon, and happens up to
> 10 times a year.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>

Yes, just what they did to us over the NE of Scotland. Which is why the 
Lightning jet was developed. To intercept them before they could finish 
their sandwiches.

Just what the Americans and Canadians did. Lets the baddies know that we 
are on the ball.

> So nothing to be alarmed there. Actually, similar incidents regularly
> occur between Greece and Turkey, without anyone in Europe (except maybe
> for the Greeks ;-)) being seriously worried that one would anytime soon
> invade the other.
>
>
Okay I'll sleep better in my bed knowing that.

Wait until I can afford some guns for my Anaconda. I'll sort them out. ;-)

>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>
> Which of the two do you mean - Putin or Uncle Sam? :-P
>

Good question. I'll get back to you on that.
Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send 
troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.


> The Americans haven't seriously pushed Vlad for decades now. They, too,
> have more important stuff to do than to protect Europe's gas supply.
>

True, like health care. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 22.09.2014 18:07, schrieb Stephen:

> Wait until I can afford some guns for my Anaconda. I'll sort them out. ;-)

Damn, you *DO* have an Anaconda?

See me grow Vulcanian skin from envy.

I really /do/ have to zap you up - and take over your ship :-P


>>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>>
>> Which of the two do you mean - Putin or Uncle Sam? :-P
>>
>
> Good question. I'll get back to you on that.
> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.

Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem 
indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being 
responsible for that.

>> The Americans haven't seriously pushed Vlad for decades now. They, too,
>> have more important stuff to do than to protect Europe's gas supply.
>
> True, like health care. :-)

Depends on which half of the population you ask, it seems.

Post a reply to this message

On 22/09/2014 19:39, clipka wrote:
> Am 22.09.2014 18:07, schrieb Stephen:
>
>> Wait until I can afford some guns for my Anaconda. I'll sort them out.
>> ;-)
>
> Damn, you *DO* have an Anaconda?
>
and 1M5 credits to spend.
Much good does it do me. :-(

> See me grow Vulcanian skin from envy.
>

I thought that it was Martians and Treens that had green skin.

There is a green eyed yellow idol to the north of Kathmandu...

> I really /do/ have to zap you up - and take over your ship :-P
>

Find me online and you are welcome.

BTW there are two empty seats beside me.
Not to mention a class 8 hardpoint.

Kerboom!

>
>>>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>>>
>>> Which of the two do you mean - Putin or Uncle Sam? :-P
>>>
>>
>> Good question. I'll get back to you on that.
>> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
>> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.
>
> Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem
> indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being
> responsible for that.
>

But if he believe that it is the right thing to do and God told him...

>>> The Americans haven't seriously pushed Vlad for decades now. They, too,
>>> have more important stuff to do than to protect Europe's gas supply.
>>
>> True, like health care. :-)
>
> Depends on which half of the population you ask, it seems.
>

Let's not try to have a sensible discussion on this.
The Americans here would probably agree it is a good thing but what 
politician ever listened to the majority when it was not what they wanted?


-- 

Regards
     One scunnered Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 22.09.2014 21:57, schrieb Stephen:

>>> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
>>> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.
>>
>> Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem
>> indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being
>> responsible for that.
>
> But if he believe that it is the right thing to do and God told him...

Sounds a bit far-fetched to me; any reliable source for this?

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 03:37, clipka wrote:
> Am 22.09.2014 21:57, schrieb Stephen:
>
>>>> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
>>>> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.
>>>
>>> Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem
>>> indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being
>>> responsible for that.
>>
>> But if he believe that it is the right thing to do and God told him...
>
> Sounds a bit far-fetched to me; any reliable source for this?
>

I put the two clauses together and the one about God is an interpolation.

Google Tony Blare and God.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/5373525/Tony-Blair-believed-God-wanted-him-to-go-to-war-to-fight-evil-claims-his-mentor.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4772142.stm

You may have to use a UK based proxy to see the last one.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most
> to be feared

In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be feared. ;-)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.09.2014 10:18, schrieb Stephen:
> On 23/09/2014 03:37, clipka wrote:
>> Am 22.09.2014 21:57, schrieb Stephen:
>>
>>>>> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
>>>>> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem
>>>> indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being
>>>> responsible for that.
>>>
>>> But if he believe that it is the right thing to do and God told him...
>>
>> Sounds a bit far-fetched to me; any reliable source for this?
>
> I put the two clauses together and the one about God is an interpolation.
>
> Google Tony Blare and God.
>
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/5373525/Tony-Blair-believed-God-wanted-him-to-go-to-war-to-fight-evil-claims-his-mentor.html

In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him 
to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told him...".

Either way, whatever his faith, he's certainly right in one thing:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Blair complained in 2007 that he had been unable to talk about his 
faith while in office as he would have been perceived as "a nutter".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And rightly so he would, as it seems.

God bless the British people for this difference to the US-Americans.

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 12:26, clipka wrote:
>
> In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him
> to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told him...".
>

Have you been promoted to 2nd dan Nitpicker? ;-)

Nobody but nobody admits to hearing voices in their head telling them to 
KILL. Unless it is at court.

> Either way, whatever his faith, he's certainly right in one thing:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tony Blair complained in 2007 that he had been unable to talk about his
> faith while in office as he would have been perceived as "a nutter".
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Too bloody true.

> And rightly so he would, as it seems.
>
> God bless the British people for this difference to the US-Americans.

And God bless you sir for your understanding.
And the old Queen Mum sends her blessing too.
Wherever she is. Gwad bless her. Lord Luv a duck

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Le 2014-09-22 09:57, Stephen a écrit :
> On 22/09/2014 13:39, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> In general, when you sell fear, it's good to have a visible represention
>> of what "THEY" look like, and the Soviets don't really fit the bill any
>> more.
>
> Do you want to look again? ;-)
>
American Conservatives are in love with Putin because he fits the bill 
of a tough president and he hates the gays, whereas Obama looks 
spineless and wants to use diplomacy instead of tanks*.

*Offer not valid in Syria.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

Le 2014-09-23 08:32, Stephen a écrit :
> On 23/09/2014 12:26, clipka wrote:
>>
>> In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him
>> to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told
>> him...".
>>
>
> Have you been promoted to 2nd dan Nitpicker? ;-)
>
> Nobody but nobody admits to hearing voices in their head telling them to
> KILL. Unless it is at court.

Unless you are a 12 year old french sheep herder and those voices tell 
you to go and fight the Kind of England.


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 13:44, Francois Labreque wrote:
> American Conservatives are in love with Putin because he fits the bill
> of a tough president and he hates the gays, whereas Obama looks
> spineless and wants to use diplomacy instead of tanks*.
>

Right, put that way I see what you mean.

> *Offer not valid in Syria.

The exception that proves the rule. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 13:49, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2014-09-23 08:32, Stephen a écrit :


>>
>> Nobody but nobody admits to hearing voices in their head telling them to
>> KILL. Unless it is at court.
>
> Unless you are a 12 year old french sheep herder and those voices tell
> you to go and fight the Kind of England.
>
>

I hope someone told her she could get her fingers burnt. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 22-9-2014 16:49, Stephen wrote:
> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
Turn around and fight.

(First heard that one on HIGNFY years ago. I think it was Ian on Blair, 
but probably that joke is much older).

-- 
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.

Post a reply to this message

On 23-9-2014 10:18, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/09/2014 03:37, clipka wrote:
>> Am 22.09.2014 21:57, schrieb Stephen:
>>
>>>>> Which reminds me. I read that Blair said that we might have to send
>>>>> troops against the Islamic State. Another Christian Fundamentalist.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, I'm not sure about that one. the IS seems to be a serious problem
>>>> indeed, and there /are/ countries that have their share in being
>>>> responsible for that.
>>>
>>> But if he believe that it is the right thing to do and God told him...
>>
>> Sounds a bit far-fetched to me; any reliable source for this?
>>
>
> I put the two clauses together and the one about God is an interpolation.
>
> Google Tony Blare and God.
>
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/5373525/Tony-Blair-believed-God-wanted-him-to-go-to-war-to-fight-evil-claims-his-mentor.html

That, in a very uncomfortable way, makes sense. Divine inspiration 
always trumps facts. Which, in a sense is exactly what was at the root 
of e.g. 9/11 and IS now. Yet, this is not just two gods fighting, it is 
one god fighting himself. Divine Auto-mutilation is probably the word 
for that.


-- 
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.

Post a reply to this message

On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most
>> to be feared
>
> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be feared.
> ;-)
>
>
Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a 
few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)

And still it seems to me, the devil is more to be feared because he will 
drive you under that baleful stare. Devil and God allied together to 
bring down the flock and make them meek.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.09.2014 14:32, schrieb Stephen:
> On 23/09/2014 12:26, clipka wrote:
>>
>> In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him
>> to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told
>> him...".
>>
>
> Have you been promoted to 2nd dan Nitpicker? ;-)

I consider that an insult, since I am the /King/ of Nitpickers! :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 19:14, clipka wrote:
> Am 23.09.2014 14:32, schrieb Stephen:
>> On 23/09/2014 12:26, clipka wrote:
>>>
>>> In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him
>>> to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told
>>> him...".
>>>
>>
>> Have you been promoted to 2nd dan Nitpicker? ;-)
>
> I consider that an insult, since I am the /King/ of Nitpickers! :-P
>

Kaiser nicht?
You disappoint me.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 15:13, andrel wrote:
>
> That, in a very uncomfortable way, makes sense. Divine inspiration
> always trumps facts. Which, in a sense is exactly what was at the root
> of e.g. 9/11 and IS now. Yet, this is not just two gods fighting, it is
> one god fighting himself. Divine Auto-mutilation is probably the word
> for that.

Nah! The gods sit back and watch with amusement.

But don't get me started on religion.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 15:57, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
>> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>
>>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most
>>> to be feared
>>
>> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be feared.
>> ;-)
>>
>>
> Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a
> few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)
>

And that is the one that all Fundamentalists believe in.

> And still it seems to me, the devil is more to be feared because he will
> drive you under that baleful stare. Devil and God allied together to
> bring down the flock and make them meek.
>

Keep them in their place? Kowtowing to the priests?

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 14:57, andrel wrote:
> On 22-9-2014 16:49, Stephen wrote:
>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
> Turn around and fight.
>
> (First heard that one on HIGNFY years ago. I think it was Ian on Blair,
> but probably that joke is much older).
>

It is a joke?
It is the answer I would have given.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.09.2014 20:51, schrieb Stephen:
> On 23/09/2014 19:14, clipka wrote:
>> Am 23.09.2014 14:32, schrieb Stephen:
>>> On 23/09/2014 12:26, clipka wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In light of this article, and if you had written "and God wants him
>>>> to...", I'd be compelled to agree. Still no sign of "and God told
>>>> him...".
>>>>
>>>
>>> Have you been promoted to 2nd dan Nitpicker? ;-)
>>
>> I consider that an insult, since I am the /King/ of Nitpickers! :-P
>>
>
> Kaiser nicht?
> You disappoint me.

Nah. There ain't no Kaiser these days.

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.09.2014 20:59, schrieb Stephen:
> On 23/09/2014 14:57, andrel wrote:
>> On 22-9-2014 16:49, Stephen wrote:
>>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>> Turn around and fight.
>>
>> (First heard that one on HIGNFY years ago. I think it was Ian on Blair,
>> but probably that joke is much older).
>>
>
> It is a joke?
> It is the answer I would have given.

Turn around and fight? Well, Chuck Norris certainly would. 
Roundhouse-kick style.

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 20:23, clipka wrote:
>> Kaiser nicht?
>> You disappoint me.
>
> Nah. There ain't no Kaiser these days.

Something to aim for, then. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/09/2014 20:25, clipka wrote:
> Am 23.09.2014 20:59, schrieb Stephen:
>> On 23/09/2014 14:57, andrel wrote:
>>> On 22-9-2014 16:49, Stephen wrote:
>>>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>>> Turn around and fight.
>>>
>>> (First heard that one on HIGNFY years ago. I think it was Ian on Blair,
>>> but probably that joke is much older).
>>>
>>
>> It is a joke?
>> It is the answer I would have given.
>
> Turn around and fight? Well, Chuck Norris certainly would.
> Roundhouse-kick style.
>

But then if your back is to the wall and you turn around you are facing 
the wall.
English is a great language.

For instance:
There is no double positive.

Aye right!


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

I say part of a YT video of about 2-3 hrs long, and it's just some more 
self-concluded christian BS, to prove that Jesus is coming soon, yes 
more christian fan fiction or mental masturbation, anyway irrelephant 
unless they decide to make another inquisition or crusade, oh wait..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2W41pvvZs0

Somebody should create laws against this kind of christian dictatorship 
on Human Rights.

Post a reply to this message

On 23-9-2014 20:57, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/09/2014 15:57, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most
>>>> to be feared
>>>
>>> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be feared.
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a
>> few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)
>>
>
> And that is the one that all Fundamentalists believe in.

Yes. Now that you mentioned this, I sincerely wonder what the position 
of the devil can be for them. Is there a place for him? Recalling Salem, 
I suppose there is.

>
>> And still it seems to me, the devil is more to be feared because he will
>> drive you under that baleful stare. Devil and God allied together to
>> bring down the flock and make them meek.
>>
>
> Keep them in their place? Kowtowing to the priests?

Not /priests/ sir! Those are the minions of the Babylon whore who sits 
in Rome!

But yes, I think there certainly is power play involved.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 23-9-2014 22:17, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/09/2014 20:25, clipka wrote:
>> Am 23.09.2014 20:59, schrieb Stephen:
>>> On 23/09/2014 14:57, andrel wrote:
>>>> On 22-9-2014 16:49, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> 2. What does a macho-man do when his back is to the wall?
>>>> Turn around and fight.
>>>>
>>>> (First heard that one on HIGNFY years ago. I think it was Ian on Blair,
>>>> but probably that joke is much older).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is a joke?
>>> It is the answer I would have given.
>>
>> Turn around and fight? Well, Chuck Norris certainly would.
>> Roundhouse-kick style.
>>
>
> But then if your back is to the wall and you turn around you are facing
> the wall.
> English is a great language.

LOL! I had not seen that one coming at my face!

>
> For instance:
> There is no double positive.
>
> Aye right!
>

Oh! that one is more subtle :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/09/2014 08:12, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 23-9-2014 20:57, Stephen wrote:
>> On 23/09/2014 15:57, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
>>>> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity
>>>>> most
>>>>> to be feared
>>>>
>>>> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be
>>>> feared.
>>>> ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a
>>> few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)
>>>
>>
>> And that is the one that all Fundamentalists believe in.
>
> Yes. Now that you mentioned this, I sincerely wonder what the position
> of the devil can be for them. Is there a place for him? Recalling Salem,
> I suppose there is.
>

As a big stick.

>>
>>> And still it seems to me, the devil is more to be feared because he will
>>> drive you under that baleful stare. Devil and God allied together to
>>> bring down the flock and make them meek.
>>>
>>
>> Keep them in their place? Kowtowing to the priests?
>
> Not /priests/ sir! Those are the minions of the Babylon whore who sits
> in Rome!
>

LOL the attitude in Ulster and Scotland.
It must be something to do with the House of Orange. ;-)

> But yes, I think there certainly is power play involved.
>

Too true.



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-9-2014 9:47, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/09/2014 08:12, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 23-9-2014 20:57, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 23/09/2014 15:57, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity
>>>>>> most
>>>>>> to be feared
>>>>>
>>>>> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be
>>>>> feared.
>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a
>>>> few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> And that is the one that all Fundamentalists believe in.
>>
>> Yes. Now that you mentioned this, I sincerely wonder what the position
>> of the devil can be for them. Is there a place for him? Recalling Salem,
>> I suppose there is.
>>
>
> As a big stick.

Ouch! That hurts! ;-)

>
>>>
>>>> And still it seems to me, the devil is more to be feared because he
>>>> will
>>>> drive you under that baleful stare. Devil and God allied together to
>>>> bring down the flock and make them meek.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Keep them in their place? Kowtowing to the priests?
>>
>> Not /priests/ sir! Those are the minions of the Babylon whore who sits
>> in Rome!
>>
>
> LOL the attitude in Ulster and Scotland.
> It must be something to do with the House of Orange. ;-)

Truth is that the House of Orange has become very discreet where 
religion is concerned but then we are talking about a different Orange 
when in Ulster or Scotland...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/09/2014 09:07, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> As a big stick.
>
> Ouch! That hurts! ;-)
>
>>

As it is meant to.


>>
>> LOL the attitude in Ulster and Scotland.
>> It must be something to do with the House of Orange. ;-)
>
> Truth is that the House of Orange has become very discreet where
> religion is concerned but then we are talking about a different Orange
> when in Ulster or Scotland...

Nope! The same House of Orange.
It takes its name from King Billy (Willem III prince of the House of 
Orange, later William III of Great Britain) during the Glorious Revolution.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-9-2014 11:19, Stephen wrote:
> Nope! The same House of Orange.
> It takes its name from King Billy (Willem III prince of the House of
> Orange, later William III of Great Britain) during the Glorious Revolution.
>

Sorry, I did not made myself clear. The same /house/ indeed, but the 
orangist idea in Ulster and Scotland is light years away from what the 
house represents nowadays in its home country, and over the last century 
its religious identity so to speak has become increasingly liberal to 
the point that the present queen consort is not a protestant and - if I 
am correct - was not asked to become one.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/09/2014 12:05, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 24-9-2014 11:19, Stephen wrote:
>> Nope! The same House of Orange.
>> It takes its name from King Billy (Willem III prince of the House of
>> Orange, later William III of Great Britain) during the Glorious
>> Revolution.
>>
>
> Sorry, I did not made myself clear. The same /house/ indeed, but the
> orangist idea in Ulster and Scotland is light years away from what the
> house represents nowadays in its home country, and over the last century
> its religious identity so to speak has become increasingly liberal to
> the point that the present queen consort is not a protestant and - if I
> am correct - was not asked to become one.
>

You did make yourself clear, Thomas.
But someone need to take the blame. ;-)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-9-2014 14:11, Stephen wrote:
> You did make yourself clear, Thomas.
> But someone need to take the blame. ;-)
>
>

Oh right! Did I tell you about the day I thought I stepped on a sand 
hump, which proved to be cow dung?  :-D

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/09/2014 15:18, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 24-9-2014 14:11, Stephen wrote:
>> You did make yourself clear, Thomas.
>> But someone need to take the blame. ;-)
>>
>>
>
> Oh right! Did I tell you about the day I thought I stepped on a sand
> hump, which proved to be cow dung?  :-D
>

No but it reminds me of the urban myth we had when I was a child.
It was a bit like knocking the door and running away. The twist was that 
you put some dog droppings in a paper bag outside someone's door, set 
fire to it, knock the door and run away.
The idea was that the householder would come to the door in his slippers 
see the fire and stamp on it to put the flames out.
For certain age groups that was very funny.
My next door neighbour's granddaughter has not heard about the paper bag 
thing.
Cheeky little beasom. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-9-2014 16:39, Stephen wrote:
>> Oh right! Did I tell you about the day I thought I stepped on a sand
>> hump, which proved to be cow dung?  :-D
>>
>
> No but it reminds me of the urban myth we had when I was a child.
> It was a bit like knocking the door and running away. The twist was that
> you put some dog droppings in a paper bag outside someone's door, set
> fire to it, knock the door and run away.
> The idea was that the householder would come to the door in his slippers
> see the fire and stamp on it to put the flames out.
> For certain age groups that was very funny.
> My next door neighbour's granddaughter has not heard about the paper bag
> thing.
> Cheeky little beasom. ;-)
>

LOL

Schadenfreude indeed when it happens. I was on fieldwork with a 
colleague and we had to cross a barbed wire fence. I thought that sand 
hump on the other side very convenient to put my foot on and help me 
over. The season was dry and sand had been blown over a dung heap put 
there by the farmer. My colleague was literally rolling over the ground 
laughing seeing me soiled up to my knee. My own laugh was rather 
sheepish... :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/09/2014 16:02, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Schadenfreude indeed when it happens. I was on fieldwork with a
> colleague and we had to cross a barbed wire fence. I thought that sand
> hump on the other side very convenient to put my foot on and help me
> over. The season was dry and sand had been blown over a dung heap put
> there by the farmer. My colleague was literally rolling over the ground
> laughing seeing me soiled up to my knee. My own laugh was rather
> sheepish... :-)

LOL
And that reminds me of...

No, enough is enough. You win. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 9/23/2014 7:57 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 23-9-2014 12:04, Stephen wrote:
>> On 22/09/2014 08:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>
>>> That is interesting. In Christian terms the devil being the entity most
>>> to be feared
>>
>> In some parts of the Christian world it is God who is most to be feared.
>> ;-)
>>
>>
> Ah yes! The righteous, angry, vengeful, Old Testamentish God! I knew a
> few of them who bowed and cringed under his baleful stare :-)
>
I have always contended that they got the old saying dead wrong. If 
there was a devil, his greatest trick was convincing people that he and 
god where different entities.

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message