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