Make the Conspiracy Explicit in this Forum

Please keep in mind that there are several other places across ATS and its sister sites where religion can be discussed.

Religion in Government Issues
Faith, Spirituality & Theology

There is also a
Philosophy forum, but keep in mind that one can make a distinction between religion and philosophy.

There is also the
Other Ideologies forum. It would be appropriate to discuss, say, Phalangism or the Sacredotal State in that forum, or any Teleocratic/Theocratic governments/parties there.

There are a number of other forums where religion of course can come up, as long as its relevant to the domain of the forum.

This forum is specificially for conspiracies in religion.
When starting a post in it, make the conspiracy specific and explicit. Name the conspiracy, talk about its motives, its effects, its methods. Don't make the conspiracy merely implicit.

So the RCC protecting child-molesting priests is an accetpable topic.

A debate about whether or not, say, jesus existed, is not acceptable, unless the first post and ensuing discussion consider the conspiracy specific aspects of it. So you are encouraged to talk about how, say, the early church fathers excised Mary Magdelene from the christians texts and conspired to supress groups that supported her divinity thru torture, war, and labels of excommunication and heresy, but you need to make it about the conspiracy. In such a case, a discussion about matriarchal versus patriarchal worship systems, or a machoistic or feminisitic discussion itself are not acceptable and the threads will be moved to their proper forum.

On moving threads, any thread is a fair game. I and most others try to only move active and new threads. But be aware, any thread can get moved, even if the discussion wanders out from conspiracy land to religious discussion land.

Also, please do not start a post figuring that its not reall about a conspiracy, but will get moved anyway. Those are just going to be trashed.

"So the RCC protecting child-molesting priests is an accetpable topic. "

But is it also acceptable to show that "RCC" is now some illuminati agents with the mission to destroy roman catholicism from within?
By the last dynasty, from the "Good Pope" gone "bad" to the "nazi pope"?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It'd be intersting if you could actually demonstrate that, nevertheless you its a good example of whats acceptable (outside of probably trying to draw more attention to your own threads by networking them all together, but thats a different matter anyways). The conspiracy is explicit. Who's the conspiracy? The Illuminati. What'd they do? Inflitrated the RCC. How do we know" Skull and Bones symbology on the papal coffin. Etc etc.

This is by far the best posted and best run forum where "thinking" people can post.
Religion topics have a way of taking one's thinking off dis-closure, which IMO, is the greatest thing in all history and we should remember that if dis-closure happens and soon, it will put the religion factions in a new thought place? Unless it is a true religious conspiracy.

[edit on 20-4-2005 by siriuslyone]

i know what you mean when you say to keep it strictly to conspiracies in this forum, but on the other hand, there is a class of ATS discussion which isn't about conspiracies, but is just as "above top secret".

take the loch ness monster for example. there is hardly a conspiracy about old Nessie, unless it be a government coverup, yet any discussion on the loch ness monster is considered appropriate in the proper forum.

it should be the same with religion -- there are subjects pertaining to religion that are not necessarily conspiracies, but are historical mysteries surrounded with enough secrecy to make them worthy of being discussed in this forum.

Any mysterious or secretive, but non-conspiracy centric stuff wrt religion would be good to discuss in the Faith, Religion, Spirituality Forum. Its a much more 'open' forum and one can discuss, say, the supposed paganistic origins of christianity there, without having to say 'The RCC conspired to cover-up the paganistic origins'.

Example: In the Research Forum, there is a "Book of Revelation" research project, despite the fact that none of the research is conspiracy related.

Example 2: One that comes up occasionally in this forum is that of the "sons of God" and the Nephilim. Obviously this isn't a conspiracy, but on the other hand it can't be downsized to general religious discussion.

I'm not arguing -- just clarifying what I said earlier.

Originally posted by MattMarriott
But is it also acceptable to show that "RCC" is now some illuminati agents with the mission to destroy roman catholicism from within?

Yes MattMarriott, I think that would be a conspiracy...especially if illuminati agents infiltrated the "RCC"

So that is acceptable for this forum

I lost my grip on reality, you gave me 'a' Handel. I thought that it was spelt 'l' before 'e.'

Thank you for my gifts, but this Christmas all I want is my 2 front teeth.

Let us have our cake and eat it.

I'm trying, but I might as well be in a coma. I 'de-press' myself sometimes.

Originally posted by Simon_the_byron
I lost my grip on reality, you gave me 'a' Handel. I thought that it was spelt 'l' before 'e.'

Thank you for my gifts, but this Christmas all I want is my 2 front teeth.

Let us have our cake and eat it.

I'm trying, but I might as well be in a coma. I 'de-press' myself sometimes.

i'm not playing the game, but i now know that 'Umbrax'
is a another 'Hansel' leaving a trail of breadcrumbs to follow

Simon_the_byron...as opposed to Simon the Baron which would be a title rather than a rhyme of names....

hmmmm..... maybe i am getting interested

keep on