It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

All Roads Lead to Rome

page: 103
607
<< 100  101  102    104  105  106 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Thats just great. Then you have noticed all the mushrooms in Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory? This is a serious question.




posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Terrence McKenna - Mushrooms and Religion, he was an amazing man and researcher, he put his money where is mouth is so to speak by experimenting, now that is the ultimate researcher in my opinion, still missing him Terrence, now that he is no longer with us and if there is life after death maybe he has all the answers, I think he may have had most of them before he passed.

If you haven't heard any of his interviews most should still be available on line if you do a search.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Thats just great. Then you have noticed all the mushrooms in Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory? This is a serious question.



I saw Willie Wonka as a child many times. As a matter of fact I still have my ever lasting gob stopper to this day!

Umpa Umpa Umpa de-do, I have another riddle for you!

What do you get when you mix religion and drugs? Really beautiful Persian Rugs!

During the greatest years of Islamic Scientific achievement, and believe it or not the whole scientific principle was first developed by a Muslim, while Europe was still under the dark ages, opium use was a major part of the religious experience.

Drugs and war, and drugs and religion, like religion and war, often all go together.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Willys Place-Pure Imagination

Yes, its a high time at Willys.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


i'm so sorry you went to the trouble of finding those as masqua has already stated that roman's (in this case, bishops) wrote them all, so your work was for nothing. all masqua is going to debate with proto about is whether it was the political figures or religious figures of rome, that wrote the new testament.



Thanks for putting words in my mouth, since I said NO SUCH THING. I said that the texts were sorted by the bishops. As in "This one's good, this one's bad and this one's OK but needs an edit". You understand the difference between authors and editors, don't you?

Pulleeeze!



edit on 18/9/10 by masqua because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


i'm so sorry you went to the trouble of finding those as masqua has already stated that roman's (in this case, bishops) wrote them all, so your work was for nothing. all masqua is going to debate with proto about is whether it was the political figures or religious figures of rome, that wrote the new testament.



Thanks for putting words in my mouth, since I said NO SUCH THING. I said that the texts were sorted by the bishops. As in "This one's good, this one's bad and this one's OK but needs an edit". You understand the difference between authors and editors, don't you?

Pulleeeze!



edit on 18/9/10 by masqua because: (no reason given)



Reading comprehension seems to be a real problem for some here on ATS. Though it could be as simple as the onset of senility that causes some much older members to exagerate so boldly in what they purport others have said.

While there was a selection process involved of which books were included and which books weren't, what is less clear are two things, what exactly was the criteria? Was it based on shaping a politically correct version of the religion that the State saw an advantage in or was it a question of authenticity of some of the books? We also have to consider as to whether there were editors or not originally involved as far as the final wording of each book. Are we to really believe that the collection of authors all supposedly disciples used similiar prose in their writing styles? How many people on ATS use the same writing style? This is not even taking into account the subsequent rewrites of the Bible that number into the hundreds.

For instance the King James version of the Bible, that word King???? Sounds a lot like King! Doesn't sound a lot like Peter Paul and Mary. Sounds like King.

Now can we say that the Pope is simply a religious figure? Or could we speculate and agree that he is both a political and religious figure?

I know very often we do hear the Pope weigh in on very controversial political and military matters.

Now stepping back a little bit further, most politically minded Patricians had a similiar career path to the Senate and sometimes to Consul or Emperor that usually went like this, becoming a member of the Equestrian Order, then becoming an Auger (Priest) then seeking some bureaucratic appointment carrying out some administrative task in some form of government office, followed often by some type of military service, then a run for a senate.

Most patricians always followed that same path, becoming a Knight, becoming a Priest, learning some Administration skills through hands on work, then some military service, doing each one with an eye and in a way to make more and more of a name for them selves politically.

When one considers that the Bible would serve a dual function as virtually being the Law of the Land for centuries to come, and we then look at the often tedious process of legislation and compromise in the Roman Republic and Senate, Parliments, and Congresses of the world, when it comes to formulating laws written by politicians, whether it was the Bishops that 'selected' and possibly 'edited' or political factions involved too, with final approval, we do know some form of selection and with it compromise took place in formulating the product, and we know this was over seen by Romans.

There for I believe it's hard to say Rome did not write the Bible, as it was Romans involved in every step of the way, and in the case of people like Saint Augustine, who played a very major role, we know that having started out his life as a pagan, and then a gnostic that certainly other things besides Christianity shaped his thinking process, as he was a pagan in his most formative years, and then a Gnostic before developing his City of God concepts and gaining the Roman Court's confidence.

Though of course the notion offends many Christians, I think its an incredible stretch even if we were to accept that the process as it is reported to have taken place, only took place in that stated way, that the Bible is a Divine work of God.

If it were and it's intent was to be such, then excluding books from it, would have certainly been picking and choosing from God's words.

This would have resulted in the same thing as someone modifying the ingredients in a Banana Pudding recipe to not say include the Bananas.

The end result absent all the ingredients in this case all the books, would not have been the same.

The message would have been incomplete.

Very much like how some posters here paraphrase and search out, out of context partial quotes to misrepresent purposefully what another poster said.




edit on 18/9/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

For instance the King James version of the Bible, that word King???? Sounds a lot like King! Doesn't sound a lot like Peter Paul and Mary. Sounds like King.

Now can we say that the Pope is simply a religious figure? Or could we speculate and agree that he is both a political and religious figure?


Huh...?

The reason the King James Bible is called that is because it was authorized by King James I of England. It is the Bible used by English Protestants and has nothing to do with the Vatican. What's it go to do with the Pope being a religious leader or not?



edit on 18/9/2010 by serbsta because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Some would say Proto is unreasonable and never considers others in his theories or investigations and lacks the ability to admit that he is wrong.

Many have bristled in this thread, at the notion that Rome rules the world supreme alone.

Many theories have been put forward by others as to whether space aliens, satanic demons, inter-dimensional beings or other ancient dieties or ascended Masters might be involved.

While I have rejected all of these, after having previously investigated these things prior to publishing this thread, that has not stopped me in my ongoing investigation to ferret out every angle of this the Mother of All Conspiracies and to report here on ATS.

Ever vigilant and truly open minded, I have in fact through recent investigation found out who is aiding Rome and how.

As usual no one would have guessed it, and I reported my initial findings elsewhere on ATS where some of it's greatest minds, both moderators and members conveyned to discuss and access the threat.

We have concluded we have found the anticipated and dreaded power behind the Roman throne, and yes, boys and girls the Rabbit Hole runs incredibly deep on this one.

I warn those with a faint heart and those already prone to fear that visiting the below linked thread to discover this hidden power behind Rome will likely leave you terrified and remove all uncertainty that the end is upon us.

I now present the ultimate power behind Rome!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Be afraid, be very afraid.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 

in the post of yours that i'm responding to, you said:



You understand the difference between authors and editors, don't you?


my response to stormdancer came from the response you had to proto regarding authorship of the fall of christian rome in bible prophecy. here are the quotes in question

proto said:



That's what's happening, Rome wrote Christian Rome falling into the Bible, just like it orchestrated the death of Pagan Rome.


you replied:


You mean the bishops wrote it in, don't you?


my thoughts were as follows: proto says the prophecies of the fall of CHRISTIAN ROME were written into the bible by rome. you corrected him and said it was the bishops of rome that wrote it in.

so is that writing or no?

here's the post where you said it: www.abovetopsecret.com...





edit on 18-9-2010 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Greetings my friends,

I think I have about caught up. The seat of evil goes much further than Rome. It is a battle that his been waged since the dawn of Man. Rome only played a part. The Bible only plays a part. Every religious document ever written contains Truth wrapped in evil.

The Bible is written as a plan for a small group of the whole of Man. Similar stories have been forged in other cultures by the same source. Anyway, I have summed it all up in another post. To prevent repetition, here is the link.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

To tell the whole story would take parchment enough to fill the library of Alexandria. However, the Truth of it all is simple enough to be found in your own heart.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


The thread itself is meant to detail the origins of the planets PRESENT ROMAN ruling power structure, which even the majority of the Theory's critics concede is hard to deny.

Despite attempts by some members to weave earlier periods of time from defunct empires and non-present power structures, and others to simply make it about religion.

It really is about the current control grid that's been ruling the world for the last 2500 years to present.

We could talk about how dinosaurs once shaped the world too, and left some kind of lasting impact, yet the dinosaurs aren't ruling the world today.

I think it's great people like to romantacize and theorize and dream about bigger things and days gone by, but the propensity of some to give life to those fears with the vaguest of references to them, without displaying how they come into play presently, is just an ode to being fearful and superstitious.

They control grid and system that governs the world is not only here in the present, but evolving moving forwards, let me repeat that, evloving moving forwards, not backwards.

In fact as long as people choose to keep their focus on the past, by using it as some kind of standard to govern the future that is what keeps people from evolving.

In my opening piece I laid out the history of ROME to the present, hoping by so doing we could move forward from there.

Yet because many poster's belief systems lay in the past, they would prefer to keep going backwards instead of forwards.

Further to hold us all hostage to that.

This is let me repeat this is, what gives the Powers that Be the edge and the advantage because they are looking forward and evolving their tactics and thinking while the people who want to romanticize and gravitate towards the past for solutions to things that only have led to problems are not.

Hopefully now that a few people have gotten their angst and resentment out the thread, like the world like it or not, like the Powers that Be like it or not can move forward dealing with the present, which we must live, and the future which we must face.

Those who want to revisit the past, really ought to revisit the opening piece, and read it through to it's conclusion which leaves us in the present, with an open ended question mark about moving forward.

Thanks.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yet because many poster's belief systems lay in the past, they would prefer to keep going backwards instead of forwards.

Further to hold us all hostage to that.


My friend,

I include the past that we may understand the future that is to come. Before Rome, the Empire was being built because Man has found evil in his own heart to form Empires. The current seat of this earthly Empire IS Rome. I am not disputing that. However, to keep the seat in one place leaves the opportunity for discovery. Therefore, it must be constantly moved, to keep the masses under a constant veil. The Roman Empire is soon to relocate. Too many are starting to peak behind the curtain. The Bible is a blind fold for the masses. All religious texts are. They are written so that you focus on the words instead of your environment. They all contain enough mystery to keep you on an endless search for salvation, enlightenment, Nirvana what ever word used for something unobtainable. This is to deceive you from the glory right before your own eyes.

The new seat of the Roman Empire? Watch carefully at the development of Dubai, the East.

Now is it more important to know the enemy, or to know how to defeat the enemy? My opinion of the matter is to know the enemy, is to know how to defeat him. Your monumental thread reveals much about the enemy. It is however far from conclusive. I think you will agree with me on that. So, with all that you have accumulated here, I must now ask you, knowing the enemy as you do, have you discovered how to defeat him?








edit on 18-9-2010 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by undomy thoughts were as follows: proto says the prophecies of the fall of CHRISTIAN ROME were written into the bible by rome. you corrected him and said it was the bishops of rome that wrote it in.

so is that writing or no?

here's the post where you said it: www.abovetopsecret.com...






Ah... I can see that confusion and we are certainly not alone in that.

Because Revelations has dubious authorship, it is quite possible that it was penned by ecclesiastical authorities such as bishops. This is not to say that ALL the books in the New Testament were written by bishops (or authorities).

let's have a look, shall we?

www.angelfire.com...


The author of Revelation calls himself John, and ecclesiastical tradition has held Saint John the Evangelist to be the author. However, in view of such evidence as the linguistic differences between Revelation and the Gospel of John, also traditionally ascribed to John the Evangelist, many scholars have been inclined to attribute Revelation to some other prominent early Christian writer. They suggest, for instance, Saint Mark or John the Elder.


Well, at least it wasn't John Smith so far. Here, an expert chimes in:


Eusebius wrote of Revelation:
"The phrasing itself also helps to differentiate between the Gospel and Epistle[s of John] on the one hand and the book of Revelation on the other. The first two are written not only without errors in the Greek, but also with real skill with respect to vocabulary, logic and coherence of meaning. You won't find any barbaric expression, grammatical flaw, or vulgar expression in them. ... I don't deny that this other author had revelations ... but I notice that in neither language nor in style does he write accurate Greek. He makes use of barbaric expressions and is sometimes guilty even of grammatical error ... I don't say this in order to accuse him (far from it!), but simply to demonstrate that the two books are not at all similar."


And furthermore:


The belief in a common authorship between Revelation and the Gospel of John was challenged by many Christian heretics late in the 2nd century and by many orthodox Christian leaders in the early 3rd century. But the belief prevailed in the early church. If it were otherwise, the Revelation might not have made it into the official canon. Apostolic authorship was an important factor in the decisions of which books were to be accepted into the canon.


In other words, the authorship of Revelations is highly suspect and may very easily have been penned by a 'bishop'.

However, this does not, I repeat, not suggest that the entire New testament was penned by the church itself.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
However, this does not, I repeat, not suggest that the entire New testament was penned by the church itself.


My friend, when one puts his word of God to parchment, does he not form a church himself, if others read the words and follow them religiously?

What is a church?

The penning of the "New Testament" by who ever IS the first building block of a church.

The word of God is not found on Parchment. It is found all around us. It is interpreted in our heart. What is put on parchment is but one version, one Man's version of the word of God. The true Church of God is God. It his whole creation all around us. This is what Jesus told. This is why Jesus did not write any testaments himself. He taught people to open their eyes and see the testament of God!

And, he lived his life to show others how to worship God properly, by loving all of it.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


The truth whether it was religious texts on cuneiform, papyrus, etched in stone, or written on parchment and paper, these things are all done by the hand of man.

If someone were to show up in the Gray Area today claiming to be inspired directly by, and in direct communication with God who wants us to know…

He would be slaughtered as insane by the other posters, and seeking attention by the other posters.

When you actually do understand how State has used religion to further its control over the populace and understand that it was the hand of man that wrote all these things, then yes you do have to ask what really inspired them? A God that since the time of the Roman Bible lands you in the insane asylum for claiming to have spoken too, people have with the help of the Church itself come to believe it is impossible for God to directly to speak to someone and command someone?

Or the State where about the only time someone will believe God spoke to someone is if a President, King or Queen claims God spoke to them?

Meanwhile thousands of years of perpetual war, are seemingly just ignored, while each religious sect involved in them, lays claim to being a religion of love, and peace and morality.

Religion is little more than a State sponsored permission slip.

How do we know this because some States have chosen to stamp it out all together, while other states claim to do everything in God’s name, or for God’s pleasure?

I find it truly sad, and primitive that the thread is degrading into a religious discussion.

There are so many places on ATS to have this discussion, which once again in fact takes us back to how religion protects the state and the power structure.

Since this thread is in essence about the state and the power structure, this ends up not being discussed so people can debate theology and ancient texts.

Primarily for religious reasons, that while they imagine that religion serves them well, it truly only serves the state well or those looking for absolution from the state for crimes against humanity.

As many have pointed out, true spirituality is found within and through nature, not through an organization like religion, and its books, who serve the state.

The notion that God wrote them, or was in direct communication with who wrote them, is absolutely absurd.

Humans wrote them, and as we have seen in Rome’s case at the very least with the Pagan emperors permission.

Why then would he grant such permission, if not for use as a political tool?

It all boils down to me, people fearing thinking for themselves and following these ancient political manipulations right on up through today, to war, to depravity, to hording, to excusing violence as a solution because it serves their notions of religious unity and dominance, and the State that employs it.

That’s what this thread is really about people.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I find it truly sad, and primitive that the thread is degrading into a religious discussion.

There are so many places on ATS to have this discussion, which once again in fact takes us back to how religion protects the state and the power structure.

Since this thread is in essence about the state and the power structure, this ends up not being discussed so people can debate theology and ancient texts.

Primarily for religious reasons, that while they imagine that religion serves them well, it truly only serves the state well or those looking for absolution from the state for crimes against humanity.

As many have pointed out, true spirituality is found within and through nature, not through an organization like religion, and its books, who serve the state.


There is a huge difference between spirituality and religion, Proto. One is quite personal and the other is a massive conduit of socio-political power. To ignore religion in this topic is a hopeless endeavor, I'm afraid, and it will be brought up as often in the next 100 pages as it was in the past 100.

How can the power structure of Rome, throughout the last 1600 years, not be related to the church and its authority?


Originally posted by IAMIAM
The word of God is not found on Parchment. It is found all around us. It is interpreted in our heart. What is put on parchment is but one version, one Man's version of the word of God. The true Church of God is God. It his whole creation all around us. This is what Jesus told. This is why Jesus did not write any testaments himself. He taught people to open their eyes and see the testament of God!

And, he lived his life to show others how to worship God properly, by loving all of it.

With Love,

Your Brother


Well said and agreed on all counts..

Tom Harpur is a fellow I think you'd be interested in, considering you statement above.


Vision Statement

Seven Principles of Cosmic Spirituality
1) The entire cosmos is the manifestation of Divine Mind-every molecule, every cell, every creature, every rock, tree, mountain, planet, blazing star, whirling galaxy and universe of galaxies.


2) We are all an integral, interconnected part of the whole cosmos and our own inner world is a holograph of the cosmos within us.

3) One basic datum underlies every religion under the sun, the principle of Incarnation. The Word or Logos, God's self-expression made manifest, has given the light of its divine spark to every mind/soul coming into the world. Christians call this the Christ or "Christ in us." Other faiths have different names or modes of expression for this same inner reality.

4) Every religion whose ethical core is summed up by the word "compassion" or "loving-kindness" to all other creatures without exception has a vision of the truth and is a valid "way" to Transcendence.

5)No one faith or religion-whatever its claims may be, alone has The Truth.

6)True cosmic spirituality is steeped in, flows from, and derives its most powerful analogies and metaphors from the natural world -- from the tiniest bit of dust to the spiraling stars above.

7)The core aim of cosmic spirituality is radical transformation, both personal and societal.

www.tomharpur.com...



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


Well then lets be honest about religion.

I will go so far as to say that the coordinated attack by a group of at the very least like minded posters, who all tend to be pro-war in the middle east, anti-Islam, pro-Christianity, and pro-Israel, invading the thread all in an obviously coordinated effort resulting in more pages being added to this thread yesterday than any current thread on ATS shows that for exactly what it is.

A group of agenda driven posters, purposefully using their numbers to turn a broad based conspiracy discussion through sheer will into a discussion on Christianity and the Bible many of whom have never posted to this thread in the nearly six months of it’s existence while most of whom frequent the same threads with the same agenda as stated above is something I find not only repugnant but evil in it’s intent.

So I think if such posters actually deluded themselves to do this out of some love of Christianity it clearly displays how destructive a force it can be in their desire to dominate others through that doctrine.

Numbers don’t lie. 10 pages added to the thread yesterday don’t lie. Posters who normally flock together are posters who normally flock together.

Want to see the true virtue in your Christian principles and beliefs, well there it is, lying, scheming, manipulating, and insistent to dominate at all costs.

Now how would a state like Rome see such an advantage in such a doctrine that would cause people to do that, and protect the state that promotes that at the very same time?

How could Rome not.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


My friend, I apologise if you perceive me to be distracting from your points. I only wish to connect them into a full picture. Yes the state is the power structure, but religion is its principle tool. You cannot understand the whole if you only look at the parts.

I asked if all your study and compilation revealed a way to destroy the power of empire. You did not answer.

The way to destroy an empire is to teach people to live without it. Then to stand against it. What is an Empire without people to Rule over? It is an empty shell.

First, Man must learn how to get along with each other without Imperial designs, the desire to subjugate another's free will. Without teaching this first, you will only create a power vacuum in which another Empire will rise as soon as the current is knocked down. This is what has been happening since the dawn of Man, and with or without our acceptance if the fact, it started with religion and will end with religion. What that religion will be is either one of absolute tyranny, or one of absolute freedom. It is only by the fear of death can a man be controlled. Making him believe you hold the key to an after life is the strongest bond of compliance. Such is the method of the control of Rome.

Now if you are desiring an end to this Empire, what are you willing to sacrifice for it? If you are willing to sacrifice dominion over another's free will, you are on the right track. If you are willing to love like your very own kin, even those you despise for superficial reasons, you have advanced. If you are willing to forgive those who have trespassed against you and accept peace with all, you are a King already and have defeated the Empire.

If you haven't already done so, please read the Plan, at the bottom of my posts. It is just an idea. An idea that if enough believe, the Empire can be crushed once and for all.


With Love,

Your Brother




edit on 18-9-2010 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


interesting. i'd like a description of which words were barbaric, otherwise, it's just hearsay. like we are taking this guy on his word because to discover it for ourselves would require learning greek and searching the maze of revelation for the offending words.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 





My friend, I apologise if you perceive me to be distracting from your points. I only wish to connect them into a full picture. Yes the state is the power structure, but religion is its principle tool. You cannot understand the whole if you only look at the parts.


I understand where you are coming from, and I do sincerely appreciate it. However having said that, trying to defeat the circular logic instilled in a faith based religion, is a near hopeless task, when the conversation focuses on letting those same people dominate a wider based discussion with an aim to do nothing but validate that circular logic, and perpetuate the system through it that allows for state to use religion as one of it's principle tools.

States employ other tools such as economic reward, or threat of fear. Yet neither are quite as effective as someone wishing to voluntarily kill or be killed for something that they freely believe in. When that same thing they freely believe in, tells them that it's ok to be killed on behalf of that thing in this case a God for the benefit of that God and the State that tolerates it's existence then you have a never ending cycle of what we have, war, poverty, death and destruction complete with an excuse for it, to absolve the individual.

So giving a platform for, the people programmed with that circular logic, to reinforce that circular logic, is about the most defeating thing one could do, when trying to present what should be obvious to anyone not thinking with such circular logic.

So the discussion goes from the obvious to discussing the virtues of circular logic.

In this case the circular logic instilled by a religion.




I asked if all your study and compilation revealed a way to destroy the power of empire. You did not answer.


They are both bad answers, one is to do the impossible in getting people to stop employing instilled faith based circular logic that excuses the worst aspects and indulgences of their primal nature.

Or the unthinkable to eliminate those thinking in that fashion, through their wholesale extermination.

While it is unthinkable to me to use option two, history has shown us, as the present shows us, that the religious themselves have no qualms about eliminating those from rival sects or non-believers. The State itself has no problem with things like Genocide either.

History displays this.

Part of the purpose of this thread is highlighting the very real possibility that a new form of control, that is not money, that is not fear, that is not religion may be about to make those previous forms of control obsolete.

This new form of control is technology, machines that may in fact within our lifetime have the power to override free will.

Or to heavily influence it. At the very least through being able to effectively monitor people 24/7 and use automation to instantly punish/correct transgression from the State's prescribed thinking.

Considering depopulation remains large on the list of possible occurences, it is my contention that the state would want to divest itself of those it previously programmed with religion, to employ circular logic, that may in fact then become counter productive to the new state.

So it's about to me any way, hopefully getting the religious in part or in whole to recognize the dangers in the circular logic they are employing and their desire to defend and validate it at all cost, because it has a high probability of leading to their combined doom.

Which is not absurd at all, considering the current trend is for the sects of Judaism and Christianity to eliminate through war, Islam.

Which is a process many of them are voluntarily taking part in right now.

How long can humanity afford to indulge people who would rather debate 2,000 year old occurences that led to their belief system and circular logic, than confront the challenges of peacefully, let me stress the word peacefully, creating a peaceful world?

Ultimately such people aren't going to have a say in that decision, because they are immersed in a 2,000 year old argument, and not rooted in the present, or focused on anything but that argument over religion and theocracy, and gospel.

Indulging them in their desire to dominate important discussion regarding the present and future with this insane and inane debate spells nothing but doom.

Religion is a lot like drug use, some things might make you feel good right now, but boy are you going to pay for them later.



new topics

top topics



 
607
<< 100  101  102    104  105  106 >>

log in

join