Iran, The real issue, An open discussion

reply to post by milominderbinder


NO it wasn't about free health care or he would have walked into the Roman capital and demanded they pay for poor people. Did he do that? You are equating Jesus' healing powers with the forced volunteerism and income redistribution of socialism and that ain't what it's about. Even Paul said everyone should bear his own burden, but Jesus message is often misconstrued by perhaps well meaning but misinformed persons.

And I'm not a "dude" for the record, but I see now you are just trying to use the Jesus meme to push an agenda. What's new? For the record YOU brought Jesus up in this, not me. Was it my avatar of Mary Magdalene that made you think to use this as a weapon of words and ideas?

The difference between Iran/Israel and Cuban Missile Crisis is that Russian nukes would have gone directly into the USA.

Correct...and we didn't invade Russia for precisely this reason, right? Unless I missed something when I completed my Master's Degree in History, it seems that it was the USSR's nukes that deterred us, right? I mean...I know they made that goofy movie with Patrick Swayze as a resistance fighter...but nobody was REALLY afraid that the Russians were going to wheel tanks into Colorado...right?

So you are accusing the US of genocide and advocate Iran and Israel aiming nukes at each other... more anti American *^%$#

Not at all. Us Americans have not been engaged in genocide since we for the most part exterminated the Indians in the 1800's. What I'm saying is that the only way you can truly defeat an asymetric opponent is to wipe out the entire population or to give up and give them whatever they want. I suppose enslavement works as well...but I just don't see that happening.

So what I'm saying is if we want to "win" all of these Middle Eastern wars we can either not fight them in the first place or kill all 400 million Muslims in the Middle East. Personally, I don't see the latter as much of an option so that means that the only REAL option on the table is not to fight any wars in the Middle East in the first place...for any reason.

However, if you refer back to my first post you will find that I express serious doubts that our corrupt politicians are capable of behaving like adults in this regard. Thus...I'm in favor of ANY deterrent to the US invading ANY other Middle Eastern country. Out of all of the possible deterrents, an Iran with nuclear weapons seems like the thing that would REALLY make us reconsider before invading anywhere in the Middle East again...but especially effective in making us take pause before invading Iran.

I think you are rite. They should talk it out face to face,, It never makes sense when innocent men women and children are killed which is what will most likly happen. I am against any and every war and wish I could protect everyone .



peace

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

NO it wasn't about free health care or he would have walked into the Roman capital and demanded they pay for poor people. Did he do that? You are equating Jesus' healing powers with the forced volunteerism and income redistribution of socialism and that ain't what it's about. Even Paul said everyone should bear his own burden, but Jesus message is often misconstrued by perhaps well meaning but misinformed persons.

And I'm not a "dude" for the record, but I see now you are just trying to use the Jesus meme to push an agenda. What's new? For the record YOU brought Jesus up in this, not me. Was it my avatar of Mary Magdalene that made you think to use this as a weapon of words and ideas?

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

No...it was foolish way you assumed only "leftists" are interested in social justice and having water that doesn't glow in the dark.

By the way...Jesus was ALL FOR TAXATION and GOVERNMENTALLY SANCTIONED WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION. Remember that whole "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's" thing? I believe ol' JC was referring to taxes, if memory serves.

I'm just pointing out how incoherent and conflicted your thinking is.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

No you brought up Jesus in the context of social justice. You are putting a contempory description over Jesus based on socialist ideals. Evidence that Marxism has infiltrated the church enough to mar the original concept of Jesus' message of forgiveness for sins and a return to Our Father in Heaven.

Remember...your the one who said that the things that Christ was most concerned about were "leftist".

No you were the one who said it. Read your own post.

Here it is for reference

Definitely leftist. Everyone knows that Jesus was a Socialist...and look the obsessive preoccupation for social justice for the least empowered people in society that he had...right?

And no Jesus was not a socialist but a gnostic.

Gnosticism is the mystical arm of Christianity. Mysticism is the search for the Divine within one's self. It is a search within. Gnosis is a Greek word for "knowledge." However, this is not mere book learning; not a garnering of facts. The Gnostic path is a path of direct enlightenment or direct experience - inner subjective knowledge. Once gained, this experience cannot really be communicated to others with words. Gnostics believed that the point of the teachings of Jesus was to pursue this inner path. In Luke 17:21 Jesus advises us that the Kingdom of God is within us.

www.gnostic-jesus.com...


Jesus is said to have come from the Essene community

www.essenespirit.com...

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Jesus is either whatever we call him or whoever he claims to be. Jesus did not call himself a Gnostic. Gnostics call him a Gnostic.

Jesus is either whatever we call him or whoever he claims to be. Jesus did not call himself a Gnostic. Gnostics call him a Gnostic.

LOL. Correct.

Personally...I call him "fictional". However, it never ceases to amaze me how many "christians" talk about things like "social justice" and "sharing" like they are dirty words.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Am I alone here?

For the greater good of humanity, I sure hope so.

No substance, only Personal attacks.



Its clear that you have no real take in the subject, only insults, or agenda fueled anti-American sentiment, that gets posted on ALMOST all your threads.


Do you want to know why this thread hasn't been shut down?

Because it gives people who actually want to talk about the subject, a clear slate, WITHOUT the bickering and personal attacks, that exist in the "blame everything on America" threads. We have enough of those threads CE. Maybe you should stick to those, if you cant look at it objectively. In the real World, there are ALWAYS two sides to every coin, not just a coin that is minted with Zionism on one side, and Anti-Americanism on the other.


Just my take on your post.


Peace.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Whoa...I draw the line at calling Red Dawn a goofy movie! C'mon now!

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


...And thus it begins....

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Jesus is either whatever we call him or whoever he claims to be. Jesus did not call himself a Gnostic. Gnostics call him a Gnostic.

LOL. Correct.

Personally...I call him "fictional". However, it never ceases to amaze me how many "christians" talk about things like "social justice" and "sharing" like they are dirty words.

The association is cultural, not spiritual.

I think it goes all the way back to McCarthyism, USSR, Ayn Rand, Stalin, HEEETLER, etc etc. You know, back when everyone was paranoid about communism and such.

Now some in the Republican party have resurrected many of these paranoia/fear inducing attachments to soil their rival democrats.

And many Christians today consider the Republican party champions of their morals on the political stage.

Naturally, Christians who sway to the Republican agenda will be swayed by it's dogmas.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Actually you could consider that debacle in Iraq recently to be, at the very least, half-genocide. Just look at the casualty figures. The Coalition forces lost something in the order of 6000 men over the course of the war(roughly 10 years), while the figures on Iraqi casualties are e1xponentially higher (somewhere in the order of 1.5 - 2 million). I don't even know how they could call that little charade a war. A war is when TWO armies are fighting eachother. Looks like only one army was involved in that "war" if you ask me.

I am sure that all the residents of both Iran and Israel don't want war as it is bad living conditions. So, I can safely say that the people, the 99% don't want war. You want proof of this well go there and ask people! I don't have scientific proof for the later claim I made, but my gut tells me that this is right. Plus, I don't really know many people who are all happy and thrilled about war.

There was a thread not to long ago "Give peace of chance" Let's make that the end outcome! How?

By convincing the majority of the population, the majority being enough people to cripple or stop a certain sector of the economy or the government, if that is even possible. Use that peaceful way of slowing things down, a.k.a. an organized demonstration to communicate what is best for them. Communicate being peaceful and with signs saying "You can't go to war. Cuz we wont let you. we elected you, we appointed you to represent OUR interests not yours!!!"

Or, convince a certain smaller group of people who have lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of money with the others who hold great power and have "interests" in making certain things happen to stop. They will ask why?Because your going to kill innocent people who don't share the same interests of surviving and don't need this war to happen. Those smaller groups of people control all the organized systems of a nation that can make "peace not just chance, but like for real!" a possibility.

Did I miss something?

Not at all. Us Americans have not been engaged in genocide since we for the most part exterminated the Indians in the 1800's.

What are you saying? That we are not native American and we killed off all the natives and therefore we do not deserve to be called American? BIg chip on your shoulder. Could you be of native American descent and thus hate all whites as occupiers and therefore you attack those of us who wish to preserve our Contitution because it means so little to you? Or just another self-hating white liberal?

reply to post by bitsforbytes


Great response.

I wish I could give you a few stars, actually !



As I have been saying, from the beginning also. The PEOPLE need to rise up, and say enough is enough.

Period.

reply to post by bitsforbytes


Oh, man, you are the awesome.

I think this guy has successfully isolated the true common ground. The majority do not want any more wars.

Period.

ETA to sonnny1: oddly enough I had this composed with the "Period" ending before I saw your post. Not intentional, kind of funny.

reply to post by MuonSpin


McCarthy was right howerver. There were and still are communists running about in Hollywood, govt, places of industry, NGO's, etc.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

That we are not native American and we killed off all the natives and therefore we do not deserve to be called American?

Uh, yeah, that has something to do with it....

Was it my avatar of Mary Magdalene that made you think to use this as a weapon of words and ideas?

You mean your Pre-Raphealite portrait of Rossetti's lover Lizzie posed as Mary M? I remember the one you used that was J.W. Waterhouse, too.

The Pre-Raphs are wonderful, make no mistake. Waterhouse is one of my faves.....
but....
Horus, why (oh, why?!) are you so 'anti-sharing", so 'anti-compassionate', and why do you exude such hostility and greed? Why?

Originally posted by MuonSpin

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

No you brought up Jesus in the context of social justice. You are putting a contempory description over Jesus based on socialist ideals. Evidence that Marxism has infiltrated the church enough to mar the original concept of Jesus' message of forgiveness for sins and a return to Our Father in Heaven.

Remember...your the one who said that the things that Christ was most concerned about were "leftist".

No you were the one who said it. Read your own post.

Here it is for reference

Definitely leftist. Everyone knows that Jesus was a Socialist...and look the obsessive preoccupation for social justice for the least empowered people in society that he had...right?

And no Jesus was not a socialist but a gnostic.

Gnosticism is the mystical arm of Christianity. Mysticism is the search for the Divine within one's self. It is a search within. Gnosis is a Greek word for "knowledge." However, this is not mere book learning; not a garnering of facts. The Gnostic path is a path of direct enlightenment or direct experience - inner subjective knowledge. Once gained, this experience cannot really be communicated to others with words. Gnostics believed that the point of the teachings of Jesus was to pursue this inner path. In Luke 17:21 Jesus advises us that the Kingdom of God is within us.

www.gnostic-jesus.com...


Jesus is said to have come from the Essene community

www.essenespirit.com...

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Jesus is either whatever we call him or whoever he claims to be. Jesus did not call himself a Gnostic. Gnostics call him a Gnostic.

Jesus calls himself the Son of Man 11 times in John's gospel. As in the Synoptic Gospels, this title is one of Jesus’ preferred titles for himself. The title is most likely a reference to Daniel 7:13-14, in which Daniel describes one of his apocalyptic visions.

www.theopedia.com...


Nowhere in the gospels does he call himself a socialist or a social engineer or any such thing, although he said he would make his disciples 'fishers of men".

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Nowhere in the gospels does he call himself a socialist or a social engineer

What do you think he meant when he said, "Sell all you own and give the money to the poor?"

What about him spending time with lepers, prostitutes, peasants.....and never ever ever saying they were "undeserving" or "lesser than"? What about those issues?

I think, from reading your posts, that you are one of the elite, privileged few, and rather frightened....

that does not in any way excuse being "blind" to the plight of billions of people who don't have enough to expect to survive another day.
Wow.

reply to post by wildtimes


You are calling me anti sharing why? Because I don't ascribe socialism to the Master Jesus? Because I don't subscribe to communism or socialism in any of it's forms? I am actually the most generous and giving person I know. When speaking of charity, Paul references volunteer giving, not forced redistribution via a govt entity. Make no mistake about it. He also says we must bear our own (karmic) burden. Charitable gifts must also be truly of the heart and not so as to appear to be good or righteous.

en.wikipedia.org...