New World Order, No Freedom of Religion: Some Christians are threatening to burn a statue of Satan

a reply to: TrueBrit

Everyone in this thread as well as others have and do use generalized labels. Be it "Satanists" or "Christians" or whatever. Even Christians use "Christians" in a generalized way. So why all of a sudden must I use proper wording??? Is it somehow confusing only when I do it or something???

It didn't seem to be a problem when everyone else used the term in a general way. Everyone seemed to understand then what was being said. But somehow when I do it it's assumed that I mean something different now???

a reply to: mOjOm

No it's not just you.

You're right in saying that there's a lot of people doing it but it is making this site less of a joy to visit, no?

We should deal with people on an individual basis, it saves confusion, no? I'm guilty of it too, but it really is getting to a ridiculously large portion of the contributing members to just generalise and make sweeping statements. Maybe we all need a hiatus from them

a reply to: mOjOm

My apologies mOjOm...

HEY EVERYONE! QUIT GENERALISING SO MUCH! THANKS FOR YOUR TIME!

There we are... That was very inclusive was it not?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Well, it was pretty condescending too and pointless as well.

Another way to handle it is to use a bit of intelligence and reason when reading someone's post and try to understand it within the context that it's in.

General terms and group labels are used a lot around here and within speech. It's fairly simple to know the difference between someone including every member of a group mentioned versus an unspecified segment of that group. Rather than being so defensive and feeling the need to protect a label that you chose to include yourself with why not address the points being made that are still clearly valid.

All this has done is derail the conversation and divert it away from the topic for unnecessary explanations. It's a neat tactic as far as avoiding having to deal with what was presented and instead shift the focus on to the speaker rather than the message. However, it also implies that you have no better position to argue and therefor must change the topic as a means of defense.

a reply to: ketsuko

It's not a statue saying this or that religion sucks, it's just a statue representing their religion of Satanism and its satanic principles/values.

If it were a statue of Shiva or Pan, some Christians would probably still see it as "mockery". The important thing (according to law) is that they aren't discriminating based on religion (saying "Christianity sucks" for example), they're just expressing their faith (the statue represents their religion and values/principles).

a reply to: ketsuko

You don't have to explain trolling to me. I'm WELL aware of how trolling works. Trolling has been going on for much longer in the world than just on the internet. Legal trolling is an age old pastime among lawyers.

I know where the Christians' anger is coming from and it still doesn't matter. They don't get to declare that they can burn this statue down just because they disagree with it.

a reply to: arpgme

You know what I find interesting? According to Job in the Bible (and the Jewish idea of Satan), Satan exists to tempt God's people so that God can test them. These Satanists are exposing the hypocrisy of some Christians just like Satan tries to exposes their bad side. You would think around Satanists, they would be on their best behavior so God can see they do not fall into temptation (in this case hypocrisy).

You are mixing apples with oranges are you not? If people want to worship their own religion then this is protected under the constitution of the United States. Then let them at least go through the guidelines of forming their own religion. Now that is not so difficult is it? Was this done? Regardless of whether It is a lawful religious statue no one should destroy another persons property illegally. That much I do agree with.

But when you bring the Jews into this mix it is totally unfair to even mention them.

Baphomet has many meanings in many religious cults and from all over the world. But it means nothing to the Jews in the sense of being connected to any Satan. To the orthodox Jew, Satan is not evil even though any statue of any deity is evil to their understanding. In other words any worshiping of any deity outside of the God of Abraham is considered evil to them but then a Satan is not evil because a Satan is of the God of Abraham. To the Jew, a Satan tempts people in the hope that the one who is tempted will overcome that temptation. An angel can never sin. It is impossible for an angel to sin. Therefore the Jew differs from the Christian in connecting sin to a Satan. Sin is the result of the evil inclination in all people and not through any fallen angel.

So you see how unfair it is to even mention the Jew in this fight between gentile religions. I agree that this Baptist organization should refrain from this outward fight and tend to their own church affairs. This abomination is no more evil than the religion of Islam or the Roman Catholics or the hundreds of other cults around this world. As long as it is within the lawful boundaries of the constitution it should be ignored and tolerated till changed by law.

Satan worshiping and also Luciferic worshiping is laughable to the orthodox Jew simply because Lucifer is non existent and Satan is not evil. Let the heathen roar. In time all will perish and start anew only to perish again.

www.telegraph.co.uk...
Sodom
Gomorrah

... Detroit

>add an "s" and "y" Lord ,
then do it !