Centuries old statue of Buddha blown up in Afghanistan; Fundamentalist Buddhists go on violent rampage!
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Monday, September 15, 2025 17:14
VIEWED: 8984
PAGE 5 of 7
Quote:
People seem to be forgetting that a lot of truly depraved and disgusting stuff can be done by secular people as well
Excellent point. No one argues that Saddam Hussein was the worst most abusive dictator in the region, but also no one disputes that he was the most secular leader. If the rioters were religious they would be chanting something other than Allah Akbar, and ranting about something other than the prophet mohammed, but they might still be rioting. They're down and someone is organizing to get them riled up because it serves their political ends. It also serves the political ends of the Danish paper, which probably wants the muslims gone from its country.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As a Kansan, I feel obliged to weigh in on the notion that "Christianity doesn't still do bad stuff, even in isolated sects." I have two words for you.
Fred Phelps.
Thank you, and good night.
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal, Fox!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
What about the Mormons? Did they blow anything up yet? Maybe Mormonism is the true religion of peace and tranquility...
Not to diss the Mormons, but even they, in their short history, had the Danite sect, which was a supposed secret society of "enforcers" taking out revenge on enemies of Mormons.
More information at:
[link] http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/history/danites_eom.htm[\link]
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The mormons have quirks, but they don't have mass genocidal campaigns, which puts them one up on islam and catholicism. Before anyone attack this thought, I have to say "Been to Africa lately?"
Bhuddism, Taoism, seem to have the best record, Hinduism seems fairly non-violent. Quakers still doing okay.
My own take on it is pretty simple: Everyone out there killing everything that moves is some decendent of the cult of Yhwh, who was, after all, God of War. And not the way Mars or Ares was God of War. Yhwh was a genocidal God of War in a culture torn apart by ethnic strife, it was the perfect fire for making a hellish tradition of endless slaughter. The only western religions which seem to avoid this problem are ones who focus only on the teachings of their respective profits, and aren't heavy into the history of it.
I also have to combat something that Pirate News has said abou 150 times now, no offense, but...
What's with this hammering on Moloch?
Moloch, for those who don't know, was a middle eastern deity of african origin brought up by the ancient yemenites, who unlike the modern yemeni, were part of the empire of upper egypt. The bible is extremely rough on Moloch as "an evil religion of child sacrafice." In reality, Moloch had child sacrafice, but there's not a lot of historical evidence that it was any more widespread then it was in the worship of Yhwh, which it is also mentioned in the Bible.
I'm by no means making a case in favor of Moloch worship, but I do have a point that I'm getting too. Moloch was a deity not too dissimilar to Yhwh, possibly more sinister, but Yhwh was well and trul evil, so to say Moloch was worse, while possibly true, is really nitpicking.
Furthermore, to say that traditional European paganism is "Moloch Worship" is at best an exaggeration, and at worst: utter hogwash.
The idea of traditional European religions being based on Moloch worship comes from an idea of strange migration.
Scythian Strange Migration:
While this pattern of migration is theoretically possible, the historical record shows it is dwarfed by the amount of natural migration which took place.
Scythian Natural Migration:
Moloch does show up in europe, but not until 1600, long after the founding of the Masons, and then only as an obscure demon. It is more probably that the idea of Moloch was brough back along with many others as a result of the crusades.
But to understand the real underlying flaw in the strange migration idea, you have to look at it's extremely suspect source. The proponents of this theory were not originally basing their idea on a perponderance of evidence, but on a preset belief they already held and wanted to validate: That the Europeans were the natural descendents of the children of Israel, and therefore God's chosen people.
Without going to far into the sheer absurdity of the idea, it's also important to note that the only group to seriously take this as gospel were the Nazis, who were insane, and not a reliable objective source.
The reality is that the pagan rites worshipped by the founding fathers were those of the Masonic order, which was not evil. Whether or not Bush and skull and bones are evil is a separate issue. But the fact that Ben Franklin was the head of the Masonic order, and basically pagan, as were the rest of the crew, and if christian, only nominally so, does not make them evil people.
The reality of the Masons, in spite of their own myths, is that they date from around 1200AD, and are European based, and have no connection to Solomon or Israel, or Moloch for that matter. The Illuminati, which is referenced on the back of the dollar bill, was a group that sought to create separation of church and state, for which they were persecuted by the inquisition. It was an intentional homage to that effort that the symbolism was used by our govt., which openly supported the position, as most Americans do today.
I guess I'm just a little annoyed at the ultra-mysterian approac
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Footnotes for those who don't know: (A lot of this many of you already know, it's just here for those who don't, and some of this may just be dreamtrove's opinion, so it's not to be taken as completely objective, just the facts as I understand them.)
Scythians were russian tribes which populated europe a few thousand years ago. The modern Europeans are all descended from them to some extent, celts are probably their closest blood kin.
2. I believe that strange migration, which was concocted in the late christian era, was a contrivance to funnel the Scythian race through Israel in order to give a historical biblical pretext to the peoples of Europe. IMHO.
3. The appearance of Scythians in the bible is most like a result of middle easterners of Scythian descent, rather than evidence that they were our ancestors.
4. The prominant jews of the bible were most likely semitic as arabs, and had no Sythian blood. I read one theory which provided decent evidence that Jezebel et al may have been of Scythian descent, which may very well be true, but wouldn't particularly help the idea, since the christians don't wish to be related to Jezebel.
5. The major dilution of the jewish race almost certainly had nothing to do with Sythian migrations, and happened later when Israel was destroyed and the people were scattered across the mediterranean and points east.
6. The earliest depiction of Jesus is Istanbul, and dates from around 300. The people of Byzantium at the time were greek, and thus mediteranean, and not closely related to the present day Turks, who are the descendents, in part, of mongolian raiders. Nonetheless, they were most likely not blondes, and yet they chose to depict Jesus this way, a fact which spawned a really bad idea that probably has no factual basis to it, that Jesus was somehow aryan or European. If anything, there is a remote possibility that he had some persian influence, whether or not any of it was blood related, as many of his ideas seem to have sprung from Zoroastrianism, which which he was familiar. Some Iranians have blonde hair. Anyway, this is where the whole idea of aryan Jesus comes from, a notion that the decidedly Christian, and not jewish, Nazis, came from. Today Naziism is still a problem in Iran, which was an axis country, and it is part of our current political problem. Most of our political problem is that Iran is a domino for Cheney's MEU plan, IMHO.
Not being a christian, or a jew, it doesn't really effect me particularly at all. Many of my ancestors, who were lutherans, were killed in Auschwitz (roughly half of those killed in Auschwitz were not jewish.) But to me it's all 6 of one half a dozen of the other - Both are more or less Cult of Yhwh, God of War, as is Islam.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Now your just flexing your e-penis, to much virtual testosterone 
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
1. Fred Phelps is not the evil of Christianity. He's a moron. But the world is full of morons. Saying Fred Phelphs is the Christian evil of our day is like saying McCarthyism was the worst thing America did in the 20th century. There are tribes in Africa that are genocidally exterminating the non-believers, and govts in eastern europe and central america that recently did the same.
2. Actually, Citizen, I was making a point. I actually have a degree in this stuff, not just posting random stuff from the internet, and I know what I'm talking about. The point is that pirate is overzealous, which everyone already knows. But I guess if I have another point, it's this. I think PN has something to say, perhaps a lot, which is obscured by a convoluted conspiracy theory which is founded in a library of base historical points, some of which I don't think to be true. I would like him to take a serious analytical look at his own theory, which would imply the possibility that he might find that it shed an unfriendly light on christianity, and a more neutral light on the pagan traditions of the europeans. If the investigative reporter in him is willing to take on the christian in him.
I realize now that i posted all of this on a thread he wasn't writing on, so maybe he won't see it, and I feel stupid. And very tired.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I know DT, I was being flippant, based on the attacks I recieved my self from stating a similar case on the Jihad thread. I wasn't posting random stuff from the internet in that thread either, BTW.
I sometimes get the feeling that you want to start a fight with me?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why?
And, no, I'm not.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME