Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not completely. He had no problems with war disabilities, or accidents of birth. Goebbels had what we call a Klumpfuß, for example. Sorry, I do not know the English for that, but it is were one or both feet turn inwards when the baby is born.
However, we do have a stumbling stone* near us where a young boy was murdered because he had some mental condition. If the Nazis thought the disability was a negative to society, then the disabled person was killed.
Only near the end, when there were insufficient men to fight. It is tragic to see the pictures, not only because they were young, but many looked happy to be fighting for Hitler.
Indeed.
* A Stolperstein or stumbling stone is a small brass plate in the ground to mark the homes of people who were victims of the Nazis. Most of them naturally mark Jewish homes, and most of them say the Jews were killed.
the spartans did the same thing to the disabled. they discarded 'weak' disabled children who were viewed as a hindrance to their war faring culture. one had to be perfect. it was a sort of eugenics.
many centuries later, humans evolved to become the robotic cruel war faring nazis that seeked sterilization and perfection. the same evil is being seen today.
max webers iron cage correctly theorized the century of the 1900's, a time of mechanization and increase of objective rationality that lead to things like eugenics and other things
it is interesting to note that many 'christian' institutions also joined in on these inhumanities. they were complicit, contradicting jesus teachings of mercy, compassion and most importantly forgiveness.
jesus taugt to be meek, not to be strong.
bible:
John 9:1-5 (KJV)
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
Not completely. He had no problems with war disabilities, or accidents of birth. Goebbels had what we call a Klumpfuß, for example. Sorry, I do not know the English for that, but it is were one or both feet turn inwards when the baby is born.
However, we do have a stumbling stone* near us where a young boy was murdered because he had some mental condition. If the Nazis thought the disability was a negative to society, then the disabled person was killed.
Only near the end, when there were insufficient men to fight. It is tragic to see the pictures, not only because they were young, but many looked happy to be fighting for Hitler.
Indeed.
* A Stolperstein or stumbling stone is a small brass plate in the ground to mark the homes of people who were victims of the Nazis. Most of them naturally mark Jewish homes, and most of them say the Jews were killed.
the spartans did the same thing to the disabled. they discarded 'weak' disabled children who were viewes as a hindrance to their war faring culture. one had to be perfect. it was a sort of eugenics.
many centuries later, humans evolved to become the robotic cruel war faring nazis that seeked sterilization and perfection. the same evil is being seen today.
max webers iron cage correctly theorized the century of the 1900's, a time of mechanization and increase objective rationality that lead to things like eugenics
jesus taught to be meek, not strong
meekness is strength, not weakness
many 'strong' empires throughout history fell because they oppressed pillaged and insinuated continuous war. i assume that this will keep occurring on earth, space and through out the future solar system
bible:
Luke 20:9-18
World English Bible (WEB)
He began to tell the people this parable. “A man planted a vineyard, and rented it out to some farmers, and went into another country for a long time. At the proper season, he sent a servant to the farmers to collect his share of the fruit of the vineyard. But the farmers beat him, and sent him away empty. He sent yet another servant, and they also beat him, and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty. He sent yet a third, and they also wounded him, and threw him out. The lord of the vineyard said, ‘What shall I do? I will send my beloved son. It may be that seeing him, they will respect him.’
“But when the farmers saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.’ They threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy these farmers, and will give the vineyard to others.”
When they heard it, they said, “May it never be!”
But he looked at them, and said, “Then what is this that is written,
‘The stone which the builders rejected,
the same was made the chief cornerstone?’
Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces,
but it will crush whomever it falls on to dust.”
John 9:1-5 (KJV)
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.eep occuring
What is it within us that would enable us to so easily "pick the pink fuzzy passages," Arq?
Probably just want. Wanting it to be good.
"Those stupid historians who disagree with us have their own books that make them look smart and knowledgeable, well we have ours!"
Like with the Spartan Mirage, a person WANTS to hear a good story, not a boring one.
What is it within us that would enable us to so easily "pick the pink fuzzy passages," Arq?
I'm not totally sure, and I'm not sure that anyone is, and there could be several ways of answering that. But the obvious way would be to look for anything that makes your beliefs feel comfortable. You ignore the one that unsettle it. Thus cherry -picking, counting the hits and ignoring the misses, dismissing anything that doesn't suit what you want to believe - you know how it goes. I'd like to think that the more critical side (such as atheism) welcomes tough questions, from others if we don't think of them ourselves. Because it makes the belief (to use a broad term) a stronger and more resilient one. Cherry pick what makes you feel good, and the first time someone hits you with the unpleasant stuff - well, we know what happens. It is taken as a personal attack.
I'm not totally sure, and I'm not sure that anyone is, and there could be several ways of answering that. But the obvious way would be to look for anything that makes your beliefs feel comfortable. You ignore the one that unsettle it. Thus cherry -picking, counting the hits and ignoring the misses, dismissing anything that doesn't suit what you want to believe - you know how it goes. I'd like to think that the more critical side (such as atheism) welcomes tough questions, from others if we don't think of them ourselves. Because it makes the belief (to use a broad term) a stronger and more resilient one. Cherry pick what makes you feel good, and the first time someone hits you with the unpleasant stuff - well, we know what happens. It is taken as a personal attack.
you do the exact same thing. and when exposed, unlike mystic, you ran away and hid. all because some data just isn't good for marketing a less valid interpretation.
and if you need a reminder on just how fast you ran away, does the word "natural" ring a bell? lmao, you actually used it like it meant something. just like literal bible thumpers used the grand canyon for a flood like it means something.
your sect of atheism has been debunked and slapped down like the junk it is. "deny everything because we are afraid of religion." lmao at your sect of atheism's statement of belief. It would be downright funny if it wasn't so dangerous to freedom everywhere.
Yes. I'm not sure whether he actually mentions the cross - I'll look it up - but he predicts his death and resurrection several times. Even the details of his arrest and interrogation, just as he does his 'rejection' and Jerusalem's eventual destruction because of it. And we are asked to believe that he still asks God to scrap that plan if possible. Yes, me also thinks that someone was indeed making it all up, which is how they get retrospective prophecy to work.
...
Yes, it is the single passage in all the synoptics (not in John, and the OT NEVER mentions the cross. never. Though of course any mention of torture or suffering in the OT can be "Interpreted" as a prediction the cross).
In fact Luke mentions it twice, in different places, just for good measure.
Luk 9:23 (in the context of the transfiguration) And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Dam, Luke 14 didn't copy. Bloody Bible -never can rely on it...
Luke 14. 26 (in the context of abusing a Pharisee at his own dinner - table) If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. 27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-23-2018 at 01:42 AM..
Hang on - did Jesus speak about the cross? Before his execution on one? That maketh me think to mine self that someone didst maketh something up.
Yes, in Mark it was just after Jesus calls Peter Satan.
33: But turning and seeing his disciples, he rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind me, Satan! For you are not on the side of God, but of men." 34: And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
Peter's other name is Simon (Mark 3:16 Simon, to whom he gave the name Peter, but it is a different Simon who actually carries the cross for Jesus, not Simon the number one disciple. The author of Mark is again attacking the Jerusalem Christians led by Peter, James and John in his fictional account.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, but it is a different Simon who actually carries the cross for Jesus, not Simon the number one disciple. The author of Mark is again attacking the Jerusalem Christians led by Peter, James and John in his fictional account.
