|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 14:34:20 GMT -5
Rhetorically, he was rather assuming, if he wasn't in fact the real deal.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 14:36:33 GMT -5
** There TWO kinds of BEASTS are controlling the humans. Satan the Father god Beast controls our spiritual etrenal life destiny to everlasting lake of fire. The Second BEAST are Satan evil children on earth/Illuminati who are ruling and controling our natural and daily lives with ONE WORLD ORDER Govt and ONE WORLD religion/THEIRS. Both of these evil father and his evil children are here to use, abuse and destroy us humans at the end. What is the ONE WORLD religion? Marxism
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 23, 2020 15:42:05 GMT -5
What is the ONE WORLD religion? Marxism I suppose that's why 100 million died for Marxism between 1900 and 1987. According to R. J. Rummel, the killings committed by communist regimes can best be explained as the result of the marriage between absolute power and the absolutist ideology of Marxism. Rummel states that " communism was like a fanatical religion. It had its revealed text and its chief interpreters. It had its priests and their ritualistic prose with all the answers. It had a heaven, and the proper behavior to reach it. It had its appeal to faith. And it had its crusades against nonbelievers. What made this secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instruments of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and the family."He writes that the Marxists saw the construction of their utopia as "though a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism and inequality. And for the greater good, as in a real war, people are killed. And, thus, this war for the communist utopia had its necessary enemy casualties, the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, wreckers, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, rich, landlords, and noncombatants that unfortunately got caught in the battle. In a war millions may die, but the cause may be well justified, as in the defeat of Hitler and an utterly racist Nazism. And to many communists, the cause of a communist utopia was such as to justify all the deaths". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 16:12:10 GMT -5
Marxism has been spectacular, as any religion would need to be in order to rival the influence of Judeo-Christianity and it's attendant, secular-historical order.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 23, 2020 16:20:51 GMT -5
What is the ONE WORLD religion? Marxism No, it wasn't Marxism, Lee!
You really know better than that.
People can't go & label something it is not just because they want to believe it.
Obviously you have forgotten or never knew what Marx said about religion.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 16:34:58 GMT -5
I think you want to debate over the definition of a religion. I don't. I just watch what people do to see what they believe or don't believe, out of a righteous fear or respect, or something else.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 23, 2020 17:28:06 GMT -5
I think you want to debate over the definition of a religion. I don't. I just watch what people do to see what they believe or don't believe, out of a righteous fear or respect, or something else. No -I don't want to debate the definition of religion with you, Lee.
You can make your own definition if you want, -but it doesn't make your definitions accurate, you know.
Except I fear poor old Daniel Webster might spin in his grave.
But then again, -he would probably just ignore you and say "just another upstart who thinks he know it all!"
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jun 23, 2020 17:35:16 GMT -5
Gullible people believe some really odd stuff. Such as" The earth was formed in six days. A donkey talked. A bloke walked on water. The Red sea was parted by another bloke who then led a heap of people through it without them getting their toes wet. Bill Gates owns a patent to the Covid 19 virus. curly I think you should have mentioned how many people crossing through the path made by parting the waters that lost their sandals in the sucking mud.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 17:42:03 GMT -5
I think you want to debate over the definition of a religion. I don't. I just watch what people do to see what they believe or don't believe, out of a righteous fear or respect, or something else. No -I don't want to debate the definition of religion with you, Lee.
You can make your own definition if you want, -but it doesn't make your definitions accurate, you know.
Except I fear poor old Daniel Webster might spin in his grave.
But then again, -he would probably just ignore you and say "just another upstart who thinks he know it all!" No, I think most people understand the word 'religion' has a wide range of related meanings. One definition, as in ones supreme devotion, could be the state. Under Marxism, the state and more specifically, it's partisan initiates and THEIR will to power and privilege reigns supreme. As a worldview concerning life's origins, Marxism treats matter like its supreme. This is a worship of creation. This proposition, this lie as I see it, remains an effective diversion from the partisans' desire to be Gods themselves.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 23, 2020 18:42:39 GMT -5
No -I don't want to debate the definition of religion with you, Lee.
You can make your own definition if you want, -but it doesn't make your definitions accurate, you know.
Except I fear poor old Daniel Webster might spin in his grave.
But then again, -he would probably just ignore you and say "just another upstart who thinks he know it all!" No, I think most people understand the word 'religion' has a wide range of related meanings One definition, as in ones supreme devotion, could be the state. Under Marxism, the state and more specifically, it's partisan initiates and THEIR will to power and privilege reigns supreme. As a worldview concerning life's origins, Marxism treats matter like its supreme. This is a worship of creation. This proposition, this lie as I see it, remains an effective diversion from the partisans' desire to be Gods themselves. Want to put it to a vote here on TMB, Lee?
Because no, I don't think that most people understand the word 'religion' has such a wide range of related meanings that it would include Marxism.
In the past, Lee, you have tried to make Marxism an "atheist" idea; -now you are trying tp make it a "religion!"
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 18:48:32 GMT -5
Anything you devote yourself to and especially the attending ideas is a religion. Period.
What....are you going to say if a group calling themselves the 2x3s because jesus commanded some to go out in threes...that would not be a new religion in its own right?
How do you define religion?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 23, 2020 18:54:51 GMT -5
No -I don't want to debate the definition of religion with you, Lee.
You can make your own definition if you want, -but it doesn't make your definitions accurate, you know.
Except I fear poor old Daniel Webster might spin in his grave.
But then again, -he would probably just ignore you and say "just another upstart who thinks he know it all!" No, I think most people understand the word 'religion' has a wide range of related meanings. One definition, as in ones supreme devotion, could be the state. Under Marxism, the state and more specifically, it's partisan initiates and THEIR will to power and privilege reigns supreme. As a worldview concerning life's origins, Marxism treats matter like its supreme. This is a worship of creation. This proposition, this lie as I see it, remains an effective diversion from the partisans' desire to be Gods themselves. In classical times (and the first half of 20th century Japan) it was a religion to worship the emperor. I guess fanatical communism had similarities.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 23, 2020 18:57:33 GMT -5
Anything you devote yourself to and especially the attending ideas is a religion. Period. What....are you going to say if a group calling themselves the 2x3s because jesus commanded some to go out in threes...that would not be a new religion in its own right? How do you define religion? Lee, -I thought you said that you didn't want to debate the definition of a religion with me?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jun 23, 2020 19:10:08 GMT -5
Itd be better if you did with yourself. I was thinking if marxism wasnt a religion, then why does it suppress it? Its not just a religion, its an exclusive religion. Its totalistic, as well as totalitarian.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 23, 2020 21:27:53 GMT -5
Itd be better if you did with yourself. I was thinking if marxism wasnt a religion, then why does it suppress it? Its not just a religion, its an exclusive religion. Its totalistic, as well as totalitarian. Kind of like like some people regard GOPism these days.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 24, 2020 4:05:38 GMT -5
Anything you devote yourself to and especially the attending ideas is a religion. Period. What....are you going to say if a group calling themselves the 2x3s because jesus commanded some to go out in threes...that would not be a new religion in its own right? How do you define religion? Lee, -I thought you said that you didn't want to debate the definition of a religion with me?Defining religion is loving God loving others.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jun 24, 2020 11:50:14 GMT -5
Lee, -I thought you said that you didn't want to debate the definition of a religion with me? Defining religion is loving God loving others. Loving something that does not exist could be defined as a mental illness.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2020 14:17:39 GMT -5
Itd be better if you did with yourself. I was thinking if marxism wasnt a religion, then why does it suppress it? Its not just a religion, its an exclusive religion. Its totalistic, as well as totalitarian. Kind of like like some people regard GOPism these days. Abraham Lincoln must be rolling over in his grave.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 24, 2020 16:50:52 GMT -5
Kind of like like some people regard GOPism these days. Abraham Lincoln must be rolling over in his grave. Actually, I suspect the Donald had one insight into President Lincoln that most Americans today don't share. Lincoln did not necessarily believe that blacks were equal to whites -- but he believed that slavery was immoral and damaging to the economy. This makes his reason for making the Emancipation Proclamation quite interesting. He made it during the the Civil War in an effort to convince the South to surrender. The deal was that if the South would surrender they would get to keep their slaves, but if they did not surrender, the slaves in the states in secession would be freed. His first objective was to just end the war. But the South did not surrender, so when they were defeated the Proclamation went into effect. The most interesting part of the story is that it did not apply to slaves that were in states that sided with the North. They were not technically free until an amendment was made to the Constitution. PS: Recall that the Donald claimed he had done more for the blacks in America than any other president -- "except for Lincoln, who maybe could be questioned." I thought it was funny at the time because surely most people at the time were probably thinking it was another of his usual historical gaffes.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2020 20:07:23 GMT -5
Abraham Lincoln must be rolling over in his grave. Actually, I suspect the Donald had one insight into President Lincoln that most Americans today don't share. Lincoln did not necessarily believe that blacks were equal to whites -- but he believed that slavery was immoral and damaging to the economy. Of course honest Abe was right - blacks were not equal to whites. More so in his day than now. They had a very different history and culture. Australians are not equal to New Zealanders. Men are not equal to women. Kudos to Abe that he argued slavery was immoral. It was right that blacks should have the same constitutional rights as any other American. Ideally societies should work towards equality of opportunity as much as is practical, but equality is not possible.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 24, 2020 20:23:35 GMT -5
Actually, I suspect the Donald had one insight into President Lincoln that most Americans today don't share. Lincoln did not necessarily believe that blacks were equal to whites -- but he believed that slavery was immoral and damaging to the economy. Of course honest Abe was right - blacks were not equal to whites. More so in his day than now. They had a very different history and culture. Australians are not equal to New Zealanders. Men are not equal to women. Kudos to Abe that he argued slavery was immoral. It was right that blacks should have the same constitutional rights as any other American. Ideally societies should work towards equality of opportunity as much as is practical, but equality is not possible. I think you're misreading my use of the word "equal". I use it to mean genetically equal, not culturally equal. I can't understand that men and women are any more unequal than men are unequal to other men. By what scale can one's worth be measured other than the worth of one's soul? Such a discussion always boils down to chauvinism, racism, or some other attempt to diminish some other's worthiness.
|
|