Please note that new user registrations disabled at this time.

Eminem

Anything goes... just keep it clean.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mr Sleep
Posts: 11273
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Dead End Street
Contact:

Post by Mr Sleep »

Originally posted by Fezek:
<STRONG>What is it with you with bottoms and animals etc. Funny nonetheless.</STRONG>
It's old jokes that are always re hashed, they refer to certain members that have been caught making comments about animals, sorry for the confusion. :D
I'd have to get drunk every night and talk about virility...And those Pink elephants I'd see.
User avatar
Mr Sleep
Posts: 11273
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Dead End Street
Contact:

Post by Mr Sleep »

Here is a link which might explain a bit.

[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=9&t=000401"]Foul Speaks his mind[/url]
I'd have to get drunk every night and talk about virility...And those Pink elephants I'd see.
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

<STRONG>That's not fair! You edited that post! You said you would if I got seven others to ask you to explain what you mean by "A" is better and truer than"B". Be a sport. that is what this board is all about. :) </STRONG>

That's true, but upon further consideration, I realized I just don't have the time to become a full blown internet apologist right now. Do you even realize the amount of material I would have to dig up? The pros and cons of Christianity, the reliability of the Wod of God, the good, bad, and ugly repercussions Christianity has had on history, redaction criticism, the classical heresies, modern day relevance, the splintering of denominations, the attempts at ecumenicalism... Not to mention the strong and weak points of the other religions to which I would be comparing Christianity! The subject is too vast and time-consuming to merit debate here, which is why I urge you to seek out the merits of this argument yourself. There is no shortage of Christian and anti-Christian websites, message boards and chat rooms on the net, and what I post will likely echo some of the traditional arguments supporting Christianity anyway.

So seek, my friend, and ye shall find. Just don't seek here, because you won't find it!

:)
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

%$#&^%*!!%$ double post!

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: EMINEM ]
User avatar
Fezek
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Japan
Contact:

Post by Fezek »

Originally posted by EMINEM:
[QB :) [/qb]

The pros and cons of Christianity, the reliability of the Wod of God, the good, bad, and ugly repercussions Christianity has had on history, redaction criticism, the classical heresies, modern day relevance, the splintering of denominations, the attempts at ecumenicalism... Not to mention the strong and weak points of the other religions to which I would be comparing Christianity! :) [/QB]
You forgot aquaducts, sanitation, effective policing, irrigation etc. :D
".I guess soldiers have been killing other soldiers quite a bit; I believe it is called war."
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

... the Circus Maximus, Charlton Heston, gladiatorial combat, jousts and touraments, WWF Wrestling...
User avatar
Nippy
Posts: 5085
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Reading, England
Contact:

Post by Nippy »

I believe that this is somewhat relevant to the topic so I just decided to write some stuff up on Hitler and his discrimination. Although I enjoy the discussion of history I'm only 16 so I might not be up with the rest of you. However I shall press on! :)

National Socialism was in the late 1920's a very small party. Hitler had no hardcore followers apart from the SA and the Frei Korps. -The Frei Korps mainly because they wanted a stronger Germany and he promised that- In reality with this small base of 'disciples' for want of a better word, could do nothing. Hitler wanted the aid of Ritter von Kahr to capture Munich in a Putsch, to succeed where Kapp had failed. However the Provisional government retreated to Weimar to continue to govern. Kahr failed Hitler and did not show and the Munich putsch was put down, a failure for Hitler. When he was captured along with Luddendorf he was taken in front of a judge, who was very pro-right wing, and given a 5 year sentance (in reality he served 3 months!). During his short stay in jail he had a time to think about where he had gone wrong. He realised that he was being too forceful, he needed to take over through obtaining the Chancellorship. Writing Mein Kampf he was in my opinion planning a strategy to take over the government. He setup a basic plan of action and used the ethnic minorities (Gypsies, Jews etc) to blame for all the hardships.

Hitler desperately needed support and he took it in all forms. He got the 'upper class' through promising a return to strong Germany, the 'middle class' through tax breaks etc, the 'lower class' through promise of jobs and ex-military through a promise of a strong Germany.

Hitler also obtained the Church's support, he wanted their support and after he was elected he wished to ignore them. During the early 1930's Hitler started to place blame on the minorities what you have to remember is that there were millions of people in Germany who actually believed that Judaism was at fault for the worlds issues at the time. Hitler needed a scapegoat, according to the bible Jews killed Christ and Hitler made use of this by Nazifying the church in Germany and trying to persuade people of this. Hitler didn't actually believe in Christianity or any form of relegion, in reality I believe he though he was a God himself!

All in all I would have to say that Hitler made use of scapegoats. He needed someone to blame and the minorites were it.
Perverteer Paladin
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

Originally posted by Nippy:
<STRONG>Hitler didn't actually believe in Christianity or any form of relegion, in reality I believe he though he was a God himself! </STRONG>
Illuminating post, Nippy. I think you hit the nail on the head with this one.
User avatar
Nippy
Posts: 5085
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Reading, England
Contact:

Post by Nippy »

Ok thanks Eminem no need to be so harsh about it. I was just trying to some up my post and get it across. Sheesh I was only writing my point of view.
Perverteer Paladin
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

I agreed with your assessment 100 percent, Nippy. The phrase "hitting the nail on the head" means that I think you put your point across very succinctly. I wasn't being sarcastic in any way.
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

I agreed with your assessment 100 percent, Nippy. The phrase "hitting the nail on the head" means that I think you put your point across very succinctly. I wasn't being sarcastic in any way.
User avatar
Nippy
Posts: 5085
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Reading, England
Contact:

Post by Nippy »

I apologise Eminem, the lack of smilies led me to believe that you were being sarcastic, I sort of rushed headlong into it, again I apologise :)
Perverteer Paladin
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

Eminem writes:
In the Old Testament, there is a Canaanite deity by the name of Bhaal. Represented by a bull, symbol of strength and fertility, Bhaal was the god of rain and harvest whose adherants practiced bestiality, ritual prostitution, and child sacrifices.
Do you have any sources for this beyond the obviously prejudicidal biblical accounts of some people who considered everybody else's gods as demons? If we're to accept that, what's to prevent us from accepting the Christian books and pamphlets of the MIddle Ages that accused Jews of the ritual sacrifice of children on their High Holy Days?

(I trust that everybody here knows I'm not suggesting the latter is accurate. My point is that just because a book states something is so doesn't make it so. Bhaal's worshippers into bestiality? What happened, did several Jewish priests sneak into a temple of Bhaal, drill holes, and watch the proceedings, taking notes?) :p

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: fable ]
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

Originally posted by fable:
[QB]Do you have any sources for this beyond the obviously prejudicidal biblical accounts of some people who considered everybody else's gods as demons?

There is strong archaelogical evidence supporting the kind of worship I described above. The manner in which the Canaanites worshipped Bhaal apparently elicited no shame on their part, judging by the number of statuettes and figurines depicting various forms of animal and human intercourse, in addition to the excavated bronze idols with cupped hands into which naked infants were placed for burning.

I would concur with your "prejudicial" comment if the Biblical accounts were inconsistent in its condemnation of idolatry, reserving heavenly fire and brimstone for Israel's enemies alone. The fact is, the OT prophets were equally unsparing in their condemnation of the Israelites whenever they strayed from God to worship idols. If anything, the prophetic rebukes against Israel were harsher, precisely because they were the Chosen nation, had received the Law, and should have known better. The Biblical "prejudice" is not against a particular people or culture per se, but against the immorality and injustice for which that people or culture were responsible, Israel not excluded.

I've been studying the Bible for five years, and not once have I come across a passage in the OT where idols are considered to be demons. On the contrary, the prophets (notably Jeremiah and Isaiah) take pains to denude the idols of Bhaal, Marduk, Ashtoreth et al of the supposed power and sentience their devotees ascribed to them, making it clear that these replicas are nothing but mundane pieces of wood and metal that can neither hear nor speak nor understand, much less answer prayers. Consider this famous passage from Isaiah 44:18

"No one stops to think, no one has the knowledge or understanding to say, "Half of it [an idol of wood] I used for fuel; I even baked bread over its coals, I roasted meat and I ate. Shall I bow down to a block of wood?"


If we're to accept that, what's to prevent us from accepting the Christian books and pamphlets of the MIddle Ages that accused Jews of the ritual sacrifice of children on their High Holy Days?

(I trust that everybody here knows I'm not suggesting the latter is accurate. My point is that just because a book states something is so doesn't make it so.


Let me just say fable that the Bible in no ordinary book, and leave it at that.


[QB]
:D :D
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

"sigh" double post deleted

There's something wrong with my computer.

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: EMINEM ]
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

Eminem writes:
There is strong archaelogical evidence supporting the kind of worship I described above.
But with respect, you haven't stated any of it, here. Let me restate your remarks, from above:

In the Old Testament, there is a Canaanite deity by the name of Bhaal. Represented by a bull, symbol of strength and fertility, Bhaal was the god of rain and harvest whose adherants practiced bestiality, ritual prostitution, and child sacrifices.

So let's please have this strong archaelogical evidence that Bhaal was indeed worshipped through bestiality, ritual prostitution, and child sacrifices.

The manner in which the Canaanites worshipped Bhaal apparently elicited no shame on their part, judging by the number of statuettes and figurines depicting various forms of animal and human intercourse...

You seem to be arguing that because the Canaanites possessed statues depicting humans and animals in intercourse, they worshipped Bhaal via bestiality. I don't see how these two thoughts are even remotely related. If you have evidence that the worshippers of Bhaal indulged their worship via bestiality, post it.

...in addition to the excavated bronze idols with cupped hands into which naked infants were placed for burning.

I notice that you don't mention Bhaal's name. Is that because the above remarks don't refer to the worship of Bhaal, but to another deity?

Let's also have some sources for the idea that ritual prostitution was involved in the worship of Bhaal.

I've been studying the Bible for five years, and not once have I come across a passage in the OT where idols are considered to be demons.

This is arguing through misdirection, however unintentionally. Here's what I wrote, and what I requested an answer in reply to:

Do you have any sources for this beyond the obviously prejudicidal biblical accounts of some people who considered everybody else's gods as demons?

I wrote that the OT demonizes the gods of other peoples, not their idols.

[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: fable ]
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

fable, I don't know whether to praise you or throttle you for your skepticism, but you're definitely keeping me on my toes, and forcing me to re-examine my sources and methods of thinking. Keep it up!
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

Originally posted by EMINEM:
<STRONG>fable, I don't know whether to praise you or throttle you for your skepticism...</STRONG>
It's not skepticism. I criticize no one's subjective beliefs in their own god or gods. But when subjective beliefs are confused with objective facts--who worshipped what, where--then I try to arrive at some sense of the truth. Which, at least in terms of actual hard data, shouldn't be difficult to find.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

Bump!
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
Aegis
Posts: 13412
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Contact:

Post by Aegis »

Sorry Fable, I think the thread is dead...
Post Reply