Georgia guidestones

[zenshiite]

If you really believe otherwise, then by the same token you can decry every Catholic in the world as "wannabe cannibals" 'cause the bread and wine they take during mass represents the body & blood of Christ. Do you think they are actually wanting to eat human flesh and drink human blood?

I am under the impression that actual Catholic doctrine says that the wafers of bread and the wine actually literally transmute into the flesh and blood of Christ during the Eucharist.

In fact, an old Catholic fella that I was having discussions with in a Borders a year or so ago was telling me all this stuff about supposed miracles and he included that phenomenon as supposedly having been tested or whatever.

All I'm saying, there are people who seriously believe they are literally eating Christ.

[Steve James]

I scent evil when someone says there are too may people in the lifeboat. People who say that never mean themselves.

QFT

[cerebus]

All I'm saying, there are people who seriously believe they are literally eating Christ.

And I find such people to be more than a little out of touch with reality. There are more than a few fundamentalist Christians who feel that witches should be burned or stoned to death beacause "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". Again, more than a little outta touch...

[klonk]

C.S. Lewis had a very good point about killing witches, and I wish more people (including witches) would savor the reasoning rather than jumping up and down about past wrongs.

…one man said to me, “three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?” But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did–-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather–-surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did?

(Mere Christianity, Ch, 2)

You see, there is a subtle point here, one that escapes first glance. If the old craft's dark side is harmless nonsense, there is no reason to persecute anyone. There is also no reason to practice it. Right. Glad we cleared that up...

[Steve James]

You see, there is a subtle point here, one that escapes first glance. If the old craft's dark side is harmless nonsense, there is no reason to persecute anyone. There is also no reason to practice it. Right. Glad we cleared that up...

Hmm, substitute "Christianity" for "the old craft" ... Is the logic still clear?

[klonk]

As I say, the subtlety escapes nearly everyone.

[cerebus]

Ummm... that whole witch thing was just an example I was using... an analogy, not the point itself...

[wiesiek]

.." Burn them!...

[Michael]

I'm just going to take this one statement as an example here. Michael, is that really what you honestly believe? That they are "worshiping" and "pretending to burn a human alive" in a literal sense? Do you really not understand that it's merely symbolic? You actually don't realize that none of them are seriously "worshiping" the owl? It's all a gag, just pseudo-occult trappings with no real meaning behind it other than to get everyone to lay aside their normally overly-serious mindsets. It's to allow them to relax and not feel so tightly wound as they usually have to be.

If you really believe otherwise, then by the same token you can decry every Catholic in the world as "wannabe cannibals" 'cause the bread and wine they take during mass represents the body & blood of Christ. Do you think they are actually wanting to eat human flesh and drink human blood?

Troy, I take your point, but how do you turn this around and put it on me? That is what they are literally doing and saying they are doing, but I'm supposed to consider it some big joke? How is it relaxing to pretend to burn someone alive? How do you know it's a gag?

[Michael]

Mike, you really need to stop with the rense shit man, that site is almost 100% total bullshit when you really take a good look at it.

Yes, thank you for your concern for the umpteenth time And for the umpteenth time I will reply that just because some political satire jpg or mainstream news story is hosted on a rense server doesn't have much bearing on this topic.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Mike, despite the amount of links you give, they are all tantamount to supposition only and have really little or anything to do with any of what they are saying.
there's nothing there.
A bunch of rich and politically inclined people get together in the woods for a barbeque now and then and suddenly, they're all satanists?

as for rense, why shouldn't I know about it? Or any number of other low end alarmist, fanatical, ufo's and aliens etc etc site.

You ever notice that none of them offer anything substantial and it's always coulda woulda shoulda mighta etc etc etc.

I guess now and then they will link out to actual articles, but the reason I know rense is because of the hate propaganda it has and propagates and that I have been shown.
I also know about racist sites, other tin foil hat sites and so on. Does that make me the man mike? Am I CIA now becasue I know where the fruit loop internet sites are?

come on man... lol

[Michael]

Did you not see my smiley? Why is it okay for you to know about rense but not okay for me to link to a jpg hosted by rense?

[Darth Rock&Roll]

mike, it's not a problem that you link to the site, it's that you present it as bonafide. It is clearly not bonafide by any stretch of the imagination and borders on fantasy entertainment for the most part.

I don't have a problem with it, so long as it is presented correctly and not as something it isn't.
You seem to think that rense is a viable "alternative" news source.

When in fact, they get their actual "news" stories from the same newswires as any one else so that's hardly alternative and the rest of the articles are rants by people who hate israel, hate jews or have been wearing tin foil hats for too long. Or they will have a preference towards whichever newspaper is contrary to whichever sitting administration. First Bush was evil and now Obama was evil. If the smurfs got elected, rense would find a way to portray that as evil in order to sell ad space for new age hippy crystal books and blurry photos of the moon with long diatribes by men with bad haircuts on how there are aliens running the show! Seriously, it's laughable and you know it.

surely, you have at least a scrap of objectivity in you?

[Dmitri]

Darth, it's just like with religion.

Where there doesn't seem to be enough evidence, the question inevitably comes down to: "do you believe?"

If the answer is 'yes', then... well, case closed, any further discussion is a complete waste of time, for all parties.

If the answer is 'no', then the next question is, "what's more plausible?"
And the answer to that is driven by a lot of factors and will always be highly subjective, by its very nature. Whether one applies the Occam's razor (AKA "the KISS principle") or not, and where that (if applied) draws the line will always depend on the person so looking for "objectivity" may not even be applicable in this case.

To give you an example... There are a lot of people out there -- very smart, educated, completely sane, etc. -- who can present you with plenty of "evidence of God's existence."
...
Know what I mean?

[Darth Rock&Roll]

"god" is an oblique term. It's very vagueness underlines it's dependency upon belief as opposed to objective fact. NoOt to mention that it fits into virtually any view you would like to fit it into. Vishnu is not Jesus is not Kwan Yin is not YWH is not Allah and so on, but all are representations of the word god.

But human action is measurable and definable.
One can disprove or prove that someone actually did something in the physical and real world.
This can be done through the cause/effect/consequence matrix.
one can prove or disprove that someone existed or that some deed was carried out.
If one tries and tries and tries and still cannot provide conclusive and indisputable veritas, then should they keep trying or should they move on?