CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    NKBJ

    at the ark
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2010
    6,240
    149
    Can't help but be reminded of the preface to Victoria...

    The triumph of the Recovery was marked most clearly by the burning of the Episcopal bishop of Maine.

    She was not a particularly bad bishop. She was in fact typical of Episcopal bishops of the first quarter of the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century: agnostic, compulsively political and radical, and given to placing a small idol of Isis on the altar when she said the Communion service. By 2055, when she was tried for heresy, convicted, and burned, she had outlived her era. By that time only a handful of Episcopalians still recognized female clergy, it would have been easy enough to let the old fool rant out her final years in obscurity.
    The fact that the easy road was not taken, that Episcopalians turned to their difficult duty of trying and convicting, and the state upheld its unpleasant responsibility of setting torch to ******s, was what marked this as an act of Recovery. I well remember the crowd that gathered for the execution, solemn but not sad, relieved rather that at last, after so many years of humiliation, of having to swallow every absurdity and pretend we liked it, the majority had taken back the culture. No more apologies for the truth. No more “Yes, buts” on upholding standards. Civilization had recovered its nerve. The flames that soared above the lawn before the Maine State House were, as the bishopess herself might have said, liberating.
    She could have saved herself, of course, right up until the torch was applied. All she had to do was announce she wasn’t a bishop, or a priest, since Christian tradition forbids a woman to be either. Or she could have confessed she wasn’t a Christian, in which case she could be bishopess, priestess, popess, whatever, in the service of her chosen demons. That would have just gotten her tossed over the border.
    But the Prince of This World whom she served gives his devotees neither an easy nor a dignified exit. She bawled, she babbled, she shrieked in Hellish tongues, she pissed and pooped herself. The pyre was lit at 12:01 PM on a cool, cloudless August 18th, St. Helen’s day. The flames climbed fast; after all, they’d been waiting for her for a long time.
    When it was over, none of us felt good about it. But we’d long since learned feelings were a poor guide. We’d done the right thing.
    ***
    Was the dissolution of the United States inevitable?
    Probably, once all the “diversity” and “multiculturalism” crap got started. Right up to the end the coins carried the motto, E Pluribus Unum, just as the last dreadnought of the Imperial and Royal Austro-Hungarian Navy was the Viribus Unitis. But the reality for both was Ex Uno, Plura.
    It’s odd how clearly the American century is marked: 1865 to 1965. As the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century historian Shelby Foote noted, the first Civil War made us one nation. In 1860, we wrote, “the United States are.” By the end of the war, the verb was singular: “the United States is.” After 1965 and another war we disunited—deconstructed—with equal speed into blacks, whites, Hispanics, womyn, gays, victims, oppressors, left-handed albinos with congenital halitosis, you name it. The homosexuals said silence = death. Nature replied diversity = war.
    In four decades we covered the distance that had taken Rome three centuries. As late as the mid-1960s—God, it’s hard to believe—America was still the greatest nation on earth, the most productive, the freest, the top superpower, a place of safe homes, dutiful children in good schools, strong families, a hot lunch for orphans. By the 1990s the place had the stench of a third-world country. The cities were ravaged by punks, beggars, and bums; as in third century Rome, law applied only to the law-abiding. Schools had become daytime holding pens for illiterate young savages. First television, then the Internet brought the decadence of Weimar Berlin into every home.
    ***
    In this Year of Our Lord 2068—and my 80[SUP]th[/SUP] year on this planet—we citizens of Victoria have the blessed good fortune to live once again in an age of accomplishment and decency. With the exception of New Spain, most of the nations that cover the territory of the former United States are starting to get things working again. The revival of traditional, Western, Christian culture we began is spreading outward from our rocky New England soil, displacing savagery with civilization for a second time.
    I am writing this down so you never forget, not you, nor your children, nor their children. You did not go through the wars, though you have lived with their consequences. Your children will have grown up in a well-ordered, prosperous country, and that can be dangerously comforting. Here, they will read what happens when a people forgets who they are.
    This is my story, the story of the life of one man, John Ira Rumford of Hartland, Maine, soldier and farmer. I came into this world near enough the beginning of the end for the old U.S. of A., on June 28, 1988. I expect to leave it shortly, without regrets.
    It’s also the story of the end of a once-great nation, by someone who saw most of what happened, and why.
    Read it and weep.

     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,677
    113
    Fort Wayne
    If you ever just feel like soaking up Christian history until your tympanic membranes wear out, here's the guy.
    His book is sitting at the house waiting for me to find the time.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HYjau_ulHg
    Dammit, I've been Rick Rolled again.


    I seriously thought this was going to be about Christian history, not, "... secret societies try to enslave humanity. .. the Knights Templar as guardians of the Antichrist, how other secret societies tie into this subject and how they implemented counterfeit constructs to deceive us."


    EDIT: Lest I be accused of being closed minded, I am listening to it (then scrubbing it from my YouTube history). This isn't history, it's pure fantasy. There's a bunch of giants and per-deluvian construction technology... Knights Templar are actively serving Satan... Catholics, too... gotta get the Rothchilds in there, too!

    There's talk of many actual cults and things, but then he goes off the rails and tries to connect then all together into a cabal. Then there's the weird bloodlines...

    He uses I Enoch, which T.Lex may accept, but I do not.

    Vishnu? Lion gods? Shiva? Wait - what?! (1:08)

    He uses the "probably" a whole lot... then says, "It comes together perfectly."


    ...I gotta skip ahead...

    Globalism (expected that one)

    Alien deception?!


    Atlantis?!


    Galactic warfare?! (no wait, that's just going to be a clever ruse) Star Wars is some sort of propaganda to get us to fight in this fake galactic warfare, which the "one world order" needs our (Christians) help to win, but then after the war, they'll kill us.


    The last half hour is just plain ole, "here's the upcoming battle in Israel". (i.e. not history)


    Oh, There's giants hanging out in Afghanistan. Maybe.
     
    Last edited:

    JeepHammer

    SHOOTER
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 2, 2018
    1,904
    83
    SW Indiana
    It's not specific to any sect or church, the ultimate goal of every 'Pinnacle' organization, be it a religion, government, corporation to exert control on everyone.
    This one is pretty simple, the ruling class can't RISE if they don't/can't increase the base.

    While a democracy can SUSTAIN itself, it simply expands/contracts with population,
    Communism requires new input all the time. It MUST increase it's base or die.
    (While the USSR broke up and died, China buddied up to the US to survive, Russia is expanding again, simply to survive)

    While a free market can expand/contract with demand, and profits are decentralized, reinvested in community,
    Capitalism requires all profits move UP to survive so they can buy out/take over free market ventures.

    Real goods, like agricultural products, is a real economy.
    It will expand & contract as demand increases/decreases.
    The 'Consumer' economy is false since it requires an ever expanding base to sustain it, and wages CANNOT keep up with production costs/markups.

    Coal is an example...
    The 'Easy' coal is gone, shallow, high grade, easy to get at has been used up, what's left is both deeper/more expensive to get at, and/or lower grade.
    Coal takes a BUNCH of infrastructure to be useful, highways/trucks, railroads/engines & cars to move, and again the transportation issues with the waste products after it's been burned... And that doesn't address the pollution issues.

    Coal isn't renewable, once removed/burned you have to find new coal.
    Crops can be grown over & over again, without much more than rotating crops and using waste products as fertilizers.

    Coal is dying simply because gas pipelines are cheaper and less trouble than highways/trucks or rail companies,
    And gas is easier to produce with wells instead of huge strip mines or dangerous underground mines,
    AND,
    Mining companies don't get to kill workers for the sake of production anymore and get away with it.

    ----------------

    9/11/01 shook everyone with 3 extra brain cells to the core!
    It knocked the SNOT (and more) out of me, and I've seen a LOT of bad things...

    Some people went back to 'Faith' simply because they didn't know what else to do.
    Some went back to faith because they didn't understand the politics in the middle east.
    Some got mad as hell and joined the military.
    I don't know the motives of the rest were...

    That's really when I started questioning MY (lack of) 'Faith' since my knee jerk reaction was to nuke the entire middle east...

    Then I strated thinking...
    I was in Afghanistan the first time (Soviet invasion) and I saw our military leaders BEG the white house NOT to teach insurgency to the Mujahideen/Taliban simply because you can't put that cat back in the bag...
    And I saw GHW Bush drop Afghanistan like a hot rock when the Soviets left leaving a HUGE power gap the Taliban filled.

    Insurgency turned out to bite us DIRECTLY in the face after 9/11/01 and continues to do so...
    Taliban/ISIS is using what we taught them to use on the Soviets.

    I know for a fact that Reagan/Bush I sold chemical & biological weapons plants to Iraq simply because Iran took hostages.
    I know for a fact Reagan/Bush I sold weapons to both sides in that war, violating both US law & international law.

    And it didn't go unnoticed in the middle east... Why do you think they refer to the US as 'The Great Satan'?
    Doesn't 'Satan' supply/support ANYONE doing catastrophic things in religion as long as it creates death & suffering in religion?
    We know it was political decisions, but with religion being the only filter many middle easterners have, the US became 'Satan' incarnate.

    I don't have all the answers but I can see catastrophic mistakes in hindsight... Well after most of the facts come to light and the consequences smack me right in the face...
    I can be a little dense, make a LOT of mistakes, slow but I'm not entirely stupid.

    When you do something 'Good', like feeding hungry people, getting the homeless under a roof, finding help for the mentally ill, the consequences don't commonly result in terrorist attacks & wars...
    And I'm completely aware of the irony of that statement coming from a career Marine that NEVER got deployed anywhere unless someone was going to die, and I spent a LOT of time deployed.

    Maybe because I have several years of hindsight, and was deployed in such absloutley crap-hole places I'm able to connect the dots now.
    Then it was my mission, and follow orders. Period.
    Now I wonder if the people giving orders were qualified since they couldn't see what the obvious results were going to be...?
    Or did they just give into knee-jerk, short sighted reactions instead of thinking things through and acting instead of reacting...?
    Didn't we elect them to have the long view, think things through and take actions instead of knee-jerk reactions...?

    If there is a Heaven and Hell, I know I'm in for a big free fall simply because I *Thought* I was doing the 'Right' thing and following orders...
    Many it's PTSD, maybe it's mental illness, maybe it's 'Faith' trying to come through,
    What I do know is it weighs heavy on my conscience... Not just for what I did, but for the actions/reactions it set in motion.

    I have a LOT more questions than answers...
     

    rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    If there is a Heaven and Hell, I know I'm in for a big free fall simply because I *Thought* I was doing the 'Right' thing and following orders...
    Many it's PTSD, maybe it's mental illness, maybe it's 'Faith' trying to come through,
    What I do know is it weighs heavy on my conscience... Not just for what I did, but for the actions/reactions it set in motion.

    I have a LOT more questions than answers...

    Would it help to know you do NOT have to pay the price for any wrong doings that are weighing on your conscience? To know the weight of guilt CAN be lifted?
    The path to heaven or hell is not determined by your actions. No matter what any of us DO, it is neither good enough nor bad enough to determine our eternal fate.

    This is what we believe Jesus did for us... He took on the death sentence that we deserve for our sins. All He asks is for our Faith... our belief that He is who He says He is; that is the path to Heaven.

    If there is a glimmer of Faith you feel, then I urge you to explore that.

    What questions about this can we help you with?

    -rvb
     

    NKBJ

    at the ark
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2010
    6,240
    149
    Dammit, I've been Rick Rolled again.


    I seriously thought this was going to be about Christian history, not, "... secret societies try to enslave humanity. .. the Knights Templar as guardians of the Antichrist, how other secret societies tie into this subject and how they implemented counterfeit constructs to deceive us."


    EDIT: Lest I be accused of being closed minded, I am listening to it (then scrubbing it from my YouTube history). This isn't history, it's pure fantasy. There's a bunch of giants and per-deluvian construction technology... Knights Templar are actively serving Satan... Catholics, too... gotta get the Rothchilds in there, too!

    There's talk of many actual cults and things, but then he goes off the rails and tries to connect then all together into a cabal. Then there's the weird bloodlines...

    He uses I Enoch, which T.Lex may accept, but I do not.

    Vishnu? Lion gods? Shiva? Wait - what?! (1:08)

    He uses the "probably" a whole lot... then says, "It comes together perfectly."


    ...I gotta skip ahead...

    Globalism (expected that one)

    Alien deception?!


    Atlantis?!


    Galactic warfare?! (no wait, that's just going to be a clever ruse) Star Wars is some sort of propaganda to get us to fight in this fake galactic warfare, which the "one world order" needs our (Christians) help to win, but then after the war, they'll kill us.


    The last half hour is just plain ole, "here's the upcoming battle in Israel". (i.e. not history)


    Oh, There's giants hanging out in Afghanistan. Maybe.

    LOL, it's an interview with a researcher / author and there's bunches of history rolled up in there.
    There are many (including unpopular) facts included as back drop to his thoroughly supported and frequently unpopular conclusions.
    Hope you enjoyed it.
     
    Last edited:

    NKBJ

    at the ark
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 21, 2010
    6,240
    149
    It it "social justice" or rather that electronic mass media has been used to undermine and overcome (past tense) the self-regulating capabilities of the culture? Reckon I'm asking that somewhat rhetorically because my opinion on the matter was settled long before we all acquired the interseine.

    I believe and agree with you 100% that we desperately need divine help. I also believe that for each of us it is there for the asking. On the national level we're toast. Individually we can be triumphant, lifted up by the love and mighty power of our father.
     

    PaulF

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Apr 4, 2009
    3,045
    83
    Indianapolis
    Good read bug, thanks for sharing.

    I think the article misses the real problem that religion faces in the 21st century, especially in the so-called "west". Churches aren't losing members because of the evil liberal media or because of their acceptance of "social justice". Churches are losing members because increasingly fewer people can relate to the world view they offer. To me and an ever-increasing number of our fellow Americans, the stories offered as truth by modern religion pass well beyond the threshold of believability and on into to the realm of the absurd.

    This is a real problem for you guys, more serious than I think many of you realize.

    Simply put, the Bible doesn't describe the world I live in. It repeatedly offers "facts" that run from suspiciously unverifiable to verifiably errant, which makes the things I'm asked to take on faith that much harder to accept. Further, I'm not interested in the "reward" that the bible offers. Eternal "life" after death? That alone is a solid no from me. An eternity of unbroken consciousness sounds terrifying to me, and that's leaving aside the myriad implications of eternal service to the God of Abraham...an angry, vengeful god known for making "Covenants" it has no intention of keeping. Seriously...no thanks.

    There are some real hurdles believers will have to clear to turn this tide, and I think its worse than many of you see. You can no longer count on the inertia of tradition or the weight of social pressure to lend credence to your religious claims, and the claims themselves look ever more dubious as the catalogue of human knowledge expands.

    It isn't just the question of whether God exists or not, but also whether your religion's description of God is reliable...and this is another place modern religion is falling sorely flat. Both of the two largest religions on Earth claim that everything that we need to know about God was learned centuries ago, and only their understanding of the divine can be correct. The modern student has a wealth of different descriptions of God and Religious Service available for consideration, and less social or political pressure to accept any particular view. These students aren't blinded by tradition or dogma, and are free to make their own decisions about religion.

    It seems to me an increasing number are choosing to reject your version of god in search of a genuine relationship with a real God, if such a thing really exists...or, in absence of that, to understand and live a meaningful and productive life in world without gods.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,677
    113
    Fort Wayne
    LOL, it's an interview with a researcher / author and there's bunches of history rolled up in there.
    There are many (including unpopular) facts included as back drop to his thoroughly supported and frequently unpopular conclusions.
    Hope you enjoyed it.

    It was an eye opening trip, to say the least.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    I think the reason Christianity in particular is losing people is because of First World Problems.

    Christianity is specifically not a religion that "connects" very well with affluent, spoiled people. It is hope for people who have hardships - real hardships. Not "my iced latte has too much ice" type problems.

    In contemporary America, the younger kids tend to focus on themselves (even more than us GenXers did/do). As PaulF observes, they can't really relate to a life of struggle.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,677
    113
    Fort Wayne
    I think the reason Christianity in particular is losing people is because of First World Problems.

    Christianity is specifically not a religion that "connects" very well with affluent, spoiled people. It is hope for people who have hardships - real hardships. Not "my iced latte has too much ice" type problems.

    In contemporary America, the younger kids tend to focus on themselves (even more than us GenXers did/do). As PaulF observes, they can't really relate to a life of struggle.
    Perhaps it's an eye of the needle thing - all the stuff, money, good health, social connections, etc. make it hard to connect with God.
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    Perhaps it's an eye of the needle thing - all the stuff, money, good health, social connections, etc. make it hard to connect with God.

    gkc0n55721k21.png
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,555
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Good read bug, thanks for sharing.

    I think the article misses the real problem that religion faces in the 21st century, especially in the so-called "west". Churches aren't losing members because of the evil liberal media or because of their acceptance of "social justice". Churches are losing members because increasingly fewer people can relate to the world view they offer. To me and an ever-increasing number of our fellow Americans, the stories offered as truth by modern religion pass well beyond the threshold of believability and on into to the realm of the absurd.

    This is a real problem for you guys, more serious than I think many of you realize.

    Simply put, the Bible doesn't describe the world I live in. It repeatedly offers "facts" that run from suspiciously unverifiable to verifiably errant, which makes the things I'm asked to take on faith that much harder to accept. Further, I'm not interested in the "reward" that the bible offers. Eternal "life" after death? That alone is a solid no from me. An eternity of unbroken consciousness sounds terrifying to me, and that's leaving aside the myriad implications of eternal service to the God of Abraham...an angry, vengeful god known for making "Covenants" it has no intention of keeping. Seriously...no thanks.

    There are some real hurdles believers will have to clear to turn this tide, and I think its worse than many of you see. You can no longer count on the inertia of tradition or the weight of social pressure to lend credence to your religious claims, and the claims themselves look ever more dubious as the catalogue of human knowledge expands.

    It isn't just the question of whether God exists or not, but also whether your religion's description of God is reliable...and this is another place modern religion is falling sorely flat. Both of the two largest religions on Earth claim that everything that we need to know about God was learned centuries ago, and only their understanding of the divine can be correct. The modern student has a wealth of different descriptions of God and Religious Service available for consideration, and less social or political pressure to accept any particular view. These students aren't blinded by tradition or dogma, and are free to make their own decisions about religion.

    It seems to me an increasing number are choosing to reject your version of god in search of a genuine relationship with a real God, if such a thing really exists...or, in absence of that, to understand and live a meaningful and productive life in world without gods.


    I'm guessing you won't find it shocking that I disagree, Paul :)

    I don't see how moral relativism, in the truly Einsienian sense where each person gets to draw his own axes and reference everything to personal preference, can result in any sort of stable system whereby society as a whole agrees that certain ideas of good should function as universal constants (as c does in E=mc2)

    If people are moving in the direction you believe, I would expect noticeable growth in things like Bhuddism; wherein the individual is primarily responsible for himself and the path he walks. I don't think you can get to the 'Star Trek' society (for want of a better term) without a major uptick in personal responsibility targeted toward the actual greater good, not just what they are told it is. I can be convinced (and have been) to take certain actions for the good of the overall environment, for example; but I cannot be browbeaten into taking actions I consider to be useless and ineffective or even counterproductive. I have generally approved of MPG standards being the stick (and the carrot) that encouraged such advances as direct injection or variable valve timing and the general computerization of the internal combustion engine for greater efficiency. There were some rough spots but overall it resulted in more effective use of resources and less pollution. I have to draw the line, however, at pushing that concept to absurd limits where it is obvious the standards are meant to mandate ever smaller engines moving ever lighter vehicles. At some level it becomes social engineering and limits choice, but the GND folks would consider that apostasy

    I think having definite parameters of what constitutes good and evil is very helpful for people finding their way in the world, I think moral relativism makes it easy to forgive yourself for a lot

    We can however, disagree on some of the parameters and on who gets to set them. I would take the uptick in personal responsibility just about any way I can get it. It seems to me that right now some people on both sides of this issue that can agree on what constitutes personal responsibility should be natural allies until such time as we beat back socialism. It reminds me of the disconnect between gay men and gay women. You would think they would share a great many issues and viewpoints and would be natural allies, but you would be wrong. Only the direst issues can get them to rise above their animosity for each other (which is rooted in gender) even a little

    So I would suggest we fight together for as long as our paths coincide and save the argument over who's morality should prevail until we actually have a moral enough system in play to make a meaningful choice
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom