underdog

[pianistimo]

despite several scary moments for children (for whom, i am assuming, the movie was made for) - which were dealing with the mad scientist and a long needle pointed towards underdog - this movie was a little on the hilarious light side and shows the idea of justice and compassion - which i like.  the ending is quite just. 

and it's quite funny when underdog starts rhyming everything he says. 

ps i wanted to go to 'no resevations' but ended up with this kids movie.  i actually enjoyed it.  next time - i will sneak away to see what i want to see.  has anyone seen 'no reservations?'  what did they think of it?

[rimv2]

despite several scary moments for children (for whom, i am assuming, the movie was made for) - which were dealing with the mad scientist and a long needle pointed towards underdog - this movie was a little on the hilarious light side. 

i suppose there is nothing religious about it - but it does show the idea of justice and compassion - which i like.  the ending is quite just. 

and it's quite funny when underdog starts rhyming everything he says. 

ps i wanted to go to 'no resevations' but ended up with this kids movie.  i actually enjoyed it.  next time - i will sneak away to see what i want to see.  has anyone seen 'no reservations?'  what did they think of it?

Really? That sounds perfect for a family outing. Were you with your kids or did you just happen to wonder into this movie. Believe me, I know what it's like to have an idea about what you believe you want to see and then have it seemingly taken away. But, strangely you find a new sense of enjoy from taking this other path. Here is another movie that the family might be able to enjoy. 

[pianistimo]

must be x-rated - it won't come up.  rimv2 - you really should behave yourself.

[lau]

another movie with talking animals mixed with humor that is getting really old. sick

[pianistimo]

yes.  i suppose when you get down to it - the animals were fairly tortured to make this movie, too.  i don't like animal cruelty.  let's just not see any more of these.

[jlh]

must be x-rated - it won't come up.  rimv2 - you really should behave yourself.

It's not x-rated... though you might not like it.  He typed the URL wrong, so that's why it didn't come up (there's a [ " ] at the end and that's an illegal character for URL's).  Here's the video he TRIED to send you:

https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5216975979627863972

More propaganda, what else? 

[pianistimo]

how did this get in my underdog thread?  i listened to it and found it quite interesting - but a little biased towards the sun.  i mean, if the sun is a created thing - why worship it?  and, i believe that satan (the dragon - or draco) was conceived and put in the constellation without his having any say.  i believe that the constellation was God's early way of explaining time and 'aons' or ages - but in a much different way.  it is only interpreted by humans one way - but by God another.

for one thing - he created the sun and moon for seasons - and then He gives his own months which (if you read the OT calendars) are lunar - not solar.  although, the sun and moon tend to work together when figuring months and years. 

ok.  so we have some similarities - but i do not believe that horus or the idea of horus was 'plagarized.'  for one thing - horus is a figment of the egyptians imagination and not truly a real being.  basically - they are the ones imagining 'eternity.'  who gave them this concept?  God - in the garden of eden!  and, who explained the constellations to man first?  God - probably to abraham (who interestingly lived in ur - which became a center of understanding of astronomy and science).  and, sargon - most likely was no other than NIMROD - who began a false religion to counter the true religion and worship of the true God.

abraham was a follower of the true God - so to find out truth - one must search for relevant things according to God's word.  one would be the accurate calendar and times for worship.  Dec 25th was never a given date in the bible for the worship of God.  in fact, harvest time was much more important.  if you travel to israel - you will notice the festival of sukkot is not december 25th - but rather - sometime in september/early oct.  when the harvest that God allowed (via the sun he created) is harvested.  symbolic of the harvest of mankind at the judgement (wheat and tares, etc). 

so, take a look at the back of the companion bible and figure for yourself when Jesus Christ actually was born.  we know the course of abia had something to do with it - which was actually recorded.  and, we know that 'shepherds were abiding in the fields.'  now, some say that is completely possible in israel in december - albeit quite a bad time for a baby to be born and usually not the time (right before )that people would TRAVEL to take a census.  Sept. 11th is what I heard.  and, though i can't remember the year - possible 4 or 3 BC.  (to avoid the wrath of the herod - who killed - supposedly - all the baby boys under 2 years of age).

God even predicted this to happen (the birth of Christ) back in Isaiah - and also his death.  that He would be 'cut off' in the middle of the week.  which - when you look at when Jesus died - was probably a wednesday  - and risen three days later.  wed evening crux night/ thur   thur night/friday    friday night/saturday  risen before the sun on sunday.  he was gone.  out of the tomb when mary and the other mary came to see the tomb.  'as it began to dawn....'  he wasn't IN the tomb on sunday.  in fact, he was ressurrected before 'it began to dawn.' 

now, i'll look for the site which explains in modern terms some of the symbology of the astrological figures in terms of God's own story he may have given to abraham and also to other saints, like joseph - who may have shared some of it with the egyptians - countering their beliefs that the sun was a god at all.  and, that the seasons were entirely dependent upon crops - which joseph saved the egyptians from extinction by understanding the dream of pharoah (the understanding given to him by God) - and letting pharoah know that God stands alone - apart from His creation.  and that it is not the sun that helps mankind survive - but God.

[pianistimo]

ps in a sense, Jesus was always thought of as a sort of underdog - or second thought - but truly He began the whole idea of salvation and there is no other name by which we can be saved.  certainly not mythological gods like dioynisius, mythras, sargon (nimrod, the man/god?/mighty hunter), horus, or Satan himself.  i think satan was listening when God gave his plans for salvation and the redemption of mankind to moses - the giver of the laws =sin/death - so that moses would understand the promise land not to be 'land' only - but a figurative sense of our final destination.  the kingdom of God.

here's one link:
https://www.mainstreetbaptist.org/salvation-in-the-stars/#1

this is the one i was looking for.  bullinger's 'the witness of the stars' :
https://philologos.org/__eb-tws/chap11.htm

and, seiss 'the gospel in the stars' and rolleston's 'mazzaroth - the constellations'
https://philologos.org/__eb-mazzaroth/

'the heavens declare the glory of God....' 

job 38:31-33 'can you bind the chains of the pleiades, or loose the cords of orion?  can you lead forth a constellation in its season, and guide the bear with her satellites?  do you know the ordinances of the heavens, or fix their rule over the earth?

if God created all these things - then certainly He could create a star - which was MOVING (not static) for the three wise men to follow to the place of Jesus birth - just like he did for the shepherds in the field - who realized that they were seeing an ANGEL.  not just a star.  'and an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terribly frightened.' ...' and suddenly, there are ppeared with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host (stars of God?) praising God and saying 'Glory to God in the highest....'

even Satan is referred to as 'the morning star.'  'how you have fallen - o morning star....'

[ahinton]

how did this get in my underdog thread?

How indeed? - although I am rather more inclined to ask myself WHY...

 i believe that the constellation was God's early way of explaining time and 'aons' or ages - but in a much different way.  it is only interpreted by humans one way - but by God another.

for one thing - he created the sun and moon for seasons - and then He gives his own months which (if you read the OT calendars) are lunar - not solar.

There's some seriously lunatic stuff here that is full of solecisms...

and, sargon - most likely was no other than NIMROD - who began a false religion to counter the true religion and worship of the true God.

So should I assume that you skip over Variation IX whenever you listen to Elgar's Enigma Variations, then?...

abraham was a follower of the true God - so to find out truth - one must search for relevant things according to God's word.  one would be the accurate calendar and times for worship.  Dec 25th was never a given date in the bible for the worship of God.  in fact, harvest time was much more important.  if you travel to israel - you will notice the festival of sukkot is not december 25th - but rather - sometime in september/early oct.  when the harvest that God allowed (via the sun he created) is harvested.  symbolic of the harvest of mankind at the judgement (wheat and tares, etc). 

Rather more chaff than wheat here, it would seem...

so, take a look at the back of the companion bible

The what?

and figure for yourself when Jesus Christ actually was born.  we know the course of abia had something to do with it - which was actually recorded.

I'm not actually all that bothered about the precise date, frankly.

and, we know that 'shepherds were abiding in the fields.'

Well, now there's an esoteric deduction! Shepherds throughout history have rather tended towards working in fields, you know...

now, some say that is completely possible in israel in december

Do they? Who does? And, rather more importantly, what is?

albeit quite a bad time for a baby to be born

Who says so? And why? I admit that my knowledge of babies is vastly less than yours, but why would there be good times and bad times for birth on a calendar basis alone?

Sept. 11th is what I heard.

What? You mean that 9/11 wasn't even original?

and, though i can't remember the year - possible 4 or 3 BC.  (to avoid the wrath of the herod - who killed - supposedly - all the baby boys under 2 years of age).

Christ was born possibly 3 or 4 years before the birth of Christ, then; well, that's just a starting example for the kind of confused thinking, obfuscation and the rest that continues to beleaguer this entire business.

God even predicted this to happen (the birth of Christ) back in Isaiah - and also his death.  that He would be 'cut off' in the middle of the week.  which - when you look at when Jesus died - was probably a wednesday  - and risen three days later.  wed evening crux night/ thur   thur night/friday    friday night/saturday  risen before the sun on sunday.  he was gone.  out of the tomb when mary and the other mary came to see the tomb.  'as it began to dawn....'  he wasn't IN the tomb on sunday.  in fact, he was ressurrected before 'it began to dawn.'

You know, you write all this detail with such apparent confidence that one might almost be forgiven for assuming that you were there right from the time that God predicted the birth of Christ in Isaiah (why and how did He do it there? - and was Isaiah not capable of thinking and writing for himself?). It's all a STORY, Susan - just that; no more and no less.

now, i'll look for the site which explains in modern terms some of the symbology of the astrological figures in terms of God's own story he may have given to abraham and also to other saints, like joseph - who may have shared some of it with the egyptians - countering their beliefs that the sun was a god at all.  and, that the seasons were entirely dependent upon crops - which joseph saved the egyptians from extinction by understanding the dream of pharoah (the understanding given to him by God) - and letting pharoah know that God stands alone - apart from His creation.  and that it is not the sun that helps mankind survive - but God.

"God's own story"? By your own admission, God was not a storyteller and, it seems, He was capable of putting across ideas only via the mouthpieces of others. So the sun does nothing to help in the survival of mankind? Well, that's really aboyut as nonsensical as you yet got, Susan. How can you even think such a thing, let alone write it?

And what has all of this to do with anything under a dog? God is "dog" backwards, admittedly, but I cannot see it going a whole lot farther than that. I am reminded of Groucho Marx's statement that ran something along the lines of "outside of a dog, a book is the greatest thing; inside of a dog, it's too dark to make any difference" (he didn't say what it might be like under one)...

(Waits for Santa Susanna to start addressing "ahinton"...)

Best,

Alistair

[soliloquy]

godammit people you can't pregnant dog about susan changing the topic to religion when you're purposefully egging her on.


Anyway, looking forward to Super Bad with Michael Cera of Arrested Development.  Also waiting for Kung Pow 2 (which comes out in 2008) and the Arrested Development Movie (which is supposed to come out 2009).  Might see Balls of Fury.

Arrested Development- top rated TV show on IMDB beating out Family Guy, Simpsons, Seinfeld, Frasier, Friends, Will and Grace, Daily Show etc.  5 emmy noms in the first season alone.  Fox cancels it =/  *** idiot Fox demographic ._.

[opus10no2]

Oh my GOD I simply ADORED Kung Pow!

[thalbergmad]

horus is a figment of the egyptians imagination and not truly a real being. 

You know that for a fact do you? What bollox you come out with sometimes.

He was as real to the Egyptians as your God is to you and the cult of Horus probably goes back to a time when you and other fanatical tambo bangers would have us believe that the universe had not yet been created.

There are indeed some similarities between other ancient religious texts and the Bible, such as the Egyptian book of the dead and the Popul Voh. There are creation stories, large towers, virgin births, people rising from the dead and even infants floating down rivers in baskets.

Your silly book is not even unique.

Thal

[pianistimo]

yes. but, who's actually came first. you see, God had this idea of salvation from the beginning - and the request of abraham for the sacrifice of his son issac was only a forshadowing of what was to come.  the egyptians never provided any god that would sacrifice himself for others.  it was always the other way around.  in fact, when the pharoahs died - they often wanted their servants to go with them so they could serve them in the afterlife.  Jesus Christ came as a servant to those He ruled.  quite a different idea for a God - so i wouldn't say that anything in christianity is copied in terms of intent.  i believe even the constellations were renamed and assigned from what God originally designated.  perhaps they were a reminder to those who understood - that God has a plan of salvation and it's written entirely in the sky for those who read it - including the star (angel) that led the wise men to the place of Jesus birth.  the stars serve God's pupose - and the popul vuh is a figment of ancient men's superstition.

[ahinton]

godammit people you can't pregnant dog about susan changing the topic to religion when you're purposefully egging her on.

Pregnant underdog, presumably? And the idea of unscrambled eggs under a dog seems likely to be a somewhat short-lived one. Anyway, to be rather more serious, I cannot speak for anyone else on this but cannot help mention that the notion of the underdog (which is, after all, the thread topic) has no obvious direct umbilical (sorry, Adam & Eve) connection with matters of the Deity...

Anyway, looking forward to Super Bad with Michael Cera of Arrested Development.  Also waiting for Kung Pow 2 (which comes out in 2008) and the Arrested Development Movie (which is supposed to come out 2009).  Might see Balls of Fury.

Arrested Development- top rated TV show on IMDB beating out Family Guy, Simpsons, Seinfeld, Frasier, Friends, Will and Grace, Daily Show etc.  5 emmy noms in the first season alone.

I do not feel qualifed to comment intelligently on these manifestations of arrested development any more than I am able to respond meaningfully about the furiousness of otherwise of the balls that you mention.

Fox cancels it =/  *** idiot Fox demographic ._.

Jason Fox, would that be?...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

(see below - don't know why this appeared twice)

[ahinton]

yes. but, who's actually came first. you see,

It's back to that chicken and that egg, it seems - except that the latter is now apparently under the dog...

God had this idea of salvation from the beginning

Which you know only because He told you about it personally, or so it would seem...

i believe even the constellations were renamed and assigned from what God originally designated.

Assigned? those wretched lawyers were evidently at their exercise even all those years ago!

perhaps they were a reminder to those who understood - that God has a plan of salvation and it's written entirely in the sky

With diamonds?

including the star (angel) that led the wise men to the place of Jesus birth.  the stars serve God's pupose - and the popul vuh is a figment of ancient men's superstition.

And rather too many of the purportings of Susan are a figment of modern presbyterian Pennsylvanian woman's ditto, methinks...

Best,

Alistair

[jlh]

lol Alistair!  Internet problems? 

[thalbergmad]

and the popul vuh is a figment of ancient men's superstition.

It disgusts me that you diminish other religious writings, when the one you rely on is no more than ancient mans superstition itself. What you have written above, is a perfect description of the Old Testament.

The Egyptians were an advanced civilisation over a 1000 years before your Abraham and other assorted goat hearders came on the scene.

Thal

[pianistimo]

dance around with the popul vuh if you think you are more advanced, too, then.   as i see it - you have a choice.  i'm not taking the choice away from you.  i'm just saying - do you want to look stupid?  incantations are what elijah proved the followers of baal were doing in vain.  just muttering incantations is not advanced thinking.  try a religion that gets results.

ps  tell me if this makes any sense whatsoever to you.  ancient or not - these people were deluded.  https://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/maya/pvgm/pv08.htm

there are many ways to satan and only one way to God.  Jesus Christ.  as mentioned abov e- sunworship is a good indication that it's not the one true God one is worshipping.  rather, a false god.  one the mayans actually sacrificed children and virgins to.  you can see from the beginning - they adopt many religious ideas into this religion. it's basically 'let's see what works.'  there are recipies like this.

i believe that the epic of gilgamesh started this whole wierded out bible story thing.  genesis 10:10 mentions babel and erech (urak) where gilgamesh ruled.  (another name for nimrod).  and accad and calneh, in the land of shinar.  now, the popul vuh mentions Nim-Ac  or nimrod-of accad   and nim-tziis  or nimrod who knew of the 'bread of life' or worship of the one who holds the 'four corners' of the earth - mentioned in the popul vuh as being created - and substituted himself for this bread. 

nimrod was no other than sargon I - of these previous cities - and the sumerians paid tribute to the 'skies' (sun, moon, stars, planets) with sacrifice of their children.  the tower of babel was echoed by the aztecs, mayans, and incas - and nimrod's mother - semiramis gave women 'power' of creation as well with fertility and the accompanying rites.  tammuz was the 'reincarnated' nimrod - (whom semiramis deified as the 'sungod') after nimrod was killed by a wild boar.  actually, i think it was 'seth' who killed nimrod - but in any case - he died and semiramis kept his name going.

ps i believe the reference to the early beings in the popul vuh refer directly to demons - who lost their love of God and praising him and became like wood, but were not created from wood.  without love to God or the other angels who worship the true God.  they were not first 'men' - but first 'beings'  created with manlike features and yet 'without blood.'

also, i believe that ezekiel mentions satan as falling like lightening.  thus, the reference in various places to the lightening, the various jewels that surrounded satan when he was created in beauty, and his old name 'lucifer' - light bringer - was the depiction of a 'good god' - and one that he wanted to maintain with this 'emerald-like' image of himself. ezekiel 28:13 'you were in eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering; the ruby, the topaz, and the diamond; the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the lapis lazuli, the turquoise, and the emerald; and the gold, the workmanship of your settings and sockets was in you, on the day that you were created they were prepared.' 

[ahinton]

dance around with the popul vuh if you think you are more advanced, too, then.

Or you with that pole, perhaps...

as i see it - you have a choice.

As in "read the rest of this" or "don't read the rest of this"?

i'm not taking the choice away from you.

"Oh, no, they can't take that awy from me"...

i'm just saying - do you want to look stupid?

You can run a fine line in irony, Susan - not to mention pots and kettles...

incantations are what elijah proved the followers of baal were doing in vain.

I thought that they were a flute piece by Jolivet...

just muttering incantations is not advanced thinking.

Do try to remember that in a contemporary speech context, Susan...

try a religion that gets results.

Regardless of the nature of (some of) those results?

ps  tell me if this makes any sense whatsoever to you.

Neat question coming from you, ma chère...

there are many ways to satan and only one way to God.  Jesus Christ.

Thus spake the non-Zoroastrian; all religions other than Christianity (and you particular brand thereof, no doubt) offer no way to God. How very Christian of you.

as mentioned abov e- sunworship is a good indication that it's not the one true God one is worshipping.  rather, a false god.  one the mayans actually sacrificed children and virgins to.  you can see from the beginning - they adopt many religious ideas into this religion. it's basically 'let's see what works.'  there are recipies like this.

I think that I'll decline any dinner invitation from you then, Susan...

i believe that the epic of gilgamesh started this whole wierded out bible story thing.  genesis 10:10 mentions babel and erech (urak) where gilgamesh ruled.  (another name for nimrod).  and accad and calneh, in the land of shinar.  now, the popul vuh mentions Nim-Ac  or nimrod-of accad   and nim-tziis  or nimrod who knew of the 'bread of life' or worship of the one who holds the 'four corners' of the earth - mentioned in the popul vuh as being created - and substituted himself for this bread.

What about THIS epic, then? And there's no substitue for good bread...

 
nimrod was no other than sargon I - of these previous cities - and the sumerians paid tribute to the 'skies' (sun, moon, stars, planets) with sacrifice of their children.  the tower of babel was echoed by the aztecs, mayans, and incas - and nimrod's mother - semiramis gave women 'power' of creation as well with fertility and the accompanying rites.  tammuz was the 'reincarnated' nimrod - (whom semiramis deified as the 'sungod') after nimrod was killed by a wild boar.  actually, i think it was 'seth' who killed nimrod - but in any case - he died and semiramis kept his name going.

ps i believe the reference to the early beings in the popul vuh refer directly to demons - who lost their love of God and praising him and became like wood, but were not created from wood.  without love to God or the other angels who worship the true God.  they were not first 'men' - but first 'beings'  created with manlike features and yet 'without blood.'

also, i believe that ezekiel mentions satan as falling like lightening.  thus, the reference in various places to the lightening, the various jewels that surrounded satan when he was created in beauty, and his old name 'lucifer' - light bringer - was the depiction of a 'good god' - and one that he wanted to maintain with this 'emerald-like' image of himself. ezekiel 28:13 'you were in eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering; the ruby, the topaz, and the diamond; the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the lapis lazuli, the turquoise, and the emerald; and the gold, the workmanship of your settings and sockets was in you, on the day that you were created they were prepared.' 

Here endeth the umpteenth lesson...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

dance around with the popul vuh if you think you are more advanced, too, then.   as i see it - you have a choice.  i'm not taking the choice away from you.  i'm just saying - do you want to look stupid?  incantations are what elijah proved the followers of baal were doing in vain.  just muttering incantations is not advanced thinking.  try a religion that gets results.

It is bad enough that you trumpet the bilge you believe in, but it is even worse when you try to diminish other religious writings.

The major reason why the cultures and beliefs of Ancient South America did not survive, is because the bead juggling morons of 16th Century Europe did their best to wipe an entire race and belief system off the face of the Earth. People were torturted and killed, ancient religious texts were burned, idols and other artefacts were melted down to extract the gold.

This is how Chrisianity used to operate. If someone has a belief other than your own, destroy them.

The rest of your post is demented and is not worth commenting on.

Thal

[pianistimo]

i really have no opinion on face painting and spear blowing.  but, to sacrifice women and children (up to 10,000 per year) is an advanced civilization?  whew.  i think i know why you like it.  men ruled.  and, they made up stories as they went along.   cortez probably killed them for the gold - not their religion.  although, montezuma knew that the christian God hated human sacrifice and thought cortez was his incarnation. 

if they were an 'advanced civilization' - why did cortez win when his side (the conquistadors) were outnumbered 1000 to 1?  all they did was fire some rounds of rocket propelled rocks and they kept coming - so they fired more.  montezuma was killed by his own people - but not before cortez had kidnapped him once and told him the terms that he wanted peace by.  he never agreed and that's why his own people killed him.   

[rimv2]

How indeed? - although I am rather more inclined to ask myself WHY...
There's some seriously lunatic stuff here that is full of solecisms...
So should I assume that you skip over Variation IX whenever you listen to Elgar's Enigma Variations, then?...
Rather more chaff than wheat here, it would seem...
The what?
I'm not actually all that bothered about the precise date, frankly.
Well, now there's an esoteric deduction! Shepherds throughout history have rather tended towards working in fields, you know...
Do they? Who does? And, rather more importantly, what is?
Who says so? And why? I admit that my knowledge of babies is vastly less than yours, but why would there be good times and bad times for birth on a calendar basis alone?
What? You mean that 9/11 wasn't even original?
Christ was born possibly 3 or 4 years before the birth of Christ, then; well, that's just a starting example for the kind of confused thinking, obfuscation and the rest that continues to beleaguer this entire business.
You know, you write all this detail with such apparent confidence that one might almost be forgiven for assuming that you were there right from the time that God predicted the birth of Christ in Isaiah (why and how did He do it there? - and was Isaiah not capable of thinking and writing for himself?). It's all a STORY, Susan - just that; no more and no less.
"God's own story"? By your own admission, God was not a storyteller and, it seems, He was capable of putting across ideas only via the mouthpieces of others. So the sun does nothing to help in the survival of mankind? Well, that's really aboyut as nonsensical as you yet got, Susan. How can you even think such a thing, let alone write it?

And what has all of this to do with anything under a dog? God is "dog" backwards, admittedly, but I cannot see it going a whole lot farther than that. I am reminded of Groucho Marx's statement that ran something along the lines of "outside of a dog, a book is the greatest thing; inside of a dog, it's too dark to make any difference" (he didn't say what it might be like under one)...

(Waits for Santa Susanna to start addressing "ahinton"...)

Best,

Alistair

That you read an entire pianistissimo post - phenomenal!

That you dissected and responded to each piece individually - well that's just sick

Pianistimo, you seem to be proving a notion I had about people of faith rationalizing rather than accepting truth. Ask yourself, "what if this information is true? What if the religion I follow is nothing more than a recycled idea"? I asked myself that question. My theory of time loops makes more sense than what you are saying. And that's not a good thing. Your belief is your belief. I can't question that. I can, however, question why you don't question it.

It is bad enough that you trumpet the bilge you believe in, but it is even worse when you try to diminish other religious writings.

The major reason why the cultures and beliefs of Ancient South America did not survive, is because the bead juggling morons of 16th Century Europe did their best to wipe an entire race and belief system off the face of the Earth. People were torturted and killed, ancient religious texts were burned, idols and other artefacts were melted down to extract the gold.

This is how Chrisianity used to operate. If someone has a belief other than your own, destroy them.

The rest of your post is demented and is not worth commenting on.

Thal

Arguing is pointless anyway.

By criticizing a person or his beliefs directly you only serve to force him or her find more reasons to be or believe. Being wrong = pain. People avoid pain at almost all costs.

i really have no opinion on face painting and spear blowing.  but, to sacrifice women and children (up to 10,000 per year) is an advanced civilization?  whew.  i think i know why you like it.  men ruled.  and, they made up stories as they went along.   cortez probably killed them for the gold - not their religion.  although, montezuma knew that the christian God hated human sacrifice and thought cortez was his incarnation. 

if they were an 'advanced civilization' - why did cortez win when his side (the conquistadors) were outnumbered 1000 to 1?  all they did was fire some rounds of rocket propelled rocks and they kept coming - so they fired more.  montezuma was killed by his own people - but not before cortez had kidnapped him once and told him the terms that he wanted peace by.  he never agreed and that's why his own people killed him.   

I rest my point.

PS Arrows vs Bullets

[thalbergmad]

all they did was fire some rounds of rocket propelled rocks and they kept coming - so they fired more.     

Response removed as it is impossible to debate with idiots.

Thal

[ahinton]

That you read an entire pianistissimo post - phenomenal!

That you dissected and responded to each piece individually - well that's just sick

In what way, precisely? (after all, it took only some five minutes or so)...

Pianistimo, you seem to be proving a notion I had about people of faith rationalizing rather than accepting truth. Ask yourself, "what if this information is true? What if the religion I follow is nothing more than a recycled idea"? I asked myself that question. My theory of time loops makes more sense than what you are saying. And that's not a good thing. Your belief is your belief. I can't question that. I can, however, question why you don't question it.

Indeed. That said, someone somewhere inculcated these beliefs, so given that the human mind is open to change in most cases, why not help to try to open one of them to such possibilities, even if all that might do is encourage a fundamentalist and inflexible person like Susan at least to sit back, have a think about other ways of thinking to her own and ponder whether some kind of tweakings and refinements - even if not actual life-changing shifts of emphases - might not come amiss?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

It is a waste of time to argue with a brick wall.

The woman actually thought the Spanish used rocket propelled rocks against the South American natives.

It is not possible to debate with that level of ignorance.

Thal

[ahinton]

It is a waste of time to argue with a brick wall.

Of course it is. But is it always and of necessity a waste of time to take part of such a wall apart, brick by brick and reveal some of the faulty cement work between the bricks and cracks in the bricks themselves?

The woman actually thought the Spanish used rocket propelled rocks against the South American natives.

It is not possible to debate with that level of ignorance.

Thal

Is it not therefore necessary at least to do what you've done and point out the sheer absurdity of such an idea rather than just let it go?

Likewise, do you really think that one should simply let pass a bald suggestion that only a certain type of Christianity offers any way to God and/or salvation, especially given how profoundly insensitive and insulting such a suggestion will be to those of other faiths?

Best,

Alistair

[paris_hilton]

Cats are sexy. 

[chidi]

Cats are sexy. 

Hahahaha, what the hell?