Texas mother kills children for God
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
Bells said:AAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Did you read the links to the articles I posted? The NRA in the US wish to implement the laws of the old testament... including the stonings, burnings and hangings.. just like it says in the bible.
Oh my god I can actually feel my ulcer flaring in my stomach
Ooooh that one! Ok thanks. Thats the first christian organization ive seen who wanted to rival islamic fundamentalism.
Bells said:
Ow now I see what you mean. Its not my fault. Thats what it really said on the translation I used, the New Living Translation.
Here check it out yourself...
http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineS...=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=7&NavCurrentChapter=7
You worry me Bells.
Western civilisation deems stoning ( to the like of your examples) as illegal, and any such act will reult in imprisonment.
IT IS AGAINST WESTERN CIVILISED LAW - ok!!!
IN SHARIA LAW STONING IS A METHOD OF PUNISHMENT IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES - TODAY IN THE YEAR 2004
BELLS.....DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!!
HAS IT SUNK IN YET!
Western civilisation deems stoning ( to the like of your examples) as illegal, and any such act will reult in imprisonment.
IT IS AGAINST WESTERN CIVILISED LAW - ok!!!
IN SHARIA LAW STONING IS A METHOD OF PUNISHMENT IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES - TODAY IN THE YEAR 2004
BELLS.....DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!!
HAS IT SUNK IN YET!
Bells
Staff member
Vienna, thank you my lil old mouldy strudel you!
Yes I am well aware of the laws, be they Sharia and the so called secular laws of the West, etc. However I was merely pointing out that there are organisations out there who want (with all their black little hearts) to bring implement the biblical laws and some of these organisations are strong enough to be an influence on the current policy. It's entirely possible if a right wing Christian government is elected. It is not something that one should take lightly. Do you get it now?
Yes I am well aware of the laws, be they Sharia and the so called secular laws of the West, etc. However I was merely pointing out that there are organisations out there who want (with all their black little hearts) to bring implement the biblical laws and some of these organisations are strong enough to be an influence on the current policy. It's entirely possible if a right wing Christian government is elected. It is not something that one should take lightly. Do you get it now?
Bells said:
Go ahead then lovey
Name a right wing Christian government who wants (with all their black little hearts) to implement the biblical laws.
Name ONE....
I will make it easier for you - name ANY western government who want(with all their black little hearts) to implement the biblical laws.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
The NRA Vienna. Sheesh did you NOT read the articles I posted on the previous page? And the NRA are the National Reform Association in the US, who wish to implement reforms in the law, they are in effect Christian Reconstructionists.
If you don't believe me, do a quick search on them and see for yourself.
Now my lil strudel, do you see what I meant? This Christian organisation believes in the strict teachings of the bible. They appear to have close links to the conservative government in the US, although it seems that of late the members of the Bush camp have started running in the opposite direction when they heard of the stoning of children and such. It's nasty, like most right wing organisations can be nasty.
If you don't believe me, do a quick search on them and see for yourself.
Now my lil strudel, do you see what I meant? This Christian organisation believes in the strict teachings of the bible. They appear to have close links to the conservative government in the US, although it seems that of late the members of the Bush camp have started running in the opposite direction when they heard of the stoning of children and such. It's nasty, like most right wing organisations can be nasty.
But of course not - to the modern day religions, god has become nothing more than a giant pick and mix. They choose what parts they want to listen to and what parts they want to ignore. They form various off-shoots of the same religion because to them sentence A isn't worth the time, whereas sentence B is the important one.
A large benefit they have is the unrelenting mass of contradiction that will work to their favour. You'll see one christian say nobody should drink alcohol because passage A says not to, but then you'll see another christian saying it's fine because passage B says you can.
Using one sentence from the bible, people can justify pretty much anything they want - from paedophile and homosexual priests to stoning your children to death.
However, to remain fully on topic - this woman is fully justified in her actions because god said it, none of you can state god didn't personally tell her to, none of you can deny that the very same one and only god has instructed people to do it in the past - and being the one and only glorious god, he has no reason to care for earthly laws or whether this woman will spend her lifetime in a prison cell - because it's only the afterlife *tm* and his personal satisfaction that have any meaning. While you guys will label her off as a fruitcake and feel sorry for the young children lying with their heads caved in - she will eventually go and join her wonderful god in heaven for her wonderful actions and showing she has true faith, (just like Abraham), for being willing to slaughter her children when god demands it.
Sure, but in many respects the religion is the country. Over here, christians have very little say in the grand scheme of things - but - if this country was "ruled" by the religion, stoning would be a daily occurence. Think back a while to when religion was the 'power' - they went round burning/drowning anyone they wanted - from them being witches, to heresay, etc.
You see nowadays, christianity, like any religion here- has become a closet religion. It doesn't go out in public - it stays at home where it belongs, or in a church on a sunday morning where the little congregation of similar thinking people can get together and pray to space daddy.
Who are you to argue with the orders of god? I'm sure he's aware that the town elders would no longer agree to stone anyones child to death, and obviously had no problem in telling this woman to do it personally. That's the benefit of being god - he doesn't need to read the procedures in his own book.
However, your sentence comes off as a bit bizarre.. you claim it's "plain old murder" because she did it herself. Are you saying it wouldn't be "plain old murder" if everyone from the town helped?
Bells
Staff member
Who knows really. I rather hope that we don't but who really knows. I just prefer to not think about it actually. The thought that my neighbour could be a person who believes in stoning naughty children makes me very uncomfortable in truth. I don't think he'd appreciate my looking at him with squinty eyed distrust. He's a real right winger. But there are many people within the Christian community who believe that the only way to bring society back to its proper and rightful place is to implement such laws. I find the whole thing scary.Vienna said:While I do that search, tell me - have we got any organisation like that in the UK or Europe? Australia? Canada?
As for the close ties thing, here is the first part of the article quoted to you above from page 5 of this thread:
Last edited:
Bells said:
LOL..... I wouldn't worry a neighbour stoning their children through teachings from the Bible.
As for the site of the National Reform Association, here is their definition of stoning children.
Taken from their site - quote:
""The Real Meaning
Therefore, the law of Deuteronomy 21:18-21 is not about stoning disobedient children. The Bible does not instruct parents to use stoning in dealing with the rebellious nature and disobedience of their children, but to use the rod and reproof (Prov. 29:15). Children are to be trained from a young age by consistent and loving discipline so that the foolishness that is bound up in them can be driven out (Prov. 22:15), and that they will learn to honor and obey their parents and all those whom God has placed in authority over them.""
Work it out Bells
Dear SnakeLord,
Christianity had been civilized for hundreds of years now. Even with the thousands of sects under its belt. My friends let this be an example of how a violent religion could be tamed with enough criticisms. So continue attacking the ideologies & practices of Islam and hope that one day our muslim brothers would wake up and learn to recognize & deal with their own demons.
Christianity had been civilized for hundreds of years now. Even with the thousands of sects under its belt. My friends let this be an example of how a violent religion could be tamed with enough criticisms. So continue attacking the ideologies & practices of Islam and hope that one day our muslim brothers would wake up and learn to recognize & deal with their own demons.
DoctorNO said:
Don't run your mouth with things that you don't understand. Civil means national, universal, organized, communal, trained, general, municipal. How exactly is christianity civil, while it doesn't even apply nor can be implemented to a soceity. Christianity is secular, meaning, secret, divided, left, sectioned, put down, untrained, irrelevant, unapplicable.
If anything, capitalism and democracy is civil, but as far as christianity, it's the same old OT and corrupted paulianity NT.
DoctorNO said:
It was tamed alright, and the way to tame it was to ignore it completely and make it irrelevant to our daily life.
Lets see…Flores said:
www.webster.com
Main Entry: civ•il
1 a : of or relating to citizens b : of or relating to the state or its citizenry
2 a : CIVILIZED <civil society> b : adequate in courtesy and politeness : MANNERLY
synonyms CIVIL, POLITE, COURTEOUS, GALLANT, CHIVALROUS mean observant of the forms required by good breeding. CIVIL often suggests little more than the avoidance of overt rudeness <owed the questioner a civil reply>. POLITE commonly implies polish of speech and manners and sometimes suggests an absence of cordiality <if you can't be pleasant, at least be polite>. COURTEOUS implies more actively considerate or dignified politeness <clerks who were unfailingly courteous to customers>. GALLANT and CHIVALROUS imply courteous attentiveness especially to women. GALLANT suggests spirited and dashing behavior and ornate expressions of courtesy <a gallant suitor of the old school>. CHIVALROUS suggests high-minded and self-sacrificing behavior <a chivalrous display of duty>.
My friend it was the Christians who invented capitalism & democracy. Historians even attribute capitalism to the Protestant Work Ethics. Right?Flores said:
Flores said:
People must learn to do the same with Islam, eh? Make it irrelevant. Stop believing that it is inerrant. Stop closing your minds and not seeing the abundant contradictions in the quran. Said so by the muslim Irshad Manji.
While it might not be to your liking, I disagree. Civility stretches beyond murder or stoning people. I am reminded briefly of those idiots knocking on my door, slamming their books into my face saying "repent or thou shalt burn". That is not civility. I am reminded of the protests I attended to try and stop "god loving" christians from slaughtering animals because they view them as below humans. That is not civility. I am also reminded of the self-righteous nature of the religious mind - how they will doom everyone and anyone who doesn't agree with them 100%, while claiming love for mankind. You can see it in your own sentences - with your most blatant hatred for people from a different culture.
Sure they have problems - but trying to ignore the problems at home while too eager to point out problems further afield is naive, dangerous and rude.
It's like many people I know, or meet who have a genetic instinct to point out flaws within others. For instance: "look at the size of that guys nose", or "wow that guy's a fat ass", without realising they are actually no better off. However, these types of people need to feel better within themselves by pointing out other peoples "let downs". I can quite clearly see you are one of these people. The funny thing with it is that it's all about personal doubt and insecurity. You dont really mean to attack anyone else, you're just trying to feel less personal pain. I sincerely hope you conquer the skeletons in your closet.
Anyway, if for a moment we can stick to the topic: Nobody can label this woman as insane. For all anybody has the right to state, god did tell her to stone her sons. In the same kind of way that we could say god caused the bubonic plague. Now, science would tell you it was through rats, (or germs on rats), but the only thing separating that and the 10 plagues is that someone didn't write down that it was an invisible guy in the sky.
You see, these guys thousands of years ago just didn't know anything about the world and how it works- they have a valid excuse. But as man progresses, and becomes more understanding of things - god becomes less and less of importance. No longer do we "blame" god for plagues, earthquakes, or mass murderers. Finally, and about time we point the blame where it is supposed to be pointed. What I find obscene personally, is how some modern day people cling to the "god excuse" so dearly with barbaric and ancient style ignorance because they see everything they have in this life as completely worthless and meaningless, and cannot comprehend that the desires and daydreaming of ancient men doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things. This woman is doing just that - making excuses. Not so much to the law, but to herself. She was told to do it, and did it like an obedient little puppy- all the while having the most convenient of excuses to cling to.
In short: You're all as bad as each other. It's about time you all woke the fuck up.
Well said SnakeLord. They all talk about God, but if someone actually believes it and acts out what the bible says, look out, they are insane. What do they want from people? Maybe those children died for our sins. Maybe they will rise up on the third day, and sprout little wings!
"The Real Meaning of Deut. 21.18-21"
The link for the article from which Vienna drew his excerpt is here. Give it a read. It's morbidly humorous.
Really ... I hope this man doesn't speak on behalf of all Christians.
____________________
• Einwechter, William. "Stoning Disobedient Children?" Chalcedon Report, January, 1999. See http://www.nationalreform.org/statesman/03/stndisob.html
The link for the article from which Vienna drew his excerpt is here. Give it a read. It's morbidly humorous.
Jesu Mofo Cristo! I just don't think Einwechter helped his cause here at all.
Really ... I hope this man doesn't speak on behalf of all Christians.
____________________
• Einwechter, William. "Stoning Disobedient Children?" Chalcedon Report, January, 1999. See http://www.nationalreform.org/statesman/03/stndisob.html
I think his explanation is justified in an ANE context. It's certainly not Christian in a modern sense (as some here want to believe so badly). The compunctions we have about such laws today are Christian in origin - or at least because of the Christian worldview. Offenses that were then punishable by death are still punishable by death - but where hell (the grave) was a very real and immediate place to the Hebrews, it's now a world one removed - completely subjected Christ, to the point that if you don't believe in Christ you're already considered "dead". Otherwise it's believed to exist only as death, a more politically acceptable alternative because it's more "natural" and undeniable.
Where people were dependent on an unmerciful "dead" set of laws then, they are now dependent on a merciful, living God, who has placed the whole world under probabation; "let the one who is innocent cast the first stone".
What Einwecher conveyed is the OT equivalent of "nobody who compromises the sovereignity, mercy and holiness of God will be tolerated in His kingdom".
Where people were dependent on an unmerciful "dead" set of laws then, they are now dependent on a merciful, living God, who has placed the whole world under probabation; "let the one who is innocent cast the first stone".
What Einwecher conveyed is the OT equivalent of "nobody who compromises the sovereignity, mercy and holiness of God will be tolerated in His kingdom".
Last edited:
Of course we can...just as much as you have a right to call me insane. The key factor of whether she is insane or not is whether the voices in her head are real or not. Hence even if she was hearing the voice of someone you think is existing such as GW bush, she would be no less insane.
The only claim you make that is valid is how believers know whether it is God speaking to them, Satan, or their own insanity. I don't think this is any more difficult than knowing if you're mother was speaking to you. Visionaries such as Padre Pio, who have many visions both from God and demonic, tell the difference by listening to their soul and the effect the vision. The character of the voice, whether it's breathed through your entire being, is also a good indicating factor.