jefferiah

Well I must apologize to you there. I guess you didnt call him a far right fellow. But really I do think he is doing a good job. I dont think he is such a bad fellow, and really I dont know if he is more to the right than what people want him to be or if he is being portrayed more to the right of what people want him to be.

Yes, and the same thing will be said about the Harper Conservatives if they manage to stay in power for 13 years. It is a rule of humanity as you just put forth in that proverb. Now honestly answer the following.... Do you think the CPC has a chance of making it 13 years in office? What do you think of the fact that the best Harper could muster up after a scandal like Adscam was a shaky minority? Or the fact that a not even a year in the office, they were already tied with the Liberals in most polls? Funny how if you were to be honest with yourself you know that Harper probably won't last 13 years, and it is rather odd that so many Canadians would vote Liberal after something like the sponsorship scandal, and it is also odd that people would not warm up to someone with fresh ideas for the country after 13 years of the same thing... But no it's the CBC, or the immigrants, or the Liberal judges.... anything to find a scapegoat for the fact that the Liberals have dominated Canadian politics for 50 years. Yet you will never consider that perhaps it's YOUR PARTY that's the problem. I think you are right BC Chick in saying that it is not the immigrants or not the CBC. But also I think you are wrong in saying its the Conservative Party. I blame it on a horrible law of human nature-----people love what sounds nice better than what is true. Why wouldnt Harper cosy up to the Bush administration? Bush is the president of a nation which is our neighbour and our greatest ally. Try taking another look at Harper forgetting all the far-right accusations people are making. Does it not occur to you that this is ridiculous? Nonetheless people eat it up. He comes across as a rather shy and soft spoken fellow to me. I have yet to hear him say he is going to "smoke em out their holes" like his supposed "clone". Seriously take an honest look. He is a really average person. Look at all the far-right policies in our nation. Look how hard it is for you people to come on here and criticize Harper. Oh you brave souls. You could face life in prison or execution for this. What martyrs the Liberals are! They are so oppressed. People actually disagree with them and thats so offensive. If they could revive Mr. Dressup (Ernie Coombs) and make him PM, and if he was a conservative, we would be reading articles about how far-right he is. If he didnt legalize pot people would be crying fascism. If he made cuts to an overfunded special interest group who had a name like "Left-Handed Lesbian Narcoleptics for Recreational Morphine Use" people would cry discrimination.

No suggestions at all. But when I read your post about "so there is to be a gathering" I thought hmmm. Maybe I see where you are coming from in a way. I remember you were the one who posted a thread about the Left Behind video game. Yeah, if you think thats nuts Dark Angel, I dont blame you. I agree. i was meaning maybe it was telling others to ignore persecuting non-believers---- Well this may or may not be part of the meaning, but nonetheless its a good formulation you have made.

Poly is not an antisemite. I am sure of it. What he said about being arrested for a hate crime was in direct response to you saying he was an antisemite? He said you were trying to get him arrested. While I don't believe that, Canadian Blue, just give him a break and stop calling him an antisemite. His conspiracy theory is not aimed at Jews. I think I have an idea where he is going. He may even believe the conspiracy is against Jews. Why dont you ask him?

Lol Catch Me

To be fair, although I dont agree with Poly I dont think he has said anything anti-Semitic, and I dont think he is either, from what I have read. Actually you dont necessarily have to say something extremely bigotted to face a hate crime charge. This is one of the scary things about it. The definitions of hate become very liberal.

Extremely right-wing hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Far right? Lol. Conservatives are right of the Canadian Liberals maybe, but that aint right of center. Thats right of left.

You did not understand the meaning then, Dark Angel. I was pointing out that throughout the New Testament all references to battle point to something much different than what you think of as war. Scripture is referred to as a sword. Salvation as a helmet. And it says our battle is not with flesh and blood. Now as for Cybercoma's quote, it may be that he posed this as an honest questioning of religion, in which case it is a good thing. But nonetheless I think he was wrong in saying Myata was making a convenient interpretation of the Parable. I've read that story many times, and this is the first time I have ever heard someone say that it was a command to kill non-believers. Basically no one even thinks this, except for Cybercoma. If he insists that we must take it literally he must begin with the line "there was a certain nobleman", and this story is similar to that of Herod Archelaus, who was the brother of Herod Antipas. This Herod Archelaus was a hard man. The son of Herod the great, he travelled to Rome to be crowned King of his alloted territory and in his absence a rebellion occured. A delegation was sent after him, but he did succeed in becoming King, and he massacred many people. In Matthew we are told that Mary and Joseph fled with Jesus to Egypt to escape the slaying of children two years old and under that was commanded by Herod the Great. They did not return to Israel until Herod died. He was suceeded by Archelaus. Matthew 2:22- 22 But when he (Joseph) learned that the new ruler was Archelaus, he was afraid. Then in another dream he was warned to go to Galilee. 23 So they went and lived in a town called Nazareth. It was because of this certain nobleman that Jesus became known as Jesus of Nazareth. Nazareth was outside Archelaus's territory. This is why they went there. Now, if Cybercoma thinks that it is "convenient" for us to say today 2000 years later that Jesus was not telling people to kill others, he will be reminded that the Disciples who actually knew the man and heard the story did not even take it this way, since it was not their practice to go around slaughtering non-believers but to preach to them. In fact these men (with the exception of John, who lived to a very old age) were all slaughtered themselves.

Ephesians 6:11-20 12 For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens. 13 Therefore, put on the armor of God, that you may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold your ground. 14 So stand fast with your loins girded in truth, clothed with righteousness as a breastplate, 15 and your feet shod in readiness for the gospel of peace. 16 In all circumstances, hold faith as a shield, to quench all (the) flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. 18 With all prayer and supplication, pray at every opportunity in the Spirit. To that end, be watchful with all perseverance and supplication for all the holy ones 19 and also for me, that speech may be given me to open my mouth, to make known with boldness the mystery of the gospel 20 for which I am an ambassador in chains, so that I may have the courage to speak as I must.

Matthew 10: 34 "Don't imagine that I came to bring peace to the Earth! No, I came to bring a sword." This one can be seen as equally disturbing, however the meaning of "sword" has two sides. The apostles who spread the message throughout different parts of the world were all executed for what they said, excepting John I believe. Brother will be against brother. One brother's weapon is the truth he speaks, the other brother's weapon is the literal sword with which he silences the honest brother (his own conscience). Throughout the New Testament there a several references to warfare in which the truth is to be used as a sword and salvation as a helmet, etc. Scripture is compared in the epistles to a double-edged sword. And in Revelations (which is very very surreal) the King returns and slays his enemies with a "sword from his mouth". Do you understand?

And actually I think the story would not be realistic at that time without that ending. Not even a few hundred years ago. If I am not mistaken that parable which he was using as an illustration was taken from an actual event of the time period, which the people would have been quite familiar with. Archelaus I think was his name.

Every believer is a non-believer at some point. As myata says it is definitely meant as an end of days thing, since the King has not returned. The life in between is a period of grace. And once again I point out that in order for those men to have rebelled against the King they must have known he was becoming one.

No he is not. First off whatever judgement is to be given is not to be given until the King returns. He is not mandating that people kill while he is away, or to pass judgement---for he is the judge. Also you will note that the offenders were not non-believers since they knew he was going to be King.

Once again I must note that I am not using it as a point. But what I meant was if the Encyclopedia describes freemasonry as a religion and it was written prior to 1965, this could have been what he was pointing out. You see.

He is not telling Christians to slaughter non-believers. In fact the New Testament gives a commision to live among the world but not to be of the world. That's it. If there is any judgement it is left to God, not to us. We are to take care of the minas.

Oh excuse me Catch Me, I was wrong there. You were right. That was his own Webster's citation. But then again---and not that I am using this as a point---it could be said that it has some relevance since---well....when was the Encyclopedia of Freemasonry written, pray tell?

Thats funny Catch Me......that was your Websters Defnition---he replied to a specific post---that was part of the text of the quotes of previous posters

not speaking out against the hanging of Saddam---Catch Me Do you have Iraqi citizenship, may I ask? This is an Iraqi issue. In another post you said people who are not members of a said group do not have any business telling that group how to handle their issues. "gutting women's programs" What, cutting a few million off of the 23 million that The Advisory Council on The Status of Women gets to be a politically subsidized lobby group? Cuts to MADD who basically abused the money they got?

You are missing something from the Jesus quote. It was from a parable. Luke Chapter 19 12He said: "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a]'Put this money to work,' he said, 'until I come back.' 14"But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, 'We don't want this man to be our king.' 15"He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it. 16"The first one came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned ten more.' 17" 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.' 18"The second came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned five more.' 19"His master answered, 'You take charge of five cities.' 20"Then another servant came and said, 'Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.' 22"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?' 24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.' 25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!' 26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

And you were right Saturn. Well, I wasnt drunk, but those sentences were put together pretty sloppily.

I had to look up mysogynist.

It means you have special knowledge limited to a few people. In this case I kind of used it wrong, since I dont actually believe in it---but actually I think red necks are very intelligent, and they possess a logic which alot of cultured people don't. I am a hick as well.

A woman probably did that study. I think they are just better at feigning concentration than us. Must be, cuz my mom says I am handsome.

And furthermore we are beginning to see cases of -----"This is my right. Lets pass a law that says people cannot vocally express individual moral objection to it, that they must condone it, or else they are guilty of a Hate Crime." And all the while they accuse you of forcing your beliefs on them.