"God told me to do it"

homeOwner

The Corinthian wrote:

Many Christian denominations have downplayed Hell in recent years. I believe some may have even effectively abolished it, but I could well be wrong on the latter point.

Yes they do seem to have down-played hell, speaking of Catholisism here, but it is still there. Afterall, if you have a heaven, then by default you must have an opposite for the people who do not make it into heaven i.e. hell, or the anti-heaven, whatever you want to call it. Otherwise there are no consequences for not repenting and everyone goes to heaven.:D

MeatProduct

Why is George Bush a Christian? Simply because he is christined, baptised? Is it because he says he is one? Who determines if someone "qualifies" as a Christian or not? If I say I am a Christian and go and kill my neighbour am I not anti-christian by my actions? What then? Do people say I am not a Christian? Am I stricken off the Christian records?

My point is that how many anti-christian acts can Bush do until someone says, "Hey, that guy does really un-Christian stuff, I don't think he's a Christian". If he calls himself a Christian is he in fact misleading the public? Young Christians around the world see the acts of this Christian leader, is that not dangerous? What kind of example is that. Indeed, perhaps worse, is that children of other beliefs might percieve Christianity as a threat since it seems so violent and agressive.

Now if he called himself a Satanist then that would be fine since his actions would, more often than not, fit his religion. He gives Christianity a very bad name simply because he is not Christian by his actions, only in his head.

Nick

homeOwner

MeatProduct wrote:

Why is George Bush a Christian? Simply because he is christined, baptised? Is it because he says he is one? Who determines if someone "qualifies" as a Christian or not? If I say I am a Christian and go and kill my neighbour am I not anti-christian by my actions? What then? Do people say I am not a Christian? Am I stricken off the Christian records?
etc.....

You comments made me smile - you make very good points here and I agree with what you are saying.

Just to point out some facts. By definition a christian is someone who is a follower of christ. You go through a ceremony of being christened (catholics call it baptism, I dont think protestants call it baptism but I could be wrong). Anyone who has been through the ceremony/sacrament is by default a christian. Its not a club and you cant be kicked out.

There is also the notion of christian values: love thy neighbour as thyself, forgiveness etc... I suppose that someone who lives by these values could also call themselves a christian, if they also believed in christ.

I suppose anyone can call themselves anything they want. People do terrible things in the persuit of power and self interest and say they do it for the common good. I personally dont think that GWB espouses the morals and values of a christian but I guess if he believes he is following christ, then he is within his rights to call himself a christian.

wiseones2cents

The Corinthian wrote:

Other than ignoring my first question to you in my response, you seem to be under the misapprehension that I’m in some way Capitalism’s defender in this discussion; I’m not and never have been. So if you’d like to point to where I’ve said that Capitalism is perfect or the way forward, please do, otherwise find another axe to grind.

Sounded to me you defended Capitalism, Greed and Competition. Sounded to me like you defended Privatization and Outsourcing. Sounded to me like you were saying that Capitalism wasnt perfect but it was the best system out there, when it CLEARLY IS NOT.

Please don’t pretend to be stupid. I pointed out that the corrupt would certainly be more likely to have a better chance of Investing in the Economy and working his way up in ranks through Capitalism, only because anyone would certainly be more likely to have a better chance of Investing in the Economy and working his way up in ranks through Capitalism. It does not mean that only the corrupt can do so.

Is pointing out the Obvious pretending to be stupid?I'd like to see an Honest folk compete with a dishonest that is making minimum 10X the Income to Invest as the honest guy. Those days are gone.

Evidence please. Less waffle.

Evidence that there has been a Increasingly growing monopoly on world news for quite some time now?

Why Dont you look up Rupert Murdock. Find out who gave Tony Blair and george bush all the media support?
Here's a few of the Media's he owns although I have seen lists that were much,much,much more extensive.

Then do some research On Conrad Black. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Black

I wonder who will pick up the slack, if he falls?

Yet the USSR managed to build up huge debts - resulting in its eventual economic meltdown, without using any Capitalism. Go figure.

I tell you that 90% of Canada's debt is due to Interest and you talk about USSR's Debt caused from World War I & II. yes Evading tactics.

I didn’t comment on it because I was not going to comment on something that didn’t make grammatical sense. Certainly secularism flourishes in educated populations, while the ignorant will tend towards the religious. But how this is tied into your earlier claims that people becoming less naïve is beyond me.

It made grammatical sense when I first wrote it. Religion flourishes in poor nations because it gives them hope. Secularism flourishes when they people have taken what was given to them for granted. Something tells me you are headed for so rough times.

And what do you gain from it? There’s nothing in it that supports any of your other arguments. I could concede that the sky is blue too, but would you see that as a victory also?

The fact that you are starting to agree with me sees your position is tottering.

Were your observations and opinions educated, I might agree. They are not. You lack understanding of logic or debate. You seem to be incapable of understanding basic concepts such as proof or the difference between theory and law.

So no, I do not believe you are neither qualified nor educated enough to make such observations. I do not mean that to be an insult, but you asked.

The proof? In Regards to what? Canada's Economy?I am surrounded by it.
How do I show you proof? Do you want to see my bills today and compare them with the 70's? I am not easily offended.

I did not say that. Where am I supposed to have said that?

Back peddling again I see? Why do you think we do not murder?

I’m glad you’ve finally found the solution to the nurture versus nature debate. You might contact the psychological community with your findings, as they haven’t managed it yet.

Ah Sarcasm when there is nothing intelligent to say.It is common sense.
Actually I have. It is one of my fields of expertise.;) If we did not discipline our emotions, we would be more likely to kill. It is the discipline that keeps us in Check.

I was discussing social and anti-social - these are sociological terms. As I said don’t confuse them in such a simplistic manner.

You said Social and popular. You did not say anti-social. Greed is anti-social but wealth is popular.Simply because people want a peace of the pie. The greedy does not give you a piece of the pie, unless their is something in it for him.

Indeed it can. Just like religion.

Once again. Is it Religion or man using religion(FOR GREED) that starts wars?

As fast as it should have? How fast is that? Can you support your claim? Your opinion will not suffice as proof, BTW.

Is this a joke? Its common sense. Think about it.
Why has the world not Advanced as fast as it should have?COMPETITION.
I find a discovery and I keep it to myself for profit rather than sharing it and having another great mind build upon it.

One of the advantages of a totalitarian regime.

EXACTLY!

P.S> Next page coming up.

wiseones2cents

Murder, whether on one person or a million is wrong. This cannot be equated with the difference with ambition (which you yourself agreed was good) and excessive greed. It’s not a difficult distinction to make.

Yes but which is worse?Is not Genocide?Which would affacet more lives? Which is worse? If I am ambitious and I take away food from a starving child(Indirectly) or am greedy and take away food from a 1,000 starving children?

And I explained how you don’t actually know what Socialist means.

I am well aware of the Definition of Socialism. Canada was more or less socialist except for cars and phones. Now why did we have to aquire cars and phones from America? COMPETITION AND GREED. Why did America advance? They BOUGHT all the European SCIENTISTS from Socialist and Communist countries.

You’re not in the know. Don’t kid yourself.

I disagree.

America my fall or not, but you still have not presented proof either way.

Did you not read my Link?Proof that their in severe debt? And have been setting up puppet leaders and dictators around the world to rob countries of their resources for dirt cheap?And are now after Iraqi oil? Along with Britain, Italy, ect that have stakes in the oil and the Iraqi economy? I can fill this board with proof that would take you 10 years minimum to read.

The Israelites conquered a few neighbouring scraps of land around them. That’s about it. Feel free to cite a historical source that says they got any further. Problem is evidence says the opposite to you: Our language, as with almost all European languages, is Indo-European, not Semitic. Our alphabet is based upon the Latin and not Amharic one. So please speare yourself the pain of further delusion.

Where ever they went people had heard about them. I'm sure though much was distorted or Exagerated. Thats where all the legends and Myths came from.Not to Mention The Jews were the Leading traders in thier day and were conected to every society on the earth.Even as far as the Orient. Jerusalem and Egypt were major trading centers.

Your point was bogus. Your link made no such claim and merely said that they’re sometimes called people of the book, not what that may mean or if it is true. If you’ve seen an old book, well good for you, but I’ll not take your word for it.

Was that not my point?Did it not say what I claimed that you denied?? Your arguments are weak(To put it nicely).

No, you keep going. You’ll find a dead end.

I give you proof and you totally disregard it?I have debated with your kind.
They want proof for everything. When you give them proof they play stupid.

I have and I see what you obviously cannot.

You've read it? Then you must realize that hard times are headed your way.

Apply my example to yours.

uh huh.:rolleyes:

Then point out where I’ve changed my stance. Quote it, or stop bluffing.

It would be a waste of my time and would fall on deaf ears and then followed by denials and word twisting.:rolleyes:

Finally admits he was wrong.

Once again You leave out the rest of my reply. And where did I Admit being wrong? And when does the Size of GDP equate to economic success?
America has the largest GPD and the economy is in Shambles.
You still haven't given up yet?:D

All I need point out (again) is that salaries have risen to debunk your argument. I say again as I already linked to the data. You obviously didn’t read it.

Salaries have gone DOWN. To promote Cheaper manufacturing and more trade. You know absolutely nothing. Not only has pay gone down? The cost of Living is sky rocketting. ASK ANY CANADIAN(Especially Ontario) and you will have your proof. Toronto is now the second highest taxed city in the world next to New York City. So your data is absolutely nonsense to a resident that knows first hand what is going on in this country.

There is no doubt much Mis-information is being spread about, fnanced by the Elites. Just like Exxon dumps millions of dollars to have scientists say that polution is not the cause for Global Warming when 90% of Global Scientists say it is.

No, that’s what I call people getting on with their lives and thriving around you. If there are criminals and the corrupt around you, fair enough, but they’re not all so. People can actually do well and become wealthy by simply working hard. I know that’s hard for you to grasp, but there you go.

We were not talking about the honest ones were we? We were talking about Criminals and the Poor.Honestly? I dont see the point of debating you. Your arguments are next to pathetic.

That is my whole point. You have to now work 3 jobs AND WORK HARD to get the money we used to earn with only 1 job and regular hours. Did you not see the Article I submitted?I noticed you did not comment.,,,,

I see, how about you tell us if you have a history of mental illness then? I can’t help but think you’ve been avoiding the question.

I will answer once again. No, I've never had a history of mental illness. ok?

And they were all Atheistic Societies that didn’t stand long?

They were either Aethiest societies or attacked by Aethiests societies whose god is wealth. They trust in thier possessions. But in the end? Their money will be worthless.

So far you have not been able to stand your ground on not one point. I have submitted many credible sources. And Have made most of my positions crystal clear.

MeatProduct

homeOwner wrote:

You comments made me smile - you make very good points here and I agree with what you are saying.

Just to point out some facts. By definition a christian is someone who is a follower of christ. You go through a ceremony of being christened (catholics call it baptism, I dont think protestants call it baptism but I could be wrong). Anyone who has been through the ceremony/sacrament is by default a christian. Its not a club and you cant be kicked out.

There is also the notion of christian values: love thy neighbour as thyself, forgiveness etc... I suppose that someone who lives by these values could also call themselves a christian, if they also believed in christ.

I suppose anyone can call themselves anything they want. People do terrible things in the persuit of power and self interest and say they do it for the common good. I personally dont think that GWB espouses the morals and values of a christian but I guess if he believes he is following christ, then he is within his rights to call himself a christian.

Well maybe there should be more stringent rules for being a Christian Perhaps a "punishment" police force that monitors the actions of Christians.

If Bush believes he is a Christian then that really doesn't make him one. Which is fine and I have no issue with that. However he is a horrifically powerful man and when he heads off on a rampage of bloody slaughter I think it is quite important if others share his view that he is still a Christian. It really just takes a bunch of people to agree with you. Say I call myself a Christian and kick the heads off a few people in the neighbourhood (not that I could or would mind you!), now that's not terribly Christian but if every other Christian thinks that's just grand then I would still be a Christian in their eyes. Violence and bloody carnage seems to be somehow acceptable for Christians these days otherwise there would be something done about Mr. Bush damning the religion.

Hope I managed to make a coherant argument there

Nick

wiseones2cents

homeOwner wrote:

Ok let me explain. You were talking about aethiest societies that had fallen. Now you are talking about nations that disobeyed God's laws. Apples and oranges. Do you know what an aethiest is? You are displaying a distinct lack of understanding of your own arguments. A "nation that disobeyes God's laws" can be christian, jewish, muslim, pagan etc.... If it were aethiest, it would not recognise that there is a god to impose laws. So it would have laws not based on God's alleged word. Ok so, back to original question - I dont need thousands of examples - just name one society were the majority were aethiest that has fallen during any period in history.

Not really apples and Oranges. Most of those people that were not following GOD's laws were Monothiests only from thier lips. They were Aethiests(DID NOT BELIEVE IN GOD).
If they had Believed in GOD and all HIS warnings of what would happen if they went astray, they would have not went astray. The Bible clearly states that they had forgotten GOD. Which would make them Aethiest.

The Obvious. The Roman Empire. The only god they believed in was Cesar, who was no god at all.

Ok, yes there are buddhists but even a prelimiary glance at websites will tell you that only around 8% of the country - thats around 100million people out of a population of 1.2billion people claim to have religion in China. So I would classify that country as being aethiest - on the whole, which is what I said in my post. I was not saying that no one in china believes in God.

I have seen other Figures. That figure is mis-information.
Falun Gong alone claims to have 70 million followers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong

Christians even higher than that, although worship in Secrecy.

Buddists are even more than that.

Many different religions are around in China Today but Christianity will soon out pace them all.

Is this from the Dummy's Guide to China?

I followed Chinese politics for close to 4 years(not including this one.) So I know the situation in China.

wiseones2cents

MeatProduct wrote:

This is the god that has America in the state it is. I'm not a Christian but it was my understanding that the Christian god was a god of love, not of vengeance and punishment.

Could you please clarify this as I find it might bring some relevance to the title of this thread.

Thank you,

Nick

The only god they follow in America is the golden calf. the god of wealth.
They follow ministers whose intentions are only for profit.
The bible said they would follow doctrine that would tickle their ears so they would be allowed to sin. 2Timothy 4:3

I have talked to a few American Christians.Dont know if they were Evangelists, Methodists, Protestants or Born again.

But Many claim that since Jesus died on the cross for thier sins, their sins are forgiven. Therefore they have been freed from obeying the law. That is utter nonsense. The Bible clearly states there will be punishmenmt for those who do not make an effort to refrain from sinning.

They Also say it is for "freedom" but the Bible clearly states not to use your freedom as an excuse to sin. 1Peter 2:16

Conclusion? Those American Christians are being Mis-Guided since the main theme of Jesus's teachings were Peace, Forgiveness and to love your enemy.
America is a country of haters. They belittle everything not American.

The ministers accuse the Roman Catholic Church of Being Babylon. When they have no basis to stand on. They are pointing fingers at Europe as the Beast when it is more than Likely America.

The Fact is America needs to make enemies. To Justify its Military spending(which is a large chunck of their economy.)and keep its control over the people.

The Corinthian

wiseones2cents wrote:

Sounded to me like you were saying that Capitalism wasnt perfect but it was the best system out there, when it CLEARLY IS NOT.

Clearly it is not to you, but clearly you’ve yet to make a believable case for that.

Is pointing out the Obvious pretending to be stupid?

It is when the obvious is irrelevant. Whether it is easier for someone to thrive under Capitalism (be they honest or not) is irrelevant.

I'd like to see an Honest folk compete with a dishonest that is making minimum 10X the Income to Invest as the honest guy. Those days are gone.

Facts - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish – give us some cold hard proof.

Evidence that there has been a Increasingly growing monopoly on world news for quite some time now?

Hearsay. Please point to some of this credible evidence. The Internet’s a wonderful source, why don’t you go find some of this evidence.

Why Dont you look up Rupert Murdock. Find out who gave Tony Blair and george bush all the media support?
Here's a few of the Media's he owns although I have seen lists that were much,much,much more extensive.

Indeed, and you will also find numerous media outlets that do not follow the same line, including Aljazeera and CNN. You might read a few newspapers too while you’re at it, for even further diversity. So it’s hardly a monopoly.

I tell you that 90% of Canada's debt is due to Interest and you talk about USSR's Debt caused from World War I & II. yes Evading tactics.

Facts please - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish – give us some cold hard proof.

Something tells me you are headed for so rough times.

Is God talking to you again, or is it the other guy?

The fact that you are starting to agree with me sees your position is tottering.

I’m agreeing with things that have nothing to do with my position.

The proof? In Regards to what? Canada's Economy?I am surrounded by it.

Statistics, surveys, data, articles, hell anything other than you saying you heard about it somewhere or “it is because I think it is” would be a move towards your supplying proof.

Back peddling again I see? Why do you think we do not murder?

No back peddling - I am challenging you to point out where I said that ‘we act against murder because of fear of discipline’, as you claimed. Otherwise you are misquoting me, quite possibly dishonestly.

Ah Sarcasm when there is nothing intelligent to say.It is common sense.

No sarcasm when pointing out that your opinion flies in the face of discussion and debate on the subject.

Actually I have. It is one of my fields of expertise.;) If we did not discipline our emotions, we would be more likely to kill. It is the discipline that keeps us in Check.

It’s not one of your fields of expertise. At present, outside of having numerous opinions, you have yet to display any field of expertise.

You said Social and popular. You did not say anti-social.

No, I said anti-social in this post. If you believe I said otherwise please feel free to point to it.

Greed is anti-social but wealth is popular.Simply because people want a peace of the pie. The greedy does not give you a piece of the pie, unless their is something in it for him.

Is there a point to your ramblings?

Once again. Is it Religion or man using religion(FOR GREED) that starts wars?

And once again, facts please - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish - give us some cold hard proof.

Is this a joke? Its common sense. Think about it.

The argument that ‘it’s common sense’ was once used when the subject of whether the World was flat debated. So you’ll have to do better than that.

Why has the world not Advanced as fast as it should have?

Again, how fast should it have advanced? Do you have metrics? Evidence? Anything other than your own fantasy?

EXACTLY!

I take it you favour totalitarian regimes then?

Yes but which is worse?Is not Genocide?Which would affacet more lives? Which is worse?

But that has nothing to do with the point I made.

I am well aware of the Definition of Socialism.

Apparently not. I gave you a link to an article that discusses Socialism and what it is. Read it.

Did you not read my Link?Proof that their in severe debt? And have been setting up puppet leaders and dictators around the world to rob countries of their resources for dirt cheap?And are now after Iraqi oil? Along with Britain, Italy, ect that have stakes in the oil and the Iraqi economy? I can fill this board with proof that would take you 10 years minimum to read.

All that from your link? I think not. The US’s debt and it’s long term effects are still a matter for debate. Perhaps it will cause a global meltdown, perhaps not, but your link that claims the US owes X amount hardly proves that or any of the other conclusions you’ve come out with.

Where ever they went people had heard about them. I'm sure though much was distorted or Exagerated. Thats where all the legends and Myths came from.Not to Mention The Jews were the Leading traders in thier day and were conected to every society on the earth.Even as far as the Orient. Jerusalem and Egypt were major trading centers.

Where do you get this crap? Seriously, what historical sources are you citing?

Was that not my point?Did it not say what I claimed that you denied??

No, you said they were a tribe of Israel and have failed to demonstrate it.

I give you proof and you totally disregard it?I have debated with your kind.
They want proof for everything. When you give them proof they play stupid.

You didn’t give me proof. You showed me a link between Roman and Greek and Egyptian law, and then you suggest I join up the dotted lines all the way to Jerusalem? Why don’t you fill in that gap yourself with some credible evidence, then you’ll have some proof. Until then, you’ve got nothing.

You've read it? Then you must realize that hard times are headed your way.

Err... no. No harder than for you. Actually, probably much more pleasant.

uh huh.:rolleyes:

If you can’t understand basic reasoning, that’s not my problem.

It would be a waste of my time and would fall on deaf ears and then followed by denials and word twisting.:rolleyes:

Oh so you were bluffing.

Salaries have gone DOWN.

No, AGAIN read the data I supplied.

We were not talking about the honest ones were we? We were talking about Criminals and the Poor.Honestly? I dont see the point of debating you. Your arguments are next to pathetic.

Only the dishonest can succeed? jealousy is a sin, you do know that?

They were either Aethiest societies or attacked by Aethiests societies whose god is wealth. They trust in thier possessions. But in the end? Their money will be worthless.

Again, what historical sources are you citing?

So far you have not been able to stand your ground on not one point. I have submitted many credible sources. And Have made most of my positions crystal clear.

You’ve actually not submitted any sources outside of a link to a site that pretends to tabulate the US’s national debt. If you think that an unfair accusation, draw up a list of the ‘credible sources’ you’ve cited.

wiseones2cents

The Corinthian wrote:

In Christianity, much of the confusion comes from a perceived contradiction between the Old and New Testaments that preach “an eye for an eye” and “turn the other cheek” accordingly.

I would concur that religious fanaticism, on the other hand, would tend to favour the vengeful God. Typically meting out retribution on heretics, apostates and unbelievers - i.e. anyone who disagrees with the religious fanatic. Typically this is tied into a fantasy of the fanatic being blessed or in some other way superior to the unholy around them. In the most extreme cases, the fanatic will see themselves as the instrument of that retribution, as we see in the case of Islamic extremism - which further feeds into the fanatic’s superiority fantasies.

There is no contradiction. The Laws in The Bible as are Laws in general, were updated as man evolves. Later Jesus came and preached Forgiveness,Compassion and Mercy. Violence has ALWAYS breeded more violence. Check out History and see how many times it has repeated itself.
This feud Between the Jews and the Arabs date back almost 5,000 years....

Many Christian denominations have downplayed Hell in recent years. I believe some may have even effectively abolished it, but I could well be wrong on the latter point.

If you have ever been in a really tight jam or lusted for something you could not have, you have felt the flames of hell.....The Bible also speaks of an Eternal hell/Punishment...so who knows....

The Corinthian

wiseones2cents wrote:

There is no contradiction.

I never said there was. I said there was a perceived contradiction.

This feud Between the Jews and the Arabs date back almost 5,000 years....

What has this to do with what I posted?

lili

maybe it's because i'm french, but don't you think it's shocking that a leader of a country mixte religion with politics?
i mean, i would be amazed to hear chirac saying to the french "god bless you" i would have a serious doubt on his mentaly health.

samb

That's because generally the french are very secularist, perhaps the most secular state going. Viva la France.

lili

the only french which heard voice from god about politics was jeanne d'arc. so, it's a little dangerous to follow god voice:D

wiseones2cents

The Corinthian wrote:

Clearly it is not to you, but clearly you’ve yet to make a believable case for that.

Whatever. If I really wanted to, I would go back and requote a few of your assertions that claim Capitalism is the best system, greed makes an economy thrive,and all the other defending of capitalism. The fact that your denying it absolutely ruins your credibility. Anyone that has been following this debate, knows that you defended Capitalism.Now that I have clearly proven you wrong you are back tracking. Yes I know you will howl and ask for proof and deny. But we know better.;)

It is when the obvious is irrelevant. Whether it is easier for someone to thrive under Capitalism (be they honest or not) is irrelevant

Irrelevant? Thats what the debate is about?Thats why the Criminals are outpacing the honest folk. In North America there are probably more drug dealers than businesses. And that money is being invested in the business economy.

Facts - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish – give us some cold hard proof.

Proof? Why dont you look at the drug use these days? You can get drugs,guns,stolen material on every corner. Someone is making that money
tax free.

Hearsay. Please point to some of this credible evidence. The Internet’s a wonderful source, why don’t you go find some of this evidence.

I did and supplied the links.:D

Indeed, and you will also find numerous media outlets that do not follow the same line, including Aljazeera and CNN. You might read a few newspapers too while you’re at it, for even further diversity. So it’s hardly a monopoly.

AL-Jeezera is a fairly new station.I hear the Americans have already began to impose its influence on it. CNN is also a huge international media corporation.
Most Newschannels around the world are all run by a handful of Media corporations. The rest are just satelittes of the mother entities.

Facts please - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish – give us some cold hard proof.

Actual I recieved a Special edition magazine on economics written by a score of Economists.On all that was wrong with World Economies. And it pointed to the IMF as the problem. It costs a country money to pay for the IMF to produce money for your country. So if you produce $1 you have to pay back 1.07 cents PLUS any incurring Interst. So you can see how the National debt can Increase at an Alarming rate,just by producing money for an economy.
The only country that doesnt pay is America, since the IMF base is there.
I would scan the magazine but dont know how to past scanned material.

Statistics, surveys, data, articles, hell anything other than you saying you heard about it somewhere or “it is because I think it is” would be a move towards your supplying proof.

Heard about it? I'm living it.If I had my bills from 20-30 years ago compared to today. I would show you. Energy costs have tripled. Which is odd considering we do not import resources, other than gasoline, even though we have oil. Most refineries are in America. Why Canada doesn't make more refineries I do not know....

No back peddling - I am challenging you to point out where I said that ‘we act against murder because of fear of discipline’, as you claimed. Otherwise you are misquoting me, quite possibly dishonestly.

Your debating skills are poor and full of flip flopping. I said we act against murder because of fear of discipline. YOU DISAGREED.

No sarcasm when pointing out that your opinion flies in the face of discussion and debate on the subject.

Most of my opinions especially on human nature need no proof. My assertions are common sense and anyone sensible recognizes this.

It’s not one of your fields of expertise. At present, outside of having numerous opinions, you have yet to display any field of expertise.

Regardless, you side stepped my opinion which is derived from undeniable logic you could not counter.

No, I said anti-social in this post. If you believe I said otherwise please feel free to point to

it.

We are not talking about THAT post but your INITAIL Post. Your arguments have been reduced to patheticness.

Is there a point to your ramblings?

If you did not understand the point in this statement. It says something about your intelligence.

REPOST:Greed is anti-social but wealth is popular.Simply because people want a peace of the pie. The greedy does not give you a piece of the pie, unless their is something in it for him.

And once again, facts please - not opinion, not some sweeping “look around you” rubbish - give us some cold hard proof.

Proof that it is man's greed and not religion that start wars?It is common sense. If you want facts, read History or the Bible, it is quite obvious. The fact that you need proof for something so trivial shows your lack of understanding.


Page 2 coming up.

wiseones2cents

The argument that ‘it’s common sense’ was once used when the subject of whether the World was flat debated. So you’ll have to do better than that.

I'd say that Information has come a long way today. Dont you think? Common sense is based on facts and not myths. The fact that you do not see this statement as common sense, says alot about your common sense. It is non existent.

REQUOTE:Why has the world not Advanced as fast as it should have?COMPETITION.I find a discovery and I keep it to myself for profit rather than sharing it and having another great mind build upon it.

Again, how fast should it have advanced? Do you have metrics? Evidence? Anything other than your own fantasy?

Alot faster than it has. In regards to Technology, Cures, Medicine, ect...
I take it you favour totalitarian regimes then?

But that has nothing to do with the point I made.

Of coarse not.(Note sarcasm)You keep changing your point.:D
You said there is no such thing as excessive murder and I disagreed and
mentioned Genocide. And I also illustarted an example of excessive greed.
Your arguments have all fallen apart and your just trying to pretend they havent.:rolleyes:

Apparently not. I gave you a link to an article that discusses Socialism and what it is. Read it.

Yes but our Base Economy(Resources) was Socialist. Which word didnt you understand?

All that from your link? I think not. The US’s debt and it’s long term effects are still a matter for debate. Perhaps it will cause a global meltdown, perhaps not, but your link that claims the US owes X amount hardly proves that or any of the other conclusions you’ve come out with.

Like I said. You must have only read the first paragraph. It said alot more than that. The Americans haven't still figured out how to solve their Social Security problems. The money was all spent. If they dont get Iraqi oil, How are they going to pay the huge number of retirees about to retire?Not that many Americans can afford to retire....

Iraq is a mess. Either the Sunni's are going to win or you will have a super Iranian state. Which America has no other choice but to attack Iran. Or there will be another Sunni-Shiite all out war.Or the Sunni's and Shiites will join forces to keep America out(WHICH I PREFER). Each one of these scenarios spells Disaster for America. America can never leave Iraq and secure its oil and it knows this. And it cant afford to stay there indefinately, especially if the insurgents cut off oil flow in Iraq or even Saudi Arabia.

Where do you get this crap? Seriously, what historical sources are you citing?

This is common knowledge to anyone that has thoroughly student Ancient History.

No, you said they were a tribe of Israel and have failed to demonstrate it.

I said that they were called the people of the book and claimed to belonged to 12 tribes. You denied them being called the people of the book. I sowed you proof that they were. Point proven. Another topic you have been soundly beaten.

You didn’t give me proof. You showed me a link between Roman and Greek and Egyptian law, and then you suggest I join up the dotted lines all the way to Jerusalem? Why don’t you fill in that gap yourself with some credible evidence, then you’ll have some proof. Until then, you’ve got nothing.

I showed you Roman Law derived from Greek law and I showed you Greek Lawed Derived From Egyptian law. Where do you think Egyptian law derived from? Babylon and where did Babylon Religion(Although it became coruptted) derive from? Noah, and Noah? From Enoch. Thats as far as the Bible goes.
Since the Bible and Zoroster are the Only old text's of religion. You can see that they Origionated from these sources that were passed down by word of mouth for centeries. Therefore your proof is? The Bible and Historical text's that support it.

Err... no. No harder than for you. Actually, probably much more pleasant.

I highly doubt it.

Oh so you were bluffing.

Nope Just couldn't bother. Anyone following this thread knows that you have flip flopped on your position numerous times.

No, AGAIN read the data I supplied.

Since I live here and know what the average pay is? I'd say that data was mis-information. Thats like me telling you my underwears are blue and you showing me data that says I'm wearing green. :rolleyes:

Only the dishonest can succeed? jealousy is a sin, you do know that?

For the most part yes. Most honest folks have ended up bankrupt. Big Companies are merging and little businesses are being squeezed out. America has had a record breaking number of bankrupcies since bush took office. Jealousy?No Jealousy here. I know If I wanted to I could easily do the same.
Their days are numbered.

Again, what historical sources are you citing?

The Bible

You’ve actually not submitted any sources outside of a link to a site that pretends to tabulate the US’s national debt. If you think that an unfair accusation, draw up a list of the ‘credible sources’ you’ve cited.

I've given numerous sources from Encyclopedia's, mostly wikipedia. I also supplied one news paste proving capitalism in Britain is a failure. The Bible which is historical reference. And you argument about Canada's economy when I live in Canada is absolutely laughable.And the Common sense issues, you were clearly beaten hands down. On Human nature and Capitalism that you NOW repeatedly deny not defending.When you clearly touted it as the best system.

MrJoeSoap

This seems to have gone waaaay off-topic, and is now just a case of debating who is the better debater.

MrJoeSoap

wiseones2cents wrote:

I also supplied one news paste proving capitalism in Britain is a failure.

Can this really be "proven"? Surely it is a matter of personal opinion.

wiseones2cents

lili wrote:

maybe it's because i'm french, but don't you think it's shocking that a leader of a country mixte religion with politics?
i mean, i would be amazed to hear chirac saying to the french "god bless you" i would have a serious doubt on his mentaly health.

Not when your largest Lobbying groups are religious fanatics.
Christians and some Jewish lobby groups are the largest backers of bush.

Thier not allowed to mix religion and politics but yet, in America many Methodists, Evangelists and born again,ect ministers, endorsed bush.

I hear that many of these Religions are heavily invested in the American military & defense. War would be beneficial to their pockets.

The Corinthian

wiseones2cents wrote:

I would go back and requote a few of your assertions that claim Capitalism is the best system

I said it was the best of a bad lot - big difference.

Yes I know you will howl and ask for proof and deny. But we know better.;)

No, I’ve given up looking for evidence from you.

In North America there are probably more drug dealers than businesses.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

Proof? Why dont you look at the drug use these days? You can get drugs,guns,stolen material on every corner.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

AL-Jeezera is a fairly new station.I hear the Americans have already began to impose its influence on it. CNN is also a huge international media corporation.
Most Newschannels around the world are all run by a handful of Media corporations. The rest are just satelittes of the mother entities.

You claimed that the news was monopolised and I’ve pointed out that it’s not.

Actual I recieved a Special edition magazine on economics written by a score of Economists.

Another phantom publication.

Heard about it? I'm living it.If I had my bills from 20-30 years ago compared to today. I would show you. Energy costs have tripled. Which is odd considering we do not import resources, other than gasoline, even though we have oil. Most refineries are in America. Why Canada doesn't make more refineries I do not know....

More opinion portrayed as fact.

I said we act against murder because of fear of discipline. YOU DISAGREED.

I still do, where did I agree?

Most of my opinions especially on human nature need no proof. My assertions are common sense and anyone sensible recognizes this.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

Regardless, you side stepped my opinion which is derived from undeniable logic you could not counter.

I did. Do you want to state how I didn’t again? If you say it enough times it might even come true...

We are not talking about THAT post but your INITAIL Post. Your arguments have been reduced to patheticness.

Where do I discuss popularity in that?

If you did not understand the point in this statement. It says something about your intelligence.

I understood, I just didn’t see any relevance between that and the point you were apparently responding to. If something does not make grammatical sense, I’ll tell you - indeed I have, when you made an earlier grammatical error.

Proof that it is man's greed and not religion that start wars?It is common sense.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

I'd say that Information has come a long way today. Dont you think? Common sense is based on facts and not myths. The fact that you do not see this statement as common sense, says alot about your common sense. It is non existent.

Classic. Because information (which apparently is being disseminated by monopolistic corporations, according to you) has come a long way common sense is now factual.

REQUOTE:Why has the world not Advanced as fast as it should have?COMPETITION.I find a discovery and I keep it to myself for profit rather than sharing it and having another great mind build upon it.

And what is the incentive for that discovery? You should work on collecting some more of that information you base your opinions on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents#Economic_rationale_and_criticisms

You said there is no such thing as excessive murder and I disagreed and
mentioned Genocide.

There is no such thing as excessive murder. For something to be excessive implies that it is acceptable otherwise.

Yes but our Base Economy(Resources) was Socialist. Which word didnt you understand?

It was not; read the article I supplied.

Like I said. You must have only read the first paragraph. It said alot more than that.

And you believe without question everything you see on the Internet?

This is common knowledge to anyone that has thoroughly student Ancient History.

I have and that’s rubbish.

I said that they were called the people of the book and claimed to belonged to 12 tribes. You denied them being called the people of the book. I sowed you proof that they were. Point proven. Another topic you have been soundly beaten.

That they are sometimes called so, does not mean that they were in any way related to the Jews. And that’s all you showed - that someone suggests that they are sometimes called that, nothing more.

I showed you Roman Law derived from Greek law and I showed you Greek Lawed Derived From Egyptian law.

More correctly influenced, but I’ll let your point pass.

Where do you think Egyptian law derived from? Babylon and where did Babylon Religion(Although it became coruptted) derive from? Noah, and Noah? From Enoch. Thats as far as the Bible goes.
Since the Bible and Zoroster are the Only old text's of religion. You can see that they Origionated from these sources that were passed down by word of mouth for centeries. Therefore your proof is? The Bible and Historical text's that support it.

The Bible and what historical texts?

Nope Just couldn't bother. Anyone following this thread knows that you have flip flopped on your position numerous times.

If you could back it out they might, but seeing as all that you seem to do is make accusations then fail to back them up, then I doubt they believe you.

I'd say that data was mis-information.

Right, you know better than them. Or they’re lying. Everyone who disagrees with you must either be ignorant or lying, I expect :rolleyes:

For the most part yes.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

The Bible

The Bible is a religious, not historical, text. This is the same Bible that claims the universe was created in seven days and the Sun revolves around the Earth.

I've given numerous sources from Encyclopedia's, mostly wikipedia.

You gave two that showed a link between Roman-Greek-Egyptian law. I even accepted that. That’s it. Another was on Conrad Black (the relevance of which escapes me still) and then one on Falun Gong (to demonstrate that they claim - not have but claim - 70 million members in China), nothing about your claim that they believe in a single supreme God.

I also supplied one news paste proving capitalism in Britain is a failure.

Where?

wiseones2cents

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Can this really be "proven"? Surely it is a matter of personal opinion.

It can be proven through statistics. But I guess your right. If someone enjoys working like a mule with 3 differnet jobs to get somewhere he could have gotten with one in a socialist society. He has a right to his opinion,:)

MrJoeSoap

wiseones2cents wrote:

If someone enjoys working like a mule with 3 differnet jobs to get somewhere he could have gotten with one in a socialist society.

You are taking an exception and implying that it is a rule. What about people living in socialist societies who wish to be able to earn millions and live in a bigger house than everyone else? There are more sides to the argument than you may care to recognise.

wiseones2cents

The Corinthian wrote:

I said it was the best of a bad lot - big difference.

Is it? I am clearly stating it is not the best of the bunch. Maybe for the short term, but it burns itself out,resulting in huge debt.

No, I’ve given up looking for evidence from you.

Looking for evidence for me? You cant even look for evidence for yourself. I think you supplied one link of mis-information.

More opinion portrayed as fact.

Really? If I had time to search for links I would prove you wrong on every single thing you state just my Opinion. Considering that America consumes more drugs than the entire planet put together? I'd say there are alot of drug dealers in America. I've seen figures of as high as 400 metric tonnes of Cocaine consumed by America. Thats Uncut(pure). you do the math.
Oh here is a link but I have seen numerous stating exactly what I claim.
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/JoshSchaikowitz.shtml

More opinion portrayed as fact.

I think the link above and crime in America speaks for itself. I hear gun crimes are up in Britain also.

You claimed that the news was monopolised and I’ve pointed out that it’s not.

I claimed there was a growing monoploy on news.
When you have a few people running the Media's of the entire world? I'd say yes there is close to a monopoly on Medias. And the funny thing is most of the major ones are all Jewish run. Not being anti-semetic. Just stating the facts.Not saying its a good thing or bad thing.

Another phantom publication.

Of coarse and I noticed you totally dismissed my currency claims I see.

I still do, where did I agree?

Can you tell me then why people do not kill each other, since you claim its not fear of discipline and upbringing?

Classic. Because information (which apparently is being disseminated by monopolistic corporations, according to you) has come a long way common sense is now factual.

Even monopolistic media corporations have to use some truth in their reporting to keep credibility. You just have to know how to sift through the b.s. Its called discerning. Also the Internet has put Information sharing on a new level.

And what is the incentive for that discovery? You should work on collecting some more of that information you base your opinions on:

Cannot a man be rewarded with a percentage in a socialistic society?If you lived in a Socialistic society and you sold something for 1 cent profit? You'd be a INSTANT multi-millionare or billionaire overnight(Depending on the size of your population). Or the government can give you sufficient money to live happily ever after. Why should one man ge greedy and own billions while others are starving?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents#Economic_rationale_and_criticisms

How does supplying a link that has both Arguments support your opinion?

What are you trying to say?Are you for or against patents and more importantly why?

There is no such thing as excessive murder. For something to be excessive implies that it is acceptable otherwise.

OK I see you do not know the meaning of excessive:Beyond what is usual; Extreme or immoderate. Understand? Therefore Murder is not excessive. Genocide is excessive(MASS) murder. I hope I was able to explain this to you in as simple terms as possible.

It was not; read the article I supplied.

Really? So who owned our resources? Does Britain still have a hand in Canada?

And you believe without question everything you see on the Internet?

AH I knew it. You didn't read it. I believe what I know to be true. I have been monitoring International politics for the last 4-5 years very extensively. So my observations are based on a lot more than 5 or 10 sources. I have done my homework.

I have and that’s rubbish.

Rubbish?King David's empire ruled the heart of known civilization. The Major Economic centers were Egypt, Europe, Africa and Asia. And David's empire was at the center. Trade was alreading thriving between Asia and the west before he even came to power. Remember the Silk road?

That they are sometimes called so, does not mean that they were in any way related to the Jews. And that’s all you showed - that someone suggests that they are sometimes called that, nothing more.

Ah now your bringing up another argument(AFter you clearly lost that one).
I didnt say they were related to jews but I have read ancient text claiming that THEY claimed to belong to 12 tribes. Ishmael also had 12 tribes.

More correctly influenced, but I’ll let your point pass.

Like I said. ALL LAW was all influenced from the same source.....

The Bible and what historical texts?

All Kinds. Have you heard of HAMMURABI LAW CODE(babylon),codex of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur(Assyria),codex of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin (babylon). By the way these are all Semetic Laws. These are the earliest recorded laws.Which probably Inspired Moses's mosaic laws(not the 10 commandments). Most of his laws,customs and Historical reference were passed down through word of mouth, and more than likely lost writings.

If you could back it out they might, but seeing as all that you seem to do is make accusations then fail to back them up, then I doubt they believe you.

My time is limited and I dont like to waste it by pointing out your errors.

Right, you know better than them. Or they’re lying. Everyone who disagrees with you must either be ignorant or lying, I expect :rolleyes:

When it comes to the Canadian economy? I'd say yes. I know better than you. I live here. Where would you get more accurate weather in Toronto right now?Reading the weather network or Asking me(now looking out the window?)

The Bible is a religious, not historical, text. This is the same Bible that claims the universe was created in seven days and the Sun revolves around the Earth.

Many people would disagree with you. It has recorded wars,events,rulerships,
ancestral lineages,disasters,ect...

Yes much of its text is Symbolic. Uncovering its meaning is the fun part.
Can you show me where it says the sun revolves around the earth?

You gave two that showed a link between Roman-Greek-Egyptian law. I even accepted that. That’s it. Another was on Conrad Black (the relevance of which escapes me still) and then one on Falun Gong (to demonstrate that they claim - not have but claim - 70 million members in China), nothing about your claim that they believe in a single supreme God.

Keep counting. Plus I've shown more than you.

Where?

Where?:rolleyes: The one that compares Britain to France. It was an entire post I pasted.

I see your posts have be reduced to "well thats your opinion". I have been through these same arguments hundreds of times and supplied ample proof on other boards. That is why I dont bother here.Most of what I state are facts derived from extensive research of facts.

MrJoeSoap

wiseones2cents wrote:

Looking for evidence for me? You cant even look for evidence for yourself. I think you supplied one link of mis-information.

He said "from".

wiseones2cents

MrJoeSoap wrote:

You are taking an exception and implying that it is a rule. What about people living in socialist societies who wish to be able to earn millions and live in a bigger house than everyone else? There are more sides to the argument than you may care to recognise.

You can also live in a big house in a socialist society if it is run properly.

Maybe the Socialism I have in mind may differ from your definition, therefore
the misunderstanding.

You can still be a millionaire in a socialist society. Although their would be fewer. But all around less poverty(if not non existent if run properly).

In a Capitalist Society you have more millionaires and billionaires but way more poverty, which causes crime, oppression, uprisings.ect...

Believe me. I have debated many sides of this argument.

MrJoeSoap

wiseones2cents wrote:

Believe me.

I have my own opinions thanks. I don't know many socialist nations that are jammed full of millionaires in fairness. While capitalism certainly doesn't work, I'd hazard a wild guess that plenty of people (not necessarily including myself) are happy under it. Just ask any of the citizens of the former Soviet Union how happy they were under it.

lazydaisy

wiseones2cents wrote:

Really? If I had time to search for links I would prove you wrong on every single thing you state just my Opinion. Considering that America consumes more drugs than the entire planet put together?
.

I guess that would be true if you include pharmeceuticals,as some consider those companies corporate drug pushers, but as I learned on another thread that they are dominated by Europeans so who knows.

wiseones2cents wrote:

I claimed there was a growing monoploy on news.
When you have a few people running the Media's of the entire world?
.

Who are these few people? I thought being a socialist you would support monopoly since you are so anti-competition?

wiseones2cents wrote:

Cannot a man be rewarded with a percentage in a socialistic society?If you lived in a Socialistic society and you sold something for 1 cent profit? You'd be a INSTANT multi-millionare or billionaire overnight(Depending on the size of your population). Or the government can give you sufficient money to live happily ever after. Why should one man ge greedy and own billions while others are starving?.

How can you be a millionaire over night with a 1cent profit? Where would the government get the money to give you?

wiseones2cents wrote:

When it comes to the Canadian economy? I'd say yes. I know better than you. I live here. Where would you get more accurate weather in Toronto right now?Reading the weather network or Asking me(now looking out the window?) /QUOTE]

And yet you dont mind proslytizing about America and you refuse to talk to Cubans who lived in Cuba both before and after Castro. So its really only your own first hand experience you value.

wiseones2cents

MrJoeSoap wrote:

I have my own opinions thanks. I don't know many socialist nations that are jammed full of millionaires in fairness. While capitalism certainly doesn't work, I'd hazard a wild guess that plenty of people (not necessarily including myself) are happy under it. Just ask any of the citizens of the former Soviet Union how happy they were under it.

Every one has a right to an opinion.

Like I said. Capitalist's have more millionaires but more poverty.

Of coarse some people are happy under Capitalism. The ones that are making the money.Capitalism gives more people a piece of the pie, But at the expense of the consumer base. Capitalism is a fancy word for MANY MIDDLE MEN.

In A capitalist society. A product that is $1 goes threw so many hands that take a piece of the pie, that by the time it reaches the Consumer, he's paying $10 for it.

In a socialists society If something costs $1, if run properly you will not pay
more than $2-$3 for that Item. So if you are poor, it is easier to afford things you need. Not in Capitalism. Thats why it breeds more crime.

P.S. Actually I have spoken to Many former Soviet Union citizens. And Like Capitalism, depends on who you ask. Most said Life was very good and simple. The Biggest problem, there was nothing to do except drink alot of Vodka and many did not see a problem with that.They Needed more entertainment, National events,ect...The war is what Brought Hard times.

Also I hear that Capitalism has caused more poverty in Russia than Communism ever did. People say life is worse today. But I am sure the Investers would disagree......

wiseones2cents

lazydaisy wrote:

I guess that would be true if you include pharmeceuticals,as some consider those companies corporate drug pushers, but as I learned on another thread that they are dominated by Europeans so who knows.

I am talking Illegal Narcotics. Did you see my Cocaine consumption Link? That doesn't Include Heroin or the newest plague. Meth........

Actually they Just found a mobster dead in America, that had ties to a pharmaceudical company, last week. He was accused of steering a dockworkers' union contract to a mob-connected pharmaceutical company.

Who are these few people? I thought being a socialist you would support monopoly since you are so anti-competition?

I already named the big Media players. Actually I have had this debate before. And the Only thing that should not be monopolized by Government or anybody is news. It has the power of mass manipulate.

How can you be a millionaire over night with a 1cent profit? Where would the government get the money to give you?

If you live in a socialist society you have a larger market. Therefore if you sell something for 1 cent to 100 million people. You are a instant millionaire.

And yet you dont mind proslytizing about America and you refuse to talk to Cubans who lived in Cuba both before and after Castro. So its really only your own first hand experience you value.

I've spoken to Cubans. I like hearing of different cultures. But the Opinion of an American Cuban will be definately Biased.He/she is living in America for a reason, no?America is to blame for most of the Cuban woes and it is obvious.

Captain Trips

wiseones2cents wrote:

Therefore one of the reasons socialism failed was because of the greed of Capitalism.

Socialism failed? ****! And there I was looking at the socialised models of industry and health, education across Europe this morning...what a waste of time that was!!!