Is it the extreme priests or the soldiers that want this war

Post #10,993 by brettj 9/30/01 9:11:27 AM 9/30/01 10:24:58 AM Reply	Is it the extreme priests or the soldiers that want this war Or should I refer to them as Mulluhs? This is a delicate topic, but the reason I ask is because I want to know who is really killing others for power. In the bible, Jesus accused the high priests of thirsting for power. "Beware of the scribes, who desire to go around in long robes, love greetings in the marketplaces, the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts, who devour widows' houses, and for pretense make long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation." Mk 12:38 I'm not suggesting the Islamic religion has any parallel to the Christian religion but it is worth asking about, is it not? edit #2: For a less kind version of the above condemnation, read Matthew, chapter 23. Woe to those that wash the outside but inside are full of extortion and lawlessness. Luke 20:45-47 is nearly identical to Mark. Edited by brettj Sept. 30, 2001, 09:23:13 AM EDT Edited by brettj Sept. 30, 2001, 10:24:58 AM EDT Is it the extreme priests or the soldiers that want this war Or should I refer to them as Mulluhs? This is a delicate topic, but the reason I ask is because I want to know who is really killing others for power. In the bible, Jesus accused the high priests of thirsting for power. "Beware of the scribes, who desire to go around in long robes, love greetings in the marketplaces, the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts, who devour widows' houses, and for pretense make long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation." Mk 12:38 I'm not suggesting the Islamic religion has any parallel to the Christian religion but it is worth asking about, is it not? Expand All History \| Collapse All History
Post #11,006 by Ashton 9/30/01 3:52:36 PM Reply	The parallels are everywhere, if you dare to look. I'm not suggesting the Islamic religion has any parallel to the Christian religion but it is worth asking about, is it not? You are doing what is most often done by those awarded the epithet, Bible-thumpers - though you are generally picking the more universal, less bellicose passages: Those common to virtually EVERY organized religion! I do appreciate that you personally - generally do stick to the more hopeful, thus useful passages among the many truly inspired ones within this massive, schizophrenic compilation of the prose of men (most.. but not all, of whom seem to have 'meant well'). It is this insouciance? ignorance of virtually ALL other, older approaches to er 'spirituality'; this hubris, this "certainty of the unique possession of truth" / combined with an intentional ignorance of all human thought which went before and still exists, which characterizes the 'style' of religious non-discourse most commonly seen. It is that characteristic.. which I find, now first rises into my memory, when a pair of suited evangelists appears on my doorstep and immediately! launches into a canned spiel - as If I knew nothing of their Bible, why they are sent there and perhaps most simultaneously insulting / laughable: presumes that my life experience, intelligence and discrimination - could not possibly match the accumulated 'wisdom' of a pair of twenty-somethings with well-scrubbed eager faces. No.. those of this level of 'persuasion' - remain intentionally anti-clueful about homo-sap, all of her history and at root, remain utterly unaware of the reasons why "truth" by any metaphor simply cannot be! "passed on like a recipe for Eggs Benedict" ! Even to the interested, let alone to ones who have made their own difficult enquiries; have done their OWN homework all along. So.. Oh Yes there are parallels in ALL the popular organized religions; The fundamentalists within each -- all sound alike, all operate from the same intolerance of any Other views of the mystery of life - and all are certain, to the point of Killing for God (by any variation of the wording). My view is that, so long as the majority of sane, wiser 'believers' stand silently by, as their extreme, hostile and nowadays bellicose members - "speak and ACT on their behalf", undisciplined by the wiser, better informed members of any of these groups: No communication shall occur. All present and ancient stereotypes shall prevail. The 'Open Society' shall employ all means possible, against the lunatic fringe (in order to survive) -- and likely in that process: shall surrender its Openness for the chimerical 'security' which so many ignorants would trade Everything, to get. THIS is the War signified and commenced on 9/11, IMhO. Ashton
Post #11,012 by Simon_Jester 9/30/01 4:54:45 PM Reply	Hard to tell at this point... The news is coming in censored now, and mis-information is probably rampant. But, guessing on Afganstian's seeming befuddled replies regarding bin Laudin, I would guess that the military does not want to fight. However, I would also suspect that the military doesn't have the final say. I'm not sure the Priests want to fight either, but for them it's a matter of principle. Bin Laudin, right or wrong, has been accepted as a guest into their house and is under their protection. Turning him over to a rival would be such a loss 'face' as to be beyond words. It would an affront to God and all of their customs. I don't know enough about Afganstian customs. I curious as to what will happen if we prove to them bin Laudin did it. If a guest kills a man under a host's protection, does Afganstian law/custom require the host to kill the guest? Does the host become libel? I don't know.
Post #11,031 by brettj 9/30/01 8:07:19 PM Reply	Good questions. I wish we had the answers. We will probably need guidance from Islamic geniuses to answer these questions. Fortunately, Mr. Bush realizes this and has already met with Islamic priests. His religious wisdom is starting to shine through.
Post #11,020 by CRConrad 9/30/01 5:41:18 PM Reply	No, you shouldn't; & yes, you should. Too bad two wrongs... ...don't make a right. Brett writes: Or should I refer to them as Mulluhs? No, you shouldn't, because they aren't "Mulluhs". They're Mullahs. This is a delicate topic, but the reason I ask is because I want to know who is really killing others for power. What a typical stupid mealy-mouthed BrettJ-style question! What fucking planet have you been hanging around on 'til now?? Can't be Earth, because if it were, you'd bloody well know that the answer is, pretty much EVERYBODY who kills in a more or less organized large-scale fashion. Sheesh... I'm not suggesting the Islamic religion has any parallel to the Christian religion but it is worth asking about, is it not? Well, you fucking well should, because it has lots of them, as everybody who isn't totally butt-ignorant should fucking well know. And don't give me that bullshit about being "new to religion" -- this is way below the least decent level of general knowledge any native of a modern Western nation, "religious" or not, should have. At least if they don't want to call themselves functionally illiterate, that is... Fuck, I'm a lifelong atheist, and I know shit like that. Did you grow up under a fucking rock, or what?? Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #11,133 by tuberculosis 10/1/01 4:28:11 PM Reply	Extremists period. Many religions have been used as excuses for psycho warlords to raise armies. The how many "savage cultures" of "heathen faiths" have been systematically destroyed by variants of the Catholic church? Was the Crusades really about god or greed? Spanish Inquisition purging the Jews and non-white Christians. Zionist zealots kill muslims and destroy mosques. Chinese (government!) works to destroy Buddhism in Tibet. Hindus & Muslims fight in India. 31 Killed 75 Injured in Kashmir today. A google search on militant fundamentalist show most numerous articles on Muslims, Christians, and Jews (Oh my!). Perhaps it is numbers but these are the most commonly used religions and their "standard texts" contain the necessary out of context snippets to incite the strong willed and weak minded. Behold John 15:18-20, \ufffdIf the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his Lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.\ufffd And Shine On You Crazy Diamond.
Post #11,137 by CRConrad 10/1/01 5:02:11 PM Reply	Hypothesis: Monotheistic religions are the worst. Todd Blanchard writes: A google search on militant fundamentalist show most numerous articles on Muslims, Christians, and Jews OK, Hinduism seems to lead to (or be used as an excuse for) the same kind of thing, what with the recurring massacres between Hindus and Sikhs, and Hindus and Moslems, in India. But yes, the adamantly monotheistic religions have always "felt", to me, like the most liable to lead to this kind of shit. In world news, those massacres perpetrated by Hindus, there only seem to be about as many of those in a decade as there are by Christians or Moslems in a year, right? Perhaps it is numbers but these are the most commonly used religions and their "standard texts" contain the necessary out of context snippets to incite the strong willed and weak minded. Well, looking at it from the point of view of "comparative religion studies", I'd say it stands to reason that monotheism leads to less tolerance and more bigotry: It has the "There Is Only One Right Way" thing even more built-in than other religions; that is what lies at the very core of monotheism AFAICS. In polytheistic religions, one person can say "I worship Vishnu the most", and another would have to go, "Well I think Kali is the greatest deity -- but they're both gods, so I can't say you aren't just as much a Hindu as I am." (Substitute in Thor / Freya, Anubis / Set, Apollon / Hermes, Venus / Mercurius, etc...) The step from there to realising that even someone of a whole other religion might still be human -- it seems a lot smaller than the same step from a monotheistic religion which only allows one single God, one single Truth, one single kind of True Believers. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #11,143 by wharris2 10/1/01 5:46:14 PM Reply	Re: Hypothesis: Monotheistic religions are the worst. That's one reason I'm no longer affiliated with any church. There may be a Being out there, there may be an afterlife, but there sure as hell isn't a being who supports preposterous notions such as "We are the true religion, and the others are going to hell." I've heard protestants say it about Catholics, let along about Muslims - and both protestant and Catholic are supposedly Christian. (But then we have plenty of evidence for animosity there in Belfast.) Who knows how empty the sky is In the place of a fallen tower. Who knows how quiet it is in the home Where a son has not returned. -- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)

Welcome to IWETHEY!