Mel Gibson's DUI and drunken rant

by **havanagilla** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:56 am

snappy answer (to a stupid question ?). Can someone give a SHORT historical description of the emergence and nature of the 40 million evangelical christians in the USA ? and what is the deal between Catholics and protestants in north american POLITICS in the present ? -- I know its a huge question, so maybe links will do.

by **rain** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:51 am

you could try this one hava, I haven't read thriugh it, just first to pop up wih groogle but it seems to provide the gist of the situation. <a href="http://www.iraqwar.org/ArmageddonUpdates.htm">www.iraqwar.org/ArmageddonUpdates.htm</a> and, I'm having difficulty understanding that this is all news to you or anyone, for that matter. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Well, from my limited understanding, its more a case of how the 40 million evangelical christians view their support of the Jewish lobby, with the basic understanding that any anti semite/new anti-semitism is to spend eternity in hell without god.<hr></blockquote> fair enough, it's more complicated, or should I say, deceptive than that, and I've read figures citing roughly 75 million, but "the basic understanding that any anti semite/new anti-semitism is to spend eternity in hell without god" is not correct. The script they're ostensibly following is Revelation and it's interpretted as quite specific, ya gotta have armageddon to get the second coming and then they'll all live happilly ever after. but first, they need this - .......... In these days of difficulty for the Land of Israel, there is encouraging news as well... It can now be revealed that less than one month ago, a red heifer was born in Israel. After the heifer's owner contacted the Temple Institute, on Friday, April 5th, 2001, Rabbi Menachem Makover and Rabbi Chaim Richman traveled to the farm where the heifer is located, to inspect and validate her status. The rabbis found her to be kosher and were satisfied that this heifer could indeed be a candidate to be used in the process of purification described in the book of Numbers, chapter 19. This is a prerequisite for the rebuilding of the Holy Temple. Tradition records that a red heifer in our generation is a herald of the Messianic era. It is certainly an important development towards the rebuilding of the Holy Temple. Our sages taught that Israel’s redemption can be compared to the dawn. "In the beginning, it progresses very slowly...but as it continues, it grows brighter and brighter." ............ <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=21491">www.israelnationalnews.co...3?id=21491</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rain@rigorousintuition>rain</A> at: 8/3/06 5:11 am

by **rain** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:58 am

<a href="http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/timeline.htm">www.andrewcollins.com/pag...meline.htm</a>

by **rain** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:21 am

hava, thought I'd include this one too, as it's quite recent, and, as you'll note, on MSN. Are These the End Times? The coauthor of the popular ‘Left Behind’ series explains why he believes Christ will return in our lifetimes Web Exclusive By Brian Braiker Newsweek Updated: 10:37 p.m. ET July 28, 2006 July 28, 2006 - When Tim LaHaye talks, the faithful listen—by the millions. The conservative Protestant minister is the coauthor of the wildly popular apocalyptic “Left Behind” novels. The controversial books, which have sold more than 60 million copies, depict the biblical end of the world: the Christian eschatology of the upheaval that precedes the second coming of Jesus Christ, known also as “end times.” LaHaye recently spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Brian Braiker about why he believes the events currently unfolding in the Middle East reflect biblical prophesy. Excerpts: NEWSWEEK: How do you interpret what’s happening in the Middle East? Are you seeing signs that these are the end of days? Tim LaHaye: Biblically speaking, the very nations that are mentioned in prophecy—and have been mentioned for 2,500 years as occupying the focus of the tension of the last days—are the very nations that are involved in the conflict right now. That may be one of the reasons there’s a sudden interest in bible prophecy because all of a sudden they realize end-time events could possibly take place and break forth right now. But first-century Christians believed that the end of the world could come during their lifetime. We call it the belief in the imminent return of Christ. It’s a motivational factor to serve the Lord and not let the world be so much with us that we don’t serve the Lord in the spiritual environment. Couldn't almost anything then be taken as a clue that any point in history might be the end times? Down through the years that’s true. But never the accumulation of events as we have today. I have often said that no one knows the day nor the hour that Christ will come, but no generation has had so many signs of the times as our generation. We have more reason to believe that Christ could come in our lifetime than any generation before us. You mentioned biblical prophecy. I’m not the student nor the scholar that you are— Well, I’m not the journalist that you are. [Laughs.] But my understanding is that current biblical scholarship reads some of the apocalyptic scenes in the Bible as metaphorically addressing events that were taking place as the Bible was being written. These are usually liberal theologians that don’t believe the Bible literally So the Revelation should not be interpreted, for example, as a polemic against Rome? That’s what they say. We believe that the Bible should be understood literally whenever possible. The next big event is the second coming of Christ. That’s preceded by a number of signs. And some of those signs could be stage-setting right now. They’re not going to come out of nowhere. For example, the Bible predicts when the antichrist comes and sits at his kingdom after the Rapture, he’s going to have one world economy and one world government and one world religion. We’re already moving rapidly in the direction of those very things Really? It seems we’re a ways off from one world religion. That’s the least developed, but there are many particularly liberal theologians that just think that "Oh, if we could just get everybody together of all beliefs ..." If you don’t have a strong belief system, you’re willing to compromise your beliefs with other religions. You’ve written about the threat of secular humanism. Part of the opposition to our position is from the secular humanists, but part of it is from the liberal people of theology that reject the Bible. I don’t see a great deal of difference between them. Their basic conclusions are often the same You’ve also written that “millions of unbelievers will be saved during the terrible time of the ‘Tribulation'.” What do you mean by that? I take that from Revelation, chapter 7. One of the things that’s going to happen after the Tribulation, after the church is gone, there’ll be no one here to witness the faith in Christ. So the Lord raises up 144,000 Jewish witnesses and he names the tribes that they come from. The result of those witnesses is they reach a multitude of souls that receive Christ. Does this explain how living right with God, in a Christian sense, would entail supporting the Israeli state right now? I think those two things are related. Christians who take the Bible literally are generally supportive of Israel because God promises to bless those nations that are a blessing to Israel and curse those nations that are not. And the history of America bears that out. But is it accurate to equate the state of Israel, which is a geopolitical entity, with all Jewish people around the world, who far outnumber the people actually in Israel? No, that’s just a third of the number of Jews in the world. So believers in the Rapture don’t necessarily foresee a damnation of the Jews then? No, we don’t believe in the damnation of people in ethnic groups. We believe that’s an individual decision. Now, it often follows in people groups. Take the Muslims that we’ve been talking about. Everybody knows that they do not accept Jesus Christ as a means of salvation from sin. That’s the only way you can be saved, is to call on the name of the Lord. They’re not about to do that. Neither are Jews. Correct. But during the Tribulation period, there’ll be a sea change, and many Jews will accept Christ. Not all. Again, it’s an individual decision You recently donated a whole lot of money for a hockey rink at Liberty University. If these are the end times, why make an investment like that? [Laughs.] My strategy is that Canada and Northern America produces the bulk of hockey players. We use the ice rink to get the hockey players to come to Liberty University where many of them are exposed to accept Christ. Many of them come because they are Christians. They are challenged to go into the ministry, and we’ve already had some of the guys in the earlier classes that graduated, and they’re going home to Canada to start churches Proselytism with a hockey puck? “Evangelism with a hockey puck” would be better. But if the end times are indeed near, why would there be any point in working toward fostering peace? Right now the Church of Jesus Christ is busy in the spiritual vein of trying to win people to Christ. We’re concerned about the salvation of individual souls. This whole thing has heightened the spirit of evangelism. Wars have always done that. But never have we had a war that is so specifically following the pattern of the scripture Michael Standaert is a critic of yours who has written recently in a blog that this belief in the end of the world in a big explosion of violence, reflects a “spiritual malaise” a “hopelessness in humanity” and that you’re “making money off of fear and hopelessness” in your “Left Behind” series. How do you respond to that? I would say that he’s just betraying his poverty of faith. If he had faith in the Bible, faith in the future and Jesus Christ, he’d recognize that our passion is just like the theme song in our books: we don’t want anybody to be left behind. <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14083809/site/newsweek/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/1408.../newsweek/</a> After the rapture, can I have your car? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rain@rigorousintuition>rain</A> at: 8/3/06 9:47 am

by **havanagilla** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:51 am

thanks rain. That explains the depth and the complexity of the "faith" (god they are idiots). BUt really are there 40 mil of those intellectoids in the USA ? and they have a lot of money and power ? amazing.

by **rain** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:10 pm

no probs, hava. 'idiots', just doesn't even cut it for me.

by **dugoboy** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:13 pm

heres a take i dont think has been mentioned yet but do you guys remember a little film mel gibson starred in in 1996 called Conspiracy Theory? haha. well...what if this isn't a little long term decreditization? 10 years later? i don't know but its interesting. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_Theory">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_Theory</a>

by **LilyPatToo** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:18 pm

hava, people like me here in the US have watched with horror as this ultra-right coalition of religious fascists steadily grew in power over the past 40 years or so. I used to have a bumper sticker that said, "The Moral Majority is NEITHER!" back when I had to explain to folks what it meant. Now ALL Americans "get it" since these facist morons have taken over many of our local governments and now our federal one, too. It was a case of too few people being willing to believe that a bunch of Bible-thumpers could possibly accrue this much power. LilyPat

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>And what makes you think I think the system needs to be destroyed through violent upheaval? We can destroy the system in all sorts of ways. Use your imagination and swap out 'destroy' for 'bring down' - maybe you'll be more comfortable with that. Violence is the final, final resort if it's the only thing we can do. I'm a buddhist and see no value whatsoever in violence. But, having said that, I would fight them if it was all that was left to me. I've debated this endlessly with other zen students and some agree and some don't. It comes down to a personal interpretation. But broadly speaking, please don't assume that when an anarchist says "Let's destroy government!" they're secretly mixing the molotovs. It's just language.<hr></blockquote> You're ignoring the historical facts and deeds of Anarchists. I'll leave Haymarket out, but...... Kropotkin called for violent action, "propaganda through deeds", at the International Revolutionary Congress in London in 1881. A few years earlier, anarchists assassinated William I of Prussia, the King of Spain and the King of Italy. (There were also seven attempts on Queen Victoria’s life during her reign.) Italian anarchist Luccheni assassinated Elizabeth, the empress of Austria and queen of Hungary in Geneva, Switzerland in 1898. Emile Henry was a French anarchist, who on February 12, 1894 detonated a bomb at the Café Terminus in the Parisian Gare Saint-Lazare killing one person and wounding twenty. In France, Ravachol was a violent anarchist terrorist, who robbed and murdered Jacques Brunel. Italian anarchist named Sante Jeronimo Caserio stabbed French President Carnot to death in 1894. The Bonnot gang robbed banks and killed policemen in France and Belgium in 1911 and 1912. Frank Abarno, an Italian-American anarchist and member of Gruppo Gaetano Bresci, was imprisoned for planting bombs in St. Patrick's Cathedral & the Church of St. Alphonsus. Pietro Acciarito was an Italian anarchist who attempted to stab the king of Italy. Gabriella Segata Antonili, a 19-year-old American anarchist convicted for transporting dynamite. (Wanna guess what she was gonna do with it?) Joaquín Miguel Artal, a Spanish anarchist attempted to kill Prime Minister Antonio Maura. Carmine Carbone, an Italian-American anarchist and member of the Gruppo Gaetano Bresci, was sentenced 6-12 years in prison for planting bombs in St. Patrick's Cathedral & the Church of St. Alphonsus with Frank Arbano. Mécislas Charrier attempted to rob the First Class travellers on the Paris-Marseilles train, killed one person and was executed in 1922. Manuel Possa, another anarchist, also attempted to kill Maura and wounded him in Barcelona in 1910. In December of 1910 a small gang of Latvian anarchists under the leadership of Peter Piaktow, better known as Peter the Painter, planned to rob a jeweller's shop, and ended up gunning down and killing unarmed police in what became known as the Sige of Sidney Street. Carlo Valdinoci, an Italian American anarchist and friend of Sacco & Vanzetti, was killed during an explosion he set off at the home of Attorney General Palmer. Auguste Vaillant, threw a bomb in the Chamber of Deputies, which killed no one, but wounded several people. There are many more, but I believe I've shown that the "bomb-throwing" anarchist stereotype developed from actual events. As someone who also has a very Buddhist/Taoist outlook on life, I condemn violence, except in defense of ones' self. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=johnnynemo>johnny nemo</A> at: 8/3/06 1:00 pm

by **havanagilla** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:26 pm

good point and quite plausible that it is connected somehow. the question is when did it start

by **rothbardian** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

I have somebody close to me who worked directly for this LaHaye guy, back in the 80's in San Diego, where LaHaye got his start as a pastor and a Bible college founder (Ah yes...San Diego. A beehive of nefarious activity.) This person who worked under LaHaye observed him to be a psychopath. LaHaye went on to promote the so-called Pretribulation Rapture idea, which teaches that Christian people will be whisked away to heaven before all the 'bad stuff' happens in the 'end times'. This, in turn, creates a kind of schizophrenia in many people: Strangely, the worse things get in the world, the more excited they get, about the impending 'rapture' (or so they think). When I say 'schizo', I mean that many Americans (and not just 'Bible-thumpers') view the increasing troubles in the world in a strange detached kind of way...like it's just another 'TV program'. They'll see the horrors of Lebanon, then they click over to the next channel and start watching something about Paris Hilton. It's sad because I can tell you from personal experience that, up close and personal, Midwestern flag-waving 'Christian' people are overall, very decent, friendly, generous and neighborly people. But they've been lied to. They've been scammed. They have people like Pat Robertson and Tim LaHaye (both of whom have given indication of being secretly occultic and totally counterfeit 'Christians') leading them on. I believe (and have seen much evidence) that there has been heavy infiltration into Christian circles in America, on the part of cultic/occultic groups who are pushing for world power. After all, is not George W. Bush an example of that very thing? A completely counterfeit 'Christian. It is the 'method of operation' for the powers behind Bush/Cheney, in their attempts at world domination. When you combine this infiltration thing...with the heavy bigotry against Christian culture, particularly in the entertainment world ( a total and unceasing onslaught of sneering, disdainful putdowns against all things 'Christian', which are worked into a huge percentage of the movie and TV scripts)...it creates a kind of mirrored scenario to the whole 'anti-semitism' thing. In the same way, the powers that be (PTB) have created an unjust notion that Jews are to blame for much of the world's problems...the same thing is being cynically concocted in regards to 'Christians'. Hence, George W. Bush. For that matter, all these top guys are putting up a big fat Christian front. (Karl Rove, for example, goes to a nice 'Christian' church every Sunday, and we all know what a lovely chap he is, in real life. He was outed by Internet researchers, during the Jeff Gannon fiasco, a year ago, as having a hankering for a 300-pound dominatrix. He appears to be one of the Operation Paperclip babies. His grandfather, Karl Heinz Roverer, was a high-ranking Nazi and engineer who built Nazi death camps.) It looks to me like this is the strategy for their final push to world domination (or at least these bad guys are hoping it's their final push).....to advance under a false Christian front, just as they have advanced under a false Jewish front. Please don't get distracted into going after these ordinary, gentle, neighborly 'little people' in Midwestern America...who have been lied to, scammed and deceived. If you do...you've been suckered. We need to more carefully sort out these issues...and clearly recognize, among other things, this whole counterfeit Christian strategy. With George W. Bush staring you in the face with his blatantly falsified Christianity...you have little excuse for not recognizing this central and crucial strategy being implemented by the bad guys.

by **rothbardian** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 4:09 pm

Johnny Nemo-- You're forgetting the biggest anarchists of all-- the Founding Fathers of the U.S. They started an entire war over their insistence on the complete and total removal of all government, such as it was. They demanded the complete and total removal of the existing British rule. They then went about structuring the American community from scratch. The Declaration of Independence advocates the complete removal of an entire government...if it has become tyrannical. I think you're missing the irony of you having to scrape the bottom of the barrel of history, in trying to find the odd 'anarchist' who threw a grenade here or there...when it has been the advocates of centralized and coercive government (NOT the advocates of so-called 'anarchy') who have prosecuted the real violence. They're the ones who did all the wars of the 20th century (on into the 21st). They're the ones who murdered 250 million people.

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:04 pm

First of all, there have been many violent anarchists throughout history, as I showed above. They assassinated kings, queens and even a U.S. President. They formed gangs and robbed and killed people. They don't do that now, mind you. They just go to demos, send books to prisoners and drink heavily. Secondly, The Founding Fathers weren't anarchists, they were Capitalist\Federalists who based the U.S. Constitution on the Constitution of the Lodge, called the Ahiman Rezon. They simply replaced the Grandmaster of the Lodge with the title President. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=johnnynemo>johnny nemo</A> at: 8/3/06 3:06 pm

by **rothbardian** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:29 pm

Nemo-- I say again, The Founders advocated the complete and total removal of all government. They were anarchists first and foremost. What each of them advocated LATER ON as a replacement for the King...was secondary...and an afterthought. They didn't even have a full idea of what they were going to do in the absence of government. The ONLY thing they agreed on initially was anarchy. And by the way, virtually all classical Libertarians believe in organizing the community in some form or fashion...contrary to the mainstream media and PTB definitions of Libertarian 'anarchy' that you appear to be relying on ("drinking heavily" and "sending books to prisoners"? I don't drink heavily- I've never sent a book to a prison).

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:39 pm

<a href="http://www.daveblackonline.com/no_king_but_king_jesus.htm">www.daveblackonline.com/n..._jesus.htm</a> Fundamental Orders (Constitution) of Connecticut (January 14, 1639), was the first constitution written in America, instituting a provisional government and later serving as the model for the United States Constitution. It was penned by Roger Ludlow in 1638, after hearing a sermon by Thomas Hooker, the famous Puritan minister, who, along with his congregation, help to found Connecticut. So important was this work that Connecticut became known as “The Constitution State.” The committee convened to frame the orders was charged to make the laws: As near the law of God as they can be. The Connecticut towns of Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor adopted the constitution, January 14, 1639, which stated in its Preamble: Forasmuch as it has pleased the Almighty God by the wise disposition of His divine providence so to order and dispose of things that we the inhabitants and residents of Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield and now cohabiting and dwelling in and upon the River Connecticut and the lands thereunto adjoining; and well knowing when a people are gathered together the Word of God requires, that to meinteine the peace and union of such a people, there should bee an orderly and decent government established according to God, to order and dispose of the affairs of all the people at all seasons as occasion shall require; do therefore associate and conjoin ourselves to be as one public State or Commonwealth, and do, for ourselves and our successors and such as shall be adjoined to us at any time hereafter, enter into Combination and Confederation together, to meinteine and presearve the libberty and purity of the Gospell of our Lord Jesus which we now professe… Which, according to the truth of the said Gospell, is now practised amongst us; as allso, in our civill affaires to be guided and governed according to such laws, rules, orders, and decrees. Articles of the Constitution of Connecticut:  Article I That the Scriptures hold forth a perfect rule for the direction and government of all men in all duties which they are to perform to God and men, as well in families and commonwealths as in matters of the church. Article II That as in matters which concern the gathering and ordering of a church, so likewise in all public offices which concern civil order, -- as the choice of magistrates and officers, making and repealing laws, dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of like nature, -- they would all be governed by those rules which the Scripture held forth to them. Article III That all those who had desired to be received free planters had settled in the plantation with a purpose, resolution, and desire that they might be admitted into church fellowship according to Christ. Article IV That all the free planters held themselves bound to establish such civil order as might best conduce to the securing of the purity and peace of the ordinance to themselves, and their posterity according to God.  North Carolina: Mecklenburg County Resolutions (May 20, 1775) We hereby declare ourselves a free and independent people; are, and of a right ought to be, a sovereign and self-governing association, under control of no power other than that of our God and the general government of Congress. Sorry, Rothbardian, but that's the real history, not the "fairy tale" told afterwards. As to the drinking heavily and sending books to prisoners, I was refering to Bob Black and the Wobblies, who do send books to prisoners and can be found crawling the bars of Philly and Austin, and many other cities. I know many Wobblies personally, have marched with them at demos, and have watched them get sloppy drunk and debate individualism/illegalism vs. syndicalism, many, many times. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=johnnynemo>johnny nemo</A> at: 8/3/06 3:50 pm

Mel Gibson's DUI and drunken rant

Re: its a good question

Re: its a good question

what's up with that

R U Rapture ready ?

Re: R U Rapture ready ?

Re: R U Rapture ready ?

conspiracy theory

Re: R U Rapture ready ?

Anarchists have a violent past

Re: conspiracy theory

anti-Semitism vs anti-Christianism

anarchists

Founding Fathers weren't really anarchists

anarchy

Sorry, but history shows that they weren't Anarchists

Who is online