Clearing Clutter

[Pastor Frank]

That's what communism also believed, but the problem began with not
knowing what to do about disbelievers. Are you planning to send those to
the Gulags or just kill them?

What do you think should be done, with people who don't believe that man
should have self determination, Frank?

How much "self-determination" is enough? Should all laws regulating
people's behaviour be scrapped? Or are you an anarchist?

We know what people who don't believe that man should have self
determination,
would do with those who believe he should: don't we Frank?
Your book tells us.
LUKE 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
But what should those who would be free of tyranny do, with those who wish
for a
tyrant to rule them?
I suppose that the kindest thing, would be to accede to their wishes, and
set up
a tyrant, especially for them, while at the same time, educating their
children,
that they CAN stand on their own two feet, and care for each other,
without
being under a constant threat.

I think the secret service will be interested in you, for willy-nilly
calling heads of government and their law enforcement "tyrants". You are
obviously an anarchist and may be dangerous to public safety as well.
Also, you obviously haven't been a child for a very long time. Children
are not interested in "caring for each other" but are very much interested
in which bully / tyrant is ruling their environs. If they would "care for
each other", bullies would be very quickly a thing of the past.




*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

[D. Hazelton]

Post by Pastor Frank

That's what communism also believed, but the problem began with not
knowing what to do about disbelievers. Are you planning to send those to
the Gulags or just kill them?

What do you think should be done, with people who don't believe that man
should have self determination, Frank?

How much "self-determination" is enough? Should all laws regulating
people's behaviour be scrapped? Or are you an anarchist?

Freedom is freedom. It's one of the components, IMHO, of "in his image".
(no arguments about that - I can back up my view as well as the next person)

There certainly are behaviors which are detrimental to society. However,
mankind, I believe, will never reach a state where any form of Anarchy
would work. Responsible Anarchy - the form that is most likely what people
are talking about when they mention Anarchy - is good in principle, but the
sad fact is that as time has progressed, fewer people will take
responsibility for the outcome of their actions.

Post by Pastor Frank

We know what people who don't believe that man should have self
determination,
would do with those who believe he should: don't we Frank?
Your book tells us.
LUKE 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
But what should those who would be free of tyranny do, with those who
wish for a
tyrant to rule them?
I suppose that the kindest thing, would be to accede to their wishes, and
set up
a tyrant, especially for them, while at the same time, educating their
children,
that they CAN stand on their own two feet, and care for each other,
without
being under a constant threat.

Either I have lived a sheltered life (impossible) or you have an extremely
black and white view of the world. While there is, admittedly, a small
minority that want a tyrant that dictates what they should and should not
be doing for any given situation, the mass of humanity strives for the
freedom to determine their path through life themselves.

And, as with a lot of people, the given quote is taken out of context. The
text is accurate, but without the context in which it is used the meaning
it has is lost. This comes from a parable - a story - "The Parable of the
Coins" if anyone is interested (Luke 19:12-19:27)

A parallel to that one is found in another book, however the ending doesn't
have the same tyrannical sound. I'm no scholar, but I try to find the
meanings myself.

As I'm new here I guess I should state that I am what you might call a
"Theist Christian" - but I have my own beliefs that aren't compatable with
any established sect of Christianity. This is why I have been slowly
teaching myself Greek, Latin and Hebrew - so that I can read the original
texts and translate them myself, attempting to do so with an eye on
accuracy and not using any existing translation as a basis.

Post by Pastor Frank
I think the secret service will be interested in you, for willy-nilly
calling heads of government and their law enforcement "tyrants". You are
obviously an anarchist and may be dangerous to public safety as well.

After following this thread I don't see where this comes from. Though I do
have to point out that Tyrants have and do exist even today. However,
calling all heads of state tyrants and accusing Law Enforcement of using
tactics like are common in "Police States" is common among the paranoid and
the conspiracy nuts.

Post by Pastor Frank
Also, you obviously haven't been a child for a very long time. Children
are not interested in "caring for each other" but are very much interested
in which bully / tyrant is ruling their environs. If they would "care for
each other", bullies would be very quickly a thing of the past.

Strange... I remember not caring about bullies - IIRC, I actually used to
stand up to the bullies and help anyone being bullied. Admittedly, though,
I am not, and have never been, normal. It makes me sad to admit this, but
you are correct here. Children, in general, are a very pure representation
of standard human psychology. They are curious about the strange, fearful
of the unknown and have a very clear hierarchy where the strong always come
out on top. But that's a generalization - as clearly demonstrated by my own
work as an outsider to the group and one who always tried to bridge the
gaps there are those who do not fit into the standard hierarchy.

Anyway - Even after reading the rest of the thread that led to me making
this post - I see no reason why it is actually relevant to any of the
groups which it is posted to. Though, if my somewhat limited understanding
of human nature is valid, there will be people that think it is clearly
relevant in some manner, and even those who disagree to one extent or
another.

ShadowWolf

[p***@shamrocksgf.com]

Post by D. Hazelton
There certainly are behaviors which are detrimental to society. However,
mankind, I believe, will never reach a state where any form of Anarchy
would work. Responsible Anarchy - the form that is most likely what people
are talking about when they mention Anarchy - is good in principle, but the
sad fact is that as time has progressed, fewer people will take
responsibility for the outcome of their actions.

I read an SF short-story once where they had an "anarchy park" in Cnetral
Park. The idea was rather interesting in that they had these floating "eye
in the sky" things trhat watched for harmfull activity. If any was spotted,
the thing would stun ALL parties involved (including the victim) and put
them to sleep for a period of hours. Other than thaty, it was "do as you
please." If a crook keeps getting stunned everytime he starts to commit a
crime/violence, what's the use? He'd eventually give it up. And since it'd
stun all parties involved, there's no figuring out "who started it", etc.

[p***@shamrocksgf.com]

Post by D. Hazelton

Your book tells us.
LUKE 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

<snip>

Post by D. Hazelton
And, as with a lot of people, the given quote is taken out of context. The
text is accurate, but without the context in which it is used the meaning
it has is lost. This comes from a parable - a story - "The Parable of the
Coins" if anyone is interested (Luke 19:12-19:27)
A parallel to that one is found in another book, however the ending doesn't
have the same tyrannical sound. I'm no scholar, but I try to find the
meanings myself.

And how, pray tell, would you interpret the above passage "in context?"

It very plainly states that there were some who didn't want him to be their
king. He then told the bystanders to bring them to him and kill them. Very
much shows a LACK of self-determination/self-government being allowed. But
yet you claim that people should be allowed to govern themselves
(collectively, as in a democracy) and not have a tyrant rule over them.

[ShadowWolf]

Post by p***@shamrocksgf.com

Post by D. Hazelton

Your book tells us.
LUKE 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

<snip>

Post by D. Hazelton
And, as with a lot of people, the given quote is taken out of context.
The text is accurate, but without the context in which it is used the
meaning it has is lost. This comes from a parable - a story - "The
Parable of the Coins" if anyone is interested (Luke 19:12-19:27)
A parallel to that one is found in another book, however the ending
doesn't have the same tyrannical sound. I'm no scholar, but I try to find
the meanings myself.

And how, pray tell, would you interpret the above passage "in context?"
It very plainly states that there were some who didn't want him to be
their king. He then told the bystanders to bring them to him and kill
them. Very much shows a LACK of self-determination/self-government being
allowed. But yet you claim that people should be allowed to govern
themselves (collectively, as in a democracy) and not have a tyrant rule
over them.

As I said, it was taken out of context. Christ was telling a story, not
preaching what should be done. The actual lesson in the story was not about
government, but about doing the best with what is given you. Hence, the
quote is taken out of context when someone uses it to claim that Christ
taught about dictatorship.

ShadowWolf

[p***@shamrocksgf.com]

Post by ShadowWolf

Post by p***@shamrocksgf.com

Post by D. Hazelton

Your book tells us.
LUKE 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

<snip>

Post by D. Hazelton
And, as with a lot of people, the given quote is taken out of context.
The text is accurate, but without the context in which it is used the
meaning it has is lost. This comes from a parable - a story - "The
Parable of the Coins" if anyone is interested (Luke 19:12-19:27)
A parallel to that one is found in another book, however the ending
doesn't have the same tyrannical sound. I'm no scholar, but I try to find
the meanings myself.

And how, pray tell, would you interpret the above passage "in context?"
It very plainly states that there were some who didn't want him to be
their king. He then told the bystanders to bring them to him and kill
them. Very much shows a LACK of self-determination/self-government being
allowed. But yet you claim that people should be allowed to govern
themselves (collectively, as in a democracy) and not have a tyrant rule
over them.

As I said, it was taken out of context. Christ was telling a story, not
preaching what should be done. The actual lesson in the story was not about
government, but about doing the best with what is given you. Hence, the
quote is taken out of context when someone uses it to claim that Christ
taught about dictatorship.

Jesus told these stories to make a point. He didn't just throw in details
just for the heck of it. So he HAD a point with that part. Again, I'll ask
you: how would you interpret that passage "in context." Don't give me any
excuses about how others have taken it out of context. I want to see YOU put
it in context and tell us what YOU think it means.