The real 'reason for the season'....
SANTA SATAN
by Mr. Normal
(Xmas Eve, 2000)
Is it plausible that Santa is really Satan?"
Think about it, folks! It's not just that "Santa" is an obvious
anagram of Satan; that Santa wears a demonic red suit symbolic of the
fires of Hell; and that his huge hat must conceal horns. The clincher
is that Santa represents xmas, that time of year when christian greed
and phony sincerity reach their unctuous peak. It's the season when
braindead followers of the ultimate cult are whipped into frenzies that
leave them figuratively drained -- broke and exhausted.
Understandably, it's also the time of the year when depression and
suicides max out as the futility of achieving happiness sinks in at
least subliminally. A December, 2000 Gallup poll shows that 85% of us
think that xmas is too commercial, but Santa/Satan wouldn't have it any
other way! Our most respected institutions are in on the plot too.
Even the law of the land (U.S.A.) forbids a baby Jesus in the town
square, but who's there instead? You
guessed it! Santa! - Satan.
Lucifer/Satan once was one of God's angels. Satan's attempted
heavenly coup failed (Isa. 14:12-15), but he was given his very own
place to rule and called it Hell/Earth (Rev. 12:9) Satan also got free
reign to tempt as many people as he wanted (even Christ himself!) and
lots of fabulous stuff to tempt them with (like eternal youth and
Mercedes Benzes). However, Satan still was not satisfied. He worked
hard to make xmas the most important retail event of the year. A
recent survey showed that 60% of holiday spending occurs at xmas, and
another 20% at Satan's recognized holiday of Halloween. Think about
it, folks! Satan has locked up 80% of our holiday dollars! Who else
could be the "red dragon" of Revelation 12:3, ?. More important is
that asking Santa for something really is an unwitting pact with the
Devil, and parents are dooming their children's souls to Hell-Fire!
(Coming to your neighbourhood; soon - JAH.)
"Santa Satan's" devilish temptations have achieved what John Lennon
could only try to claim for the Beatles -- greater popularity than
Jesus! Indeed, "Santa Satan" truly is the reason for the season!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To read the whole article, and the whole truth about Christ-mas, please
visit http://www.truth.fi/xmas.htm
Long live the fighters for Good & Truth.
Freeman
.
|
|
| User: "Hammondlover" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
15 Dec 2006 11:06:30 AM |
|
|
Freeman wrote:
The real 'reason for the season'....
SANTA SATAN
by Mr. Normal
(Xmas Eve, 2000)
Is it plausible that Santa is really Satan?"
Think about it, folks! It's not just that "Santa" is an obvious
anagram of Satan; that Santa wears a demonic red suit symbolic of the
fires of Hell; and that his huge hat must conceal horns. The clincher
is that Santa represents xmas, that time of year when christian greed
and phony sincerity reach their unctuous peak. It's the season when
braindead followers of the ultimate cult are whipped into frenzies that
leave them figuratively drained -- broke and exhausted.
Understandably, it's also the time of the year when depression and
suicides max out as the futility of achieving happiness sinks in at
least subliminally. A December, 2000 Gallup poll shows that 85% of us
think that xmas is too commercial, but Santa/Satan wouldn't have it any
other way! Our most respected institutions are in on the plot too.
Even the law of the land (U.S.A.) forbids a baby Jesus in the town
square, but who's there instead? You
guessed it! Santa! - Satan.
Lucifer/Satan once was one of God's angels. Satan's attempted
heavenly coup failed (Isa. 14:12-15), but he was given his very own
place to rule and called it Hell/Earth (Rev. 12:9) Satan also got free
reign to tempt as many people as he wanted (even Christ himself!) and
lots of fabulous stuff to tempt them with (like eternal youth and
Mercedes Benzes). However, Satan still was not satisfied. He worked
hard to make xmas the most important retail event of the year. A
recent survey showed that 60% of holiday spending occurs at xmas, and
another 20% at Satan's recognized holiday of Halloween. Think about
it, folks! Satan has locked up 80% of our holiday dollars! Who else
could be the "red dragon" of Revelation 12:3, ?. More important is
that asking Santa for something really is an unwitting pact with the
Devil, and parents are dooming their children's souls to Hell-Fire!
(Coming to your neighbourhood; soon - JAH.)
"Santa Satan's" devilish temptations have achieved what John Lennon
could only try to claim for the Beatles -- greater popularity than
Jesus! Indeed, "Santa Satan" truly is the reason for the season!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To read the whole article, and the whole truth about Christ-mas, please
visit http://www.truth.fi/xmas.htm
Long live the fighters for Good & Truth.
Freeman
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from satan
(who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now they are
God's again. Christmas does not belong to a pagan god of fertility-it
belongs to Christ. Easter is not even close to pagan. Just because it
falls around the same time as the vernal equinox (which many a religion
has celebrated) by no means makes it pagan.
By the way, "Santa" is latin for Saint.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
15 Dec 2006 02:52:48 PM |
|
|
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from satan
(who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now they are
God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he' create them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hammondlover" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
15 Dec 2006 04:14:21 PM |
|
|
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from satan
(who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now they are
God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he' create them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him. If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
15 Dec 2006 06:56:57 PM |
|
|
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from satan
(who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now they are
God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he' create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him. If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It implies that
God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his control, such as
the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows all, he knows who will love
him and who will not (even before he created them).
Why did he bother to create the ones that he knew would not choose to love
him? It seems like a redundant step. It appears that God created Satan just
because he wanted someone to torment. If that's the case, is God really
Good?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
15 Dec 2006 08:07:28 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he' create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him. If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ? The more questions like this, the more
one wants to conclude that religion and faith are a human invention
designed to ease our mind during times of difficulty.
I am already convinced that the old testament is simply an
elaborate story about families, relations, and history, with
sprinklings of moral and ethical teachings of wise men to the
less enlightened of that time.
Why did he bother to create the ones that he knew would not choose to
love him? It seems like a redundant step. It appears that God created
Satan just because he wanted someone to torment. If that's the case, is
God really Good?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
16 Dec 2006 09:32:43 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he' create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him. If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
16 Dec 2006 02:32:13 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I'd say the fact that our choices determine our own destiny is
the very best argument there is for there being no god (or at
least a god that has no real power... not a god at all, but
a figment of our own mind).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
16 Dec 2006 09:08:32 PM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I believe *evil* manifests itself in the form of mass murderers such as
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and many other examples before and
after. It can also show itself on a smaller scale, such as a serial
murderer. In other words, I believe cold calculated murder is evil.
I'd say the fact that our choices determine our own destiny is
the very best argument there is for there being no god (or at
least a god that has no real power... not a god at all, but
a figment of our own mind).
Are you trying to sell me something?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
16 Dec 2006 11:35:30 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166324912.302885.272150@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days
from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants
us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It
implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I believe *evil* manifests itself in the form of mass murderers such as
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and many other examples before and
after. It can also show itself on a smaller scale, such as a serial
murderer. In other words, I believe cold calculated murder is evil.
But yet you condone wars, such as the one in Iraq!!!
I'd say the fact that our choices determine our own destiny is
the very best argument there is for there being no god (or at
least a god that has no real power... not a god at all, but
a figment of our own mind).
Are you trying to sell me something?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
17 Dec 2006 11:15:43 PM |
|
|
mukyuk wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166324912.302885.272150@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days
from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God wants
us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It
implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings, Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I believe *evil* manifests itself in the form of mass murderers such as
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and many other examples before and
after. It can also show itself on a smaller scale, such as a serial
murderer. In other words, I believe cold calculated murder is evil.
But yet you condone wars, such as the one in Iraq!!!
I condoned the removal of the sadistic dictator Saddam Hussein, along
with his sadistic sons. Maybe you don't remember what was happening
while Saddam was still in power, but many people who cared were
complaining about the 5000 children per month who were dying in Iraq,
due to the corrupt UN Oil for Food program and other UN sanctions. Not
to mention the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis in Saddam's mass
graves. But you didn't care about any of that, did you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 12:02:14 AM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166418943.183875.4640@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166324912.302885.272150@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat
the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days
from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and
now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love
him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God
wants
us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It
implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he
created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings,
Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I believe *evil* manifests itself in the form of mass murderers such as
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and many other examples before and
after. It can also show itself on a smaller scale, such as a serial
murderer. In other words, I believe cold calculated murder is evil.
But yet you condone wars, such as the one in Iraq!!!
I condoned the removal of the sadistic dictator Saddam Hussein, along
with his sadistic sons. Maybe you don't remember what was happening
while Saddam was still in power, but many people who cared were
complaining about the 5000 children per month who were dying in Iraq,
due to the corrupt UN Oil for Food program and other UN sanctions. Not
to mention the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis in Saddam's mass
graves. But you didn't care about any of that, did you?
What I hear you saying is, it's morally right kill under certain
circumstances. Is that right? Who decides what the appropriate
circumstances are?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 07:39:42 AM |
|
|
mukyuk wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166418943.183875.4640@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166324912.302885.272150@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "mukyuk" <a@b.com> Spat
the
Words
"Hammondlover" <lordvader131@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166220860.964923.322880@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
mukyuk wrote:
Wrongo. Christmas is a victory for God-He took back the days
from
satan (who makes the days?) that had been pagan holidays and
now
they are God's again.
And exactly who created Satan and the pagans, and why did 'he'
create
them,
if I may be so bold to ask?
By all means, be bold. God created Satan and Pagans with the
expressed
desire to give them free will. He wants us to choose to love
him.
If
he forced us to love him, it would not be love anymore. God
wants
us
to
love him for the sake of love, not out of fear.
I have a few philosophical problems with that proposition. It
implies
that God is not all-powerful, since there are things outside his
control, such as the will of Satan, or even my will. If God knows
all,
he knows who will love him and who will not (even before he
created
them).
The notion of 'all powerful' may be a human concoction. Still, I
share your questioning of the established religious teachings,
Mondo.
If god is all knowing, then why the elaborate setup to allow us to
choose good versus evil ?
Why not? It is our choice, isn't it?
It would be 'our' choice, assuming I actually believe in some
strange abstraction called 'evil'. Can you define 'evil', Stephen,
that is, in terms that don't use words such as 'good' or 'god' ?
I believe *evil* manifests itself in the form of mass murderers such as
Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and many other examples before and
after. It can also show itself on a smaller scale, such as a serial
murderer. In other words, I believe cold calculated murder is evil.
But yet you condone wars, such as the one in Iraq!!!
I condoned the removal of the sadistic dictator Saddam Hussein, along
with his sadistic sons. Maybe you don't remember what was happening
while Saddam was still in power, but many people who cared were
complaining about the 5000 children per month who were dying in Iraq,
due to the corrupt UN Oil for Food program and other UN sanctions. Not
to mention the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis in Saddam's mass
graves. But you didn't care about any of that, did you?
What I hear you saying is, it's morally right kill under certain
circumstances. Is that right?
Yes, that's right.
Who decides what the appropriate
circumstances are?
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 05:53:54 PM |
|
|
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
You told me recently that 'God is the judge'? If that is the case, why not
leave it up to God? Trust that God will do justice in the end!!! And since
life is eternal, as you Christians believe, maybe the sniper was doing
those guys a favor by murdering them. Perhaps God will reward them by
sending them to a better place, maybe even! How do you know? Do you know
the mind of God and his glorious ways? If you truly trusted God, you would
not need ever to take justice into your own hands. In the end God will
decide!! Thy will be done!! Not so?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 08:27:38 PM |
|
|
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
You told me recently that 'God is the judge'? If that is the case, why not
leave it up to God? Trust that God will do justice in the end!!! And since
life is eternal, as you Christians believe, maybe the sniper was doing
those guys a favor by murdering them. Perhaps God will reward them by
sending them to a better place, maybe even! How do you know? Do you know
the mind of God and his glorious ways? If you truly trusted God, you would
not need ever to take justice into your own hands. In the end God will
decide!! Thy will be done!! Not so?
Hmm, maybe I should just stop working and hope God will provide for me
and my family? Do you really think it works that way? No, God expects
us to provide for our families. It's in the Bible. Something else
that's in the Bible is that we are to rescue those who are being taken
away to death.
And what about the Good Samaritan? Should he have just kept walking and
left the person who had been robbed on the side of the road because God
will take care of him? What about the disadvantaged who need help?
Should we just ignore them because God will take care of them? Is that
what you believe?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 12:18:15 PM |
|
|
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage. If he is
kidnapping a group of terrorists that he discovered are planning to bomb a
major landmark, killing thousands, then no the police would have done the
*wrong* thing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 08:10:43 PM |
|
|
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 10:01:11 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who have
the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time but in
no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the death of
these innocents is justified in this case ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 10:56:32 PM |
|
|
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns989DD5D31603rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who have
the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time but in
no other way are connected to the bad guys ?
If the 'inocents' on the 'bad guys' side also hve the same philosophy, then
it could be messy!!!
Do you think the death of these innocents is justified in this case ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
18 Dec 2006 11:37:17 PM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who have
the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time but in
no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the death of
these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with the
bad guys?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
20 Dec 2006 02:05:11 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who have
the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time but in
no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the death of
these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with the
bad guys?
As stated above, the innocents had no connection to the bad guys.
The US military just wrote off their deaths as 'collateral damage'.
You support killing innocents if we can also take out some bad guys ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
20 Dec 2006 08:21:24 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage, threatening to
kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot at the guy's cranium,
should the police sniper kill the guy or not? You decide and let me
know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding citizens. In
that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who have
the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time but in
no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the death of
these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with the
bad guys?
As stated above, the innocents had no connection to the bad guys.
Then they would have to be hostages. In that case, it would be a
tragedy that they died. And the kidnappers would be their murderers.
The US military just wrote off their deaths as 'collateral damage'.
Are you thinking of an actual case? Could you provide the specifics?
You support killing innocents if we can also take out some bad guys ?
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
20 Dec 2006 03:02:21 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage,
threatening to kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot
at the guy's cranium, should the police sniper kill the guy or
not? You decide and let me know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding
citizens. In that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who
have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time
but in no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the
death of these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with
the bad guys?
As stated above, the innocents had no connection to the bad guys.
Then they would have to be hostages.
Wrong again. The innocents in these cases are just villagers who
happen to be in close proximity to the bad guys.
In that case, it would be a
tragedy that they died. And the kidnappers would be their murderers.
The US military just wrote off their deaths as 'collateral damage'.
Are you thinking of an actual case? Could you provide the specifics?
You support killing innocents if we can also take out some bad guys ?
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
This is the administration that you are supporting. I doubt any
war has ever been any different, but what Bush is doing right now
isn't really a war, because those 'bad guys' aren't really warriors
and they don't represent any country that we're at war with. This is
more of a police action using the US Military.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
20 Dec 2006 08:07:14 PM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage,
threatening to kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot
at the guy's cranium, should the police sniper kill the guy or
not? You decide and let me know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding
citizens. In that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who
have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time
but in no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think the
death of these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with
the bad guys?
As stated above, the innocents had no connection to the bad guys.
Then they would have to be hostages.
Wrong again. The innocents in these cases are just villagers who
happen to be in close proximity to the bad guys.
In that case, it would be a
tragedy that they died. And the kidnappers would be their murderers.
The US military just wrote off their deaths as 'collateral damage'.
Are you thinking of an actual case? Could you provide the specifics?
You support killing innocents if we can also take out some bad guys ?
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mukyuk" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
20 Dec 2006 10:01:04 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166666834.544010.320720@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
mukyuk wrote:
If a kidnapper is holding a group of people hostage,
threatening to kill them, and a police sniper has a clear shot
at the guy's cranium, should the police sniper kill the guy or
not? You decide and let me know what you think.
That all depends on who the kidnapper is holding hostage.
Okay, let's say the hostages are all innocent, law abiding
citizens. In that case, what's your answer to my question?
You're saying that the death of innocents, under any circumstances,
is wrong, and the instigators are to blame. What about when the US
drops a bomb which kills 15 bad guys and 5 innocent civilians who
have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time
but in no other way are connected to the bad guys ? Do you think
the
death of these innocents is justified in this case ?
Were the innocent civilians hostages? Or were they associating with
the bad guys?
As stated above, the innocents had no connection to the bad guys.
Then they would have to be hostages.
Wrong again. The innocents in these cases are just villagers who
happen to be in close proximity to the bad guys.
In that case, it would be a
tragedy that they died. And the kidnappers would be their murderers.
The US military just wrote off their deaths as 'collateral damage'.
Are you thinking of an actual case? Could you provide the specifics?
You support killing innocents if we can also take out some bad guys ?
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
Of course, you would think differently if you were the 'victum' of such a
philosophy.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
21 Dec 2006 06:48:26 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
21 Dec 2006 10:12:36 PM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
Oh, the way Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
22 Dec 2006 02:46:25 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
Oh, the way Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade?
Indeed it is... but Clinton didn't start that fight out of
thin air (the Serbs were bent on mass murdering the Kosovo
muslims, and Clinton did what he could to stop it).
You still really want to support Bush, don't you, even though
he essentially 'invented' a conflict in Iraq. Amazing. You're
hopeless Stephen.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
22 Dec 2006 07:28:33 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
Oh, the way Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade?
Indeed it is... but Clinton didn't start that fight out of
thin air (the Serbs were bent on mass murdering the Kosovo
muslims, and Clinton did what he could to stop it).
Do you realize Saddam put FAR MORE people in mass graves than Milosevic
could have ever hoped to? But you don't care about that, do you?
You still really want to support Bush, don't you, even though
he essentially 'invented' a conflict in Iraq. Amazing. You're
hopeless Stephen.
You're an amazing hypocrite, Randolph.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
23 Dec 2006 02:55:50 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
Oh, the way Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade?
Indeed it is... but Clinton didn't start that fight out of
thin air (the Serbs were bent on mass murdering the Kosovo
muslims, and Clinton did what he could to stop it).
Do you realize Saddam put FAR MORE people in mass graves than Milosevic
could have ever hoped to? But you don't care about that, do you?
You still really want to support Bush, don't you, even though
he essentially 'invented' a conflict in Iraq. Amazing. You're
hopeless Stephen.
You're an amazing hypocrite, Randolph.
Sorry Stephen, you can't win this one... but you can be
remembered in history as siding with the criminals, losers,
and idiots if you want to.
Everyone knows Bush and his gang lied to get us into the Iraq
war, then did all the stupidest things to ensure that we can't
win. Whether you continue to support that is your decision.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Santa - Satan |
23 Dec 2006 06:41:18 PM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
I don't support the intentional killing of innocents.
Then you are a contradiction of yourself, because the US military
under the Bush administration finds it an acceptable trade-off to
have innocents killed if it means taking out a few questionable
characters and not putting our own soldiers at risk.
The innocents are not intentionally targeted, are they?
The innocents are intentionally allowed to die alongside
the bad guys, because the military would rather that the
innocents die than risk loss of our own soldiers in a
direct confrontation. It's bombing from 20,000 feet...
collateral damage is acceptable.
Oh, the way Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade?
Indeed it is... but Clinton didn't start that fight out of
thin air (the Serbs were bent on mass murdering the Kosovo
muslims, and Clinton did what he could to stop it).
Do you realize Saddam put FAR MORE people in mass graves than Milosevic
could have ever hoped to? But you don't care about that, do you?
You still really want to support Bush, don't you, even though
he essentially 'invented' a conflict in Iraq. Amazing. You're
hopeless Stephen.
You're an amazing hypocrite, Randolph.
Sorry Stephen, you can't win this one... but you can be
remembered in history as siding with the criminals, losers,
and idiots if you want to.
Well, before you pick up your marbles and declare victory, maybe you
should answer a couple of questions you ignored -- for instance, what
was Milosevic's provocation that caused Clinton to bomb Belgrade? And
do you realize that Saddam put FAR MORE people in mass graves than
Milosevic could have ever hoped to? Do you care about that? Probably
not since you failed to answer it the first time around.
Everyone knows Bush and his gang lied to get us into the Iraq
war,
"Everyone knows" just like "everyone knows" our troops left Vietnam
from the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon in 1975, you goof?
Regardless, do you also believe Richard Gephardt lied? Did Tony Blair
lie? How about Jay Rockefeller? John Edwards? John Kerry? Hillary
Clinton? Did the Clinton appointed CIA director also lie? Please
respond.
then did all the stupidest things to ensure that we can't
win. Whether you continue to support that is your decision.
There is no doubt many mistakes were made. But then mistakes are made
in every war. It's really a good thing today's leftist loonies (like
you) weren't around for the invasion of France during World War II.
They'd have no doubt been critical of military planning surrounding
D-Day, and later the Battle of the Bulge. Multiple thousands of troops
were killed during the D-Day invasion, as well as later during the
Battle of the Bulge. Today's loony left wouldn't have stood for that,
would they? Nope, they'd have said we must bring the troops home now,
and let Hitler have his way!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
