To hate Jews is to hate God

by Greatest I am Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:22 pm

First topic message reminder :

To hate Jews is to hate God.

If you believe in the sacrifice of Jesus, then you must believe that God planned for it and set the conditions even before the earth was formed. If as most believe, the Jews were the cause of the sacrifice, then one must believe that God put the notion and desire to kill Jesus in the Jewish hearts. Jews then were God’s tools in carrying out God’s plan. Jews then should be venerated just as Jesus is because Jesus and Jews were required and caused by God to participate in the sacrifice. They were all doing God’s will and not their own.

Jesus was a Jew and to hate Jews means that Jesus is also hated. The church has historically persecuted Jews and only repented for their actions in 2011 with the pope acknowledging that not all Jews should be hated. Just those directly involved in the sacrifice of Jesus. Ignoring of course that they were charged directly by God to be and do what God wanted.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/jews-not-responsible-for-death-of-christ-pope-says-49267/

Why then have Christians historically hated Jews, and by inference, hate the Jew part of God/Jesus the Jew?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKg4HLsu5gE&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott15j2KwQ&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHP-f-_F9U

The weird twist to this history is that the Christian right who hates Jews the most, is now the ones pushing for funding of the Jewish homeland to fulfill prophesy.

Most Jews do not believe that Jesus was the messiah. Is the Christian right just funding Jews to help drive them to destruction at the hands of God?

Jews tend not to read the O. T. the way Christians do. Are Christian interpretations of Jewish text superior or inferior to the Jewish interpretation of their own myths?

Regards
DL

by polyglide Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:35 am

I do hate some things, abuse of any kind, the lack of helping those in need, indifference to the needs of others, selfishness, being just a few.

I do love everyone to a lesses or greater degree, we are all different and those who choose evil and are looked down on are still human beings and we do not know all the circumstances so I take the advice of God, LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:38 am

When you take an emotion as strong as love and apply it to everyone you lessen its value. It's a bit like saying everyone's a world class football player but some people are more world class than others. I do accept hate is a useless emotion as it affects the person doing the hating more than the one being hated.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:36 pm

Dan Fante wrote:You can't possibly love everyone. It's just a thing to say to make you appear like a more superior human being. Without a full spectrum of emotions and feelings towards people and things the concept of love (or hate) is meaningless.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote::yeahthat:

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:39 pm

Dan Fante wrote:When you take an emotion as strong as love and apply it to everyone you lessen its value. It's a bit like saying everyone's a world class football player but some people are more world class than others. I do accept hate is a useless emotion as it affects the person doing the hating more than the one being hated.

Is he talking about historical humans as well? So he's claiming to love people like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Fred West, Ian Brady etc etc as much as he loves his own family. I have to agree with Dan here, that's an asinine claim.

by Shirina Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:50 pm

Dan Fante wrote:When you take an emotion as strong as love and apply it to everyone you lessen its value.

That really depends on the type of love being discussed.

There are some types of love, by their very natures, must be exclusive. Romantic love (the most destructive emotion in existence) is a case in point, as well as, say, a mother's love for her child. Obviously those types of love would begin to lose value if they were shown to everyone.

But there are more general types of love that could be applied to everyone ... although, to be more accurate, "love" is probably too strong a word for it. You can have concern for a fellow human being, the kind that causes you to help someone in need. You can have empathy and respect for a fellow human being which gives you the impetus to be polite, courteous, and not a complete asshat to everyone you meet.

But love? Probably not.

I think it stands to reason that most of us, if presented with that horrifying choice of saving from death only one person out of a group, we would pick a friend or relative to save before we would pick a complete stranger. (Although I do have a psycho aunt that I just might let go down in flames while I rescue a stranger .... Twisted Evil

)

by stuart torr Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:14 pm

Good post yet again Shirina, no-one can fail to see where you are coming from if you understand my meaning. I agree very much that "romantic love" is one of the most destructive forms of love going i'm afraid, as I have found seriously twice in my life. There is also a Father's love for his child too which you seemed to forget? as I would do anything for my daughter, even if it meant giving up my own life to save her's. I know i'm a great big softie, but given the choice out of saving some of my neighbours lives or my dogs I would save my dogs every time.

by Bellatori Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:08 pm

stu wrote:Good post yet again Shirina, no-one can fail to see where you are coming from if you understand my meaning. I agree very much that "romantic love" is one of the most destructive forms of love going i'm afraid, as I have found seriously twice in my life. There is also a Father's love for his child too which you seemed to forget? as I would do anything for my daughter, even if it meant giving up my own life to save her's. I know i'm a great big softie, but given the choice out of saving some of my neighbours lives or my dogs I would save my dogs every time.

You wait until you have a grandchild... it is only then that you see men reall turn to mush Very Happy

by stuart torr Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:16 pm

I believe you Bellatori, few years to wait for that though. Unless I am dead and gone.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Oct 25, 2013 10:40 pm

Bellatori wrote:
stu wrote:Good post yet again Shirina, no-one can fail to see where you are coming from if you understand my meaning. I agree very much that "romantic love" is one of the most destructive forms of love going i'm afraid, as I have found seriously twice in my life. There is also a Father's love for his child too which you seemed to forget? as I would do anything for my daughter, even if it meant giving up my own life to save her's. I know i'm a great big softie, but given the choice out of saving some of my neighbours lives or my dogs I would save my dogs every time.
You wait until you have a grandchild... it is only then that you see men reall turn to mush

I agree 100%.

by polyglide Sat Oct 26, 2013 11:32 am

Love is a many splended thing.

Take Hitler as an example.

I deplore what his actions resulted in.

There is no excuse for his beliefs.

However, who am I or anyone else, to judge, when we are unaware of the evil influences that he may have been subject to.

Perhaps love in his case may be the wrong word, maybe sympathy would be better as he must be a very lost soul.

by Dan Fante Sat Oct 26, 2013 12:50 pm

Poor Adolf.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:03 pm

polyglide wrote:Love is a many splended thing.

Take Hitler as an example.

I deplore what his actions resulted in.

There is no excuse for his beliefs.

However, who am I or anyone else, to judge, when we are unaware of the evil influences that he may have been subject to.

Perhaps love in his case may be the wrong word, maybe sympathy would be better as he must be a very lost soul.

Well Hitler's beliefs were christian, or so he repeatedly claimed, and he was raised and baptised a catholic. Also you earlier claimed that anyone who believed in Jesus would live a decent life, Hitler believed in Jesus, as did 94% of the German population according to a 1939 census. No, suggesting sympathy for Hitler is as absurd as suggesting love for Hitler.

by stuart torr Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:27 pm

Hate for Hitler yes I can give that, but no sympathy or love?

by Bellatori Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:54 pm

Hate is a very destructive emotion. To be honest I cannot think of anything or anyone I truly hate. It seems rather a waste of emotional energy. I asked myself if I could hate the Jimmy Saviles of this world and in all honesty ... NO. Personally I would approve of lethal injection for such as him and for truly serious anti social crimes simply because they deal with the problem with a certain finality AND - and this is probably going to sound a bit weird - it is cost effective.

So that's it. Don't bother hating but have a system that deals with issues once and for all. I remember being told by a management guru the main principle was 'handle it once'. That's good management apparently.

Before someone has a go at me can I make it clear that not hating an abuser does NOT mean that I do not sympathise with the abused.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:01 pm

stu wrote:Hate for Hitler yes I can give that, but no sympathy or love?

It's interesting that Polyglide earlier implied that that Hitler was perhaps not entirely culpable for his actions, which is rubbish of course, but that we should should look at the things that made him what he was. Does Polyglide realise that Hitler was born, baptised, and raised a strict Catholic I wonder? Where I wonder does Polyglide think the Nazis, 94% christian as that 1939 census attests, virulent anti-Semitism came from?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:10 pm

Bellatori wrote:Hate is a very destructive emotion. To be honest I cannot think of anything or anyone I truly hate. It seems rather a waste of emotional energy. I asked myself if I could hate the Jimmy Saviles of this world and in all honesty ... NO. Personally I would approve of lethal injection for such as him and for truly serious anti social crimes simply because they deal with the problem with a certain finality AND - and this is probably going to sound a bit weird - it is cost effective.

So that's it. Don't bother hating but have a system that deals with issues once and for all. I remember being told by a management guru the main principle was 'handle it once'. That's good management apparently.

Before someone has a go at me can I make it clear that not hating an abuser does NOT mean that I do not sympathise with the abused.

I always maintained that hate for an action is logical, but hate for the person generally self defeating. If that makes sense. It's generally hatred and intolerance that cause the catastrophes and wars in the first instance, so it stands to reason that using hatred after the problem has been for all intents and purposes removed is not just illogical but self defeating as it perpetuates the emotion that caused the problem in the first place. Of course this easy in theory, but then when one reads of the terrible crimes and atrocities committed it takes a lot of self control to think about what happened in a logical and positive way. I feel the same way about the death penalty, which on principle I'm opposed to, but see how in some extreme cases it might simply be prudent for any society to end a life. It still produces all manner of moral and logical dichotomies for me though.

by Dan Fante Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:40 pm

By the way, Polyglide: I think you mean 'many-splendored' Wink

by stuart torr Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:57 pm

You have it your way Bellatori, I will have it mine, as long as I can give the fatal injection please. many thanks. thumbsup

by Bellatori Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:13 pm

stu wrote:You have it your way Bellatori, I will have it mine, as long as I can give the fatal injection please. many thanks.

Unlike with hanging which is quite a skilled task (watch Timothy Spall in Pierrepoint - the nearest thing to an unwatchable film I have seen... brilliantly acted) pressing a needle would take little required practice so I would guess there would be a long queue.

by stuart torr Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:46 pm

Bellatori I am an ex nurse charge nurse, I do believe THAT i CAN STILL GIVE AN INJECTION !!! tell you what BELLATORI if I was told to hang someone, as that was now my job, I would do it no prob.

by Heretic Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:05 pm

stu wrote:Bellatori I am an ex nurse charge nurse, I do believe THAT i CAN STILL GIVE AN INJECTION !!! tell you what BELLATORI if I was told to hang someone, as that was now my job, I would do it no prob.

I believe there are seven billion plus causes worth dying for, not one cause worth killing for.

Heretic

by Shirina Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:11 pm

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Where I wonder does Polyglide think the Nazis, 94% christian as that 1939 census attests, virulent anti-Semitism came from?

No one really knows for sure where the anti-Semitism came from, but the leading theory says that it stemmed from the fact that a Jewish doctor treated his mother's breast cancer but she still died from it.

Hitler had an almost unhealthy closeness to his mother, namely because his father regularly beat him. Once his mother died, Hitler essentially went berserk, and it suggests that Hitler blamed the doctor, and by default all Jews, for the death of his mother.

More WWII trivia for you.

by Shirina Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:14 pm

Heretic wrote:I believe there are seven billion plus causes worth dying for, not one cause worth killing for.

While I can appreciate the sentiment, this is an evolutionary dead-end. Those who do not kill when needed to protect their families, their beliefs, and their way of life will ultimately lose all of it to more aggressive, less moral tribes, nations, and civilizations. Pacifism is merely an empty grave waiting to be filled.

by stuart torr Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:24 pm

I seem to be praising you a lot just lately Shirina ahah well said.

by Heretic Sat Oct 26, 2013 10:37 pm

Shirina wrote:
Heretic wrote:I believe there are seven billion plus causes worth dying for, not one cause worth killing for.
While I can appreciate the sentiment, this is an evolutionary dead-end. Those who do not kill when needed to protect their families, their beliefs, and their way of life will ultimately lose all of it to more aggressive, less moral tribes, nations, and civilizations. Pacifism is merely an empty grave waiting to be filled.

What others choose to do in the name of what believe is not something that I can concern myself with. What I must concern myself with is what sort of person I want to be. I have heard things similar to what you have said many times but in order to make sense of it I try and make it a bit closer to peoples lives. Here in Liverpool there is a large number of people that enjoy a drink on a Saturday night and they head for the city centre. After a number of drinks people lose their inhibitions, a lot do anyway. Those with a large amount of Testosterone in their systems as well as the alcohol are particularly prone to think they are the best fighter since Mohamed Ali and use the slightest excuse to pick a fight with someone, anyone. If they are lucky they pick a fight with someone that can't fight, or is caught by surprise when attacked or chooses to back down in a way that the attacker feels as though they won, but in the world of testosterone and alcohol this is a rarity. All too frequently those that want to fight find each other and do substantial amounts of damage to each other. Liverpool is no different to many cities in the world that suffers similar problems. When the police see these battles they frequently wait for the antagonists to punch each other out before going over and arresting both antagonists. The only people that win in this kind of situation are those that avoid the drinking venues altogether. Those prone to violence will either eventually end up in hospital with life-changing injuries or in court facing gaol for serious assault of some kind.

I choose to avoid these venues, I have to come of painkillers for three days before and after a drink so I enjoy a really nice since single malt at home when I do drink. Even before I had to take these painkillers I chose to avoid these places and chose instead coffee-bars to meet friends. Those that choose violence when there are other far better options available will eventually get seriously hurt.

Switzerland is alone in Europe in having been neutral for nearly 200 years and has not been significantly damaged by war in that time. Every other country in Europe has been damaged by war not just once but many times in that same time period.

We are going through a period in time where wars by industrialised nations are becoming less likely as time goes on and most of those wars that are continuing are either about oil (becoming less of an issue as time goes on and new sources are found) or about Islam (or at least the extremist kind) trying to Islamise the world.

There will come a time in the future where those that put forward pacifist ideas will be seen as trail blazers, with Mahatma Gandhi at their head.

Heretic

by stuart torr Sat Oct 26, 2013 10:49 pm

I haven't drunk alcohol for 20years now Heretic, and do not go around fighting at week-ends etc. but we have our opinions and what is good for one is not good for the other feel free.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Oct 27, 2013 11:54 am

Shirina wrote:
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Where I wonder does Polyglide think the Nazis, 94% christian as that 1939 census attests, virulent anti-Semitism came from?
No one really knows for sure where the anti-Semitism came from, but the leading theory says that it stemmed from the fact that a Jewish doctor treated his mother's breast cancer but she still died from it.

Hitler had an almost unhealthy closeness to his mother, namely because his father regularly beat him. Once his mother died, Hitler essentially went berserk, and it suggests that Hitler blamed the doctor, and by default all Jews, for the death of his mother.

More WWII trivia for you.

I had read this as well. Though I was talking more about the majority of Germans who took to Nazis anti-Semitism like the proverbial ducks. Since 94% of Germans identified themselves as Christians in a survey in 1939, I was refuting Polyglides assertion that anyone who believed in Jesus would live a decent life. Which I think is axiomatically false. We could just as easily cite the Klu Klux Klan, or that Norwegian far right christian who shot and killed all those youngsters as a protest that his "white christianity" was being marginalised by Islam. The list goes on of course, the inquisition, the salem witch trials etc etc

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Oct 27, 2013 11:56 am

Shirina wrote:
Heretic wrote:I believe there are seven billion plus causes worth dying for, not one cause worth killing for.
While I can appreciate the sentiment, this is an evolutionary dead-end. Those who do not kill when needed to protect their families, their beliefs, and their way of life will ultimately lose all of it to more aggressive, less moral tribes, nations, and civilizations. Pacifism is merely an empty grave waiting to be filled.

Sadly I think there is some truth in this. However one could premise that getting killed as a pacifist doesn't always negate any influence that pacifists views can have on future generations, Ghandi for instance.

by stuart torr Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:43 pm

Now I personally have had seven shades of shit kicked out of me, defending myself and partner and baby daughter. One of them got a bad wound,but I WAS PREPARED TO DIE TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE NOT HARMED. Even if that meant killing too.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Oct 27, 2013 1:10 pm

stu wrote:Now I personally have had seven shades of shit kicked out of me, defending myself and partner and baby daughter. One of them got a bad wound,but I WAS PREPARED TO DIE TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE NOT HARMED. Even if that meant killing too.

Shirina makes a good point along those lines above stu. Besides who can say with certainty how they'll react to a highly emotionally charged and adrenaline induced hypothetical situation. Until it happens no one can really be certain how they'll react.

by stuart torr Sun Oct 27, 2013 1:29 pm

I apologise Sheldon, I was aiming the post more for a response from Heretic who believes there is no cause worth killing for. I know how Shirina feels on the matter, and I was merely adding my two penneth. Sheldon take it you too have had your message from cutting edge board and are you filling in the poll i've just done it.

by Heretic Sun Oct 27, 2013 7:56 pm

stu wrote:Now I personally have had seven shades of shit kicked out of me, defending myself and partner and baby daughter. One of them got a bad wound,but I WAS PREPARED TO DIE TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE NOT HARMED. Even if that meant killing too.

I really don't know how I feel about that one. I did learn Aikido which is a martial art that is quite remarkable in that it (unlike the form used by Steven Segal) had no striking moves in it's arsenal, although it makes particularly good use of a feints. The thing I found really good about it was it's detachment, there are no power moves and no use of emotional energy, just a calm detached attitude that says to your opponent that the moment you stop trying to hurt me you will then no longer be in pain. That element of detachment and no emotional energy means you will never cause damage where no damage was intended. Aikido has the sort of attitude that says "I have the choice of causing you injury or pain at any instant and I am being merciful by not causing injury". I have only used Aikido twice outside the Dojo and in each case people just feet away had not realised that I had been attacked or that I had responded, on one of the two occasions I had not interrupted a conversation and had to explain why someone was slowly falling backwards towards the floor. Attacked is probably a bit strong as their motive was robbery and that I prevented very firmly without anyone being injured.

I really hate violence and would advocate that people put ten or twenty times as much effort into avoiding violent situations than they do into handling them when they arise. I do very firmly believe that there are seven billion causes worth dying for and none worth killing for. That is what I believe and I stand by it but it is my belief and though I think the world would be a better place if more people thought it also I am not evangelical about it. The only thing I am evangelical about is people making their own mind up about issues when they are capable of understanding the arguments, I really don't mind too much if they get it wrong as long as they thought about it before deciding.

Heretic

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Oct 27, 2013 8:03 pm

stu wrote:I apologise Sheldon, I was aiming the post more for a response from Heretic who believes there is no cause worth killing for. I know how Shirina feels on the matter, and I was merely adding my two penneth. Sheldon take it you too have had your message from cutting edge board and are you filling in the poll i've just done it.

I can't vote on the poll for some reason. scratch

by Heretic Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:05 pm

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
stu wrote:I apologise Sheldon, I was aiming the post more for a response from Heretic who believes there is no cause worth killing for. I know how Shirina feels on the matter, and I was merely adding my two penneth. Sheldon take it you too have had your message from cutting edge board and are you filling in the poll i've just done it.
I can't vote on the poll for some reason.

Could it be that you're not old enough?

Heretic

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:39 pm

Heretic wrote:
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
stu wrote:I apologise Sheldon, I was aiming the post more for a response from Heretic who believes there is no cause worth killing for. I know how Shirina feels on the matter, and I was merely adding my two penneth. Sheldon take it you too have had your message from cutting edge board and are you filling in the poll i've just done it.
I can't vote on the poll for some reason.
Could it be that you're not old enough?

Heretic

I only wish that were true.

by Heretic Sun Oct 27, 2013 11:01 pm

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
Heretic wrote:
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
stu wrote:I apologise Sheldon, I was aiming the post more for a response from Heretic who believes there is no cause worth killing for. I know how Shirina feels on the matter, and I was merely adding my two penneth. Sheldon take it you too have had your message from cutting edge board and are you filling in the poll i've just done it.
I can't vote on the poll for some reason.
Could it be that you're not old enough?

Heretic
I only wish that were true.

I can see some British government in the not too distant future being so scared of the 'grey' vote that they create a maximum age at which you can vote or say you must be working over 30 hours a week in order to vote.

Heretic

by snowyflake Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:50 am

Heretic wrote:I can see some British government in the not too distant future being so scared of the 'grey' vote that they create a maximum age at which you can vote or say you must be working over 30 hours a week in order to vote.

That wouldn't be a democracy.

by Heretic Mon Oct 28, 2013 6:07 am

snowyflake wrote:
Heretic wrote:I can see some British government in the not too distant future being so scared of the 'grey' vote that they create a maximum age at which you can vote or say you must be working over 30 hours a week in order to vote.
That wouldn't be a democracy.

I think that with this current lot of politicians that would not worry them.

Heretic

by Shirina Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:44 am

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:Since 94% of Germans identified themselves as Christians in a survey in 1939, I was refuting Polyglides assertion that anyone who believed in Jesus would live a decent life.

Christians will, of course, say that if they aren't living a decent life, then they aren't really Christians - hence the use of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

My counter argument is to simply say that claiming Christians always live a decent life is essentially saying that Christians never sin. That, naturally, falls well short of what Christians actually say about their belief paradigm.

by Shirina Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:01 am

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:However one could premise that getting killed as a pacifist doesn't always negate any influence that pacifists views can have on future generations, Ghandi for instance.

Ghandi was fortunate enough to be dealing with a relatively moral civilization, that being, of course, the British Empire. If Ghandi had tried the same pacifist tactics against, say, the Nazis or the Japanese, he and everyone who followed him would have been wiped out.

Individual pacifism is okay, I suppose, though I wouldn't want to be reliant on a pacifist, especially if I were a child or other person who could not adequately protect herself.

There is evil afoot in the world, and by evil, I simply mean those who have decided to abandon the "social contract" that the majority of us adhere to. Nations like Nazi Germany, Tojo's Japan, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Saddam's Iraq, Mussolini's Italy, Khomeini's Iran, Kim Il Jung's North Korea, Stalin's Soviet Union ... these nations do not respect pacifism as it was regarded as pathetically weak. Like it or not, as much as I abhor violence as well, there is a time and a place for it. As a parent, for instance, you have a moral obligation to protect your children, and if violence is needed to do so, there is nothing immoral about it. What would truly be immoral is to stand back and allow your children to come to harm because you held too strictly to a belief system. It would be no different than those religious loons who refuse to take their children to the doctor because their belief states that modern medicine is bad.

Incidentally, during the 80's when the Soviets were rampaging in Afghanistan, the Taliban tried using terrorism against the Soviets. The Red Army lost a total of three men to terrorism. Why so few? Because the Soviets sent in professional assassins to take out the terrorists' families. The Taliban, believe it or not, both respected and feared this action and never again waged a war of terror against them. But what about the West? Well ... how many tens of thousands have we lost to Islamic terrorism? They perceive the West as too weak, too soft ... and unwilling to do what is needed to put and end to their attacks.

Over and over again, Western nations have been victims of more aggressive and less moral agents because those agents believed (not altogether wrongly) that the West is a paper tiger, too soft and pampered to deal with large casualties in any combat situation. The Japanese believed this, which gave them the impetus to attack Pearl Harbor; Al Qaeda believed it to; so did the North Vietnamese, which is why America had to pull out of there after 10 years of fighting. The NVA knew that if they killed enough Americans, we would throw down our weapons and go home.

Pacifism does not influence the people that are truly dangerous; it only impresses and influences those that were never your enemy in the first place.

by polyglide Mon Oct 28, 2013 2:38 pm

NO Hitler like so many others, SAID he was a Christian.

I could SAY I was the King of Siam.

Many people claim they are Christians for there own ends that does not make them Christians.

A Christian is one who believes in Jesus and follows his teachings.

by Sponsored content