Thursday, July 21, 2011

'Christian' Doublethink



For reasons I'll get into in a future post I've been mulling over the nature of belief and the internal contradictions within certain belief systems

Top of my list of belief systems with internal contradictions is evangelical Christianity

Having not been raised in a 'born again' tradition, evangelical Christianity came as a bit of a surprise to me when I started bumping into evangelicals and the strange, rather scary take some of them had on how a supposedly Loving Creator goes about his business

I also couldn't help noticing that members of certain evangelical communities were very big on quoting that ode to genocide, the Old Testament, and the bits in the New Testament that follow accounts of the life of Jesus. They were much more selective about what they quoted from Jesus Christ himself and accounts of his life

All that stuff about sharing, turning the other cheek, embracing outcasts and unconditional love barely got a look in

Which struck me, and still does, as rather peculiar behaviour for people who claim to be followers of Jesus' teachings

Someone asked me yesterday about one particular inconsistancy within evangelical Christianity

The End Times thing

The subject came up because there is a significant overlap between people who are sceptical of 'Official Narratives' and evangelical Christians who believe that they are among The Elect, blessed to be around during the run up to Armageddon and battling in a holy war against Satan and his End Game (which includes state-sponsored false flag terror ops)

They know this because it has been prophesised

One thing that has always struck me as peculiar with this belief is that it seems to presuppose that either a) Satan hasn't read the Bible or b) Satan has read the Bible but reckons he can outwit the Creator of Everything and change the ending

Nope, it's not working for me I'm afraid

And then there's the small matter of Jesus' own words, as quoted in the divinely inspired Word of God - The Gospel of Matthew 24:36-44...

"36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. ... 42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him."

Jesus' position on End Time prophecies couldn't be much clearer could it?

I freely admit that I like Christianity, as defined by the words and actions attributed to Jesus. The intolerant, arrogant, inconsistent belief system that some people practice and describe as Christianity has got fuck all to do with either

The capacity to adhere to a belief system which is contradicted internally by its own teachings is more Orwell than Jesus

.

65 comments:

Lukiftian said...

I've often wondered about this passage.
There is a difference between the Son of God (Christ) and the 'Son of Man'

They may mean this literally after all. The Son of God is literally a God walking on the face of the Earth.

So what is the Son of Man? This would be our progeny, created in our own image as mankind was created in the image of god.

And what possibly would we be able to create in our own image, give it the same rights and privileges...

Not that I want to go all Terminator on anyone... or all corporate, for that matter...

Stef said...

I was going to respond by posting a link to the crazies over at transhumanism.org but I notice they've had a makeover and rebranded themselves as Humanity Plus

A bit like the way The Eugenics Society rebranded itself as The Galton Institute for exactly the same reason

Anonymous said...

Stef, I've been commenting here anonymously for the last 4 years off and on. Great post mate.

Been agnostic myself for the longest time, but due to some fairly recent events in my life, I've come to see (believe) that there is a force of love (god) out there. I've seen it work with my own eyes.
Unfortunately people critical of spirituality focus on evangelicals like these as well as the man-made religious institutions themselves.

IMO, Much of this evangelical/end-time stuff is cult-like fear and anathema to love. Men playing god. Sad that so many buy into it, and it never leads to any good.

http://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/Jonestown.html

Stef said...

Amen

Unconditional Love, or whatever you want to call it, should bring its own rewards and if you need to back that up with the threat of frying for all Eternity then you're missing something

Quite a lot actually

One of the best (partial) answers to the question of why a benevolent creator would allow bad people to do bad things in this world is that this is consequence of Free Will. Free Will being a necessary requirement of Unconditional Love (or whatever you want to call it)

The strain of Christianity I refer to in my post is pretty thin on unconditionality, Love or Free Will. This End Times stuff, in particular, smacks heavily of pre-destiny, which is another of those internal contradictions that believers seem perfectly OK with

Cheers for the JJ link, I'm off there now

S.

Anonymous said...

"Unconditional Love, or whatever you want to call it, should bring its own rewards.."

Agreed. May not always be the rewards you crave, either.

"One of the best (partial) answers to the question of why a benevolent creator would allow bad people to do bad things in this world is that this is consequence of Free Will."

Agreed again. Though some people argue against free will... but I gather we have Roger Penrose & Kurt Godel on our side.

Evidence of Revision (really thought this was a good set of videos) used some of John Judge's work about Jim Jones and even links to a possible reason for the Grenada invasion (similar shenanigans).

anyways, back on topic, one thing I am also suspicious of, are forms of Christianity/religions that preach that all you need is good faith, not good works.

Stef said...

"forms of Christianity/religions that preach that all you need is good faith, not good works"

David Icke has dusted that one off, upgraded the exterior a little and has been doing very well out of it ever since

CanSpeccy said...

It's not double-think, it's just a two-sided morality: a morality for dealing with members of the chosen race -- or the baptized, in the case of Christians -- and the morality for dealing with the rest, whom may often, it may be thought, are best treated with the edge of the sword.

This is a rational morality in a world of tribes and nations and has always been the state religion of Christian countries.

Jesus seems to have rejected the distinction between them and us, judging all good men worthy of respect, e.g., the parable of the good Samaritan (Samaritans were not Jews).

But Jesus preached only to Jews so his view on the us-them question is never clearly enunciated.

Given that most churches teach the two-faced ethical code, and given that the two-faced code makes sense in a world of strife, it is understandable that so many Christians accept it.

The rise of evangelical Christianity in the United States probably reflects the depth to which the tension of the Cold War permeated the American psyche.

Stef said...

Back when I first started asking evangelicals about their beliefs one of the biggest shockers to me was discovering that some of them believed that no matter how good a life you have led, if you had heard the 'Word of God' and not become a Christian you would fry

What kind of ******** would believe that?

Stef said...

Following on from that, and I've mentioned this before way back, there are some evangelicals out there who believe that they can earn a ticket to heaven if they preach the Word of God to a set number of people

Which is why you see some of them yelling at crowds of passers-bay

The downside is, of course, that many of those passers-by would have heard The Word, not converted to Christianity and will therefore burn

Stef said...

"The rise of evangelical Christianity in the United States probably reflects the depth to which the tension of the Cold War permeated the American psyche"

The rise of loony strains of Christianity in the US goes way back to its origins and its use as a handy dumping ground for fervant folks who desired to create their own utopian communities

Anonymous said...

"David Icke has dusted that one off, upgraded the exterior a little and has been doing very well out of it ever since"

LMAO. I hear you. It takes a certain degree of self-absorption and ego-centrism to do what Icke does, the way he does it.

Stef said...

"It's not double-think, it's just a two-sided morality: a morality"

Element of religious thinking may be down to that

But sticking with the example I gave in my post, believing that end times are being foretold by the apparent fulfillment of prophecy and following the teachings of a saviour who said End Times would come without warning *is* Doubethink, pure and simple

CanSpeccy said...

But even within a Christian community, there is something a bit crazy about Christian morality: turn the other cheek, and all that. Fo one thing, practically no one adheres to it.

According to Carroll Quigley, the Rhodes Milner Group that sought to spread Western civilization to all colors and ranks of mankind throughout the world sincerely believed that this morality could be applied in politics. But as Quigley argued, wherever it was tried, in South Africa following the formation of the Union and in dealing with Hitler, it failed abysmally.

Perhaps game theory could provide us with a moral code that actually maximized human happiness.

Stef said...

...as is believing that we are accountable for our own decisions but also believing that human events are following a fixed game-plan

Stef said...

"But even within a Christian community, there is something a bit crazy about Christian morality: turn the other cheek, and all that. Fo one thing, practically no one adheres to it"

Quite. It certainly wouldn't be an easy path to follow but I doubt anyone would claim it to be. Gandhi had some success though

But at least the people practicing it would be adhering to an internally consistent belief system

Unlike those who claim to follow the teachings of Christ but don't follow the teachings of Christ

CanSpeccy said...

But Jesus said:

... there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.(Matt. 16:27-28)

Once that was proved incorrect, Jesus ceased to be a reliable source. So perhaps the Evangelicals aren't so unreasonable to consider other predictions.

Stef said...

"Perhaps game theory could provide us with a moral code that actually maximized human happiness"

The small problem with Game Theory as espoused by Nash was that it was based on the underlying assumption that everyone was a deranged calculating sociopath like Nash

As a related aside, in Adam Curtis' most recent series he tells the story of geneticist George Price

Unable to accept the selfish reasoning for kindness found in his own mathematical theory of altruism Price began trying to prove the theory wrong by personally showing an ever increasing amount (in both quality and quantity) of random kindness to complete strangers. As such Price dedicated the latter part of his life to helping the homeless, often inviting homeless people to live in his house. Sometimes, when the people in his house became a distraction, he slept in his office at the Galton Laboratory. He also gave up everything to help alcoholics, yet as he helped them they stole his belongings causing him to fall into depression.

He was eventually thrown out of his rented house due to a construction project in the area, which made him unhappy because he could no longer provide housing for the homeless. He moved to various squats in the North London area, and became depressed over Christmas, 1974.

Price committed suicide on January 6, 1975, using a pair of nail scissors to cut his own carotid artery. His body was identified by his close colleague Bill Hamilton. Friends said he committed suicide because of despondency over his inability to continue helping the homeless.


I still haven't quite figured out what the moral of that particular tale is

CanSpeccy said...

"Unlike those who claim to follow the teachings of Christ but don't follow the teachings of Christ"

There is a real problem with Christianity, which is what to believe. The bible is full of contradictions. Even the New Testament is full of contradictions.

That is why I think Desmond Tutu is the greatest theologian of the age. He was asked about some contradiction in the Bible, and he said (and try to recall his splendid voice and enunciation),

"Whatever is not in the spirit of Christ, I reject it. I reject it absolutely."

If you take it as Jesus' most basic teaching that God is within and that one must listen to the still small voice of conscience, then you have direct knowledge of the spirit of Christ and thus you have a complete and coherent theology.

Stef said...

"Once that was proved incorrect, Jesus ceased to be a reliable source. So perhaps the Evangelicals aren't so unreasonable to consider other predictions."

Well, quite

Jesus' followers do seem to have been expecting JC to return within some of their lifetimes and they behaved accordingly

But, of course, evangelicals believe that everything in the Bible is literally true which must mean that the Second Coming, somehow, has been and gone

Still searching for that internal consistency...

CanSpeccy said...

The story of George Price is very sad.

Perhaps the moral is that a strategy of tit-for-tat makes better sense than turn the other cheek.

I think that's what game theory shows.

Stef said...

"Whatever is not in the spirit of Christ, I reject it. I reject it absolutely."

Good one, and new to me

That's internally consistent

gyg3s said...

"Back when I first started asking evangelicals about their beliefs one of the biggest shockers to me was discovering that some of them believed that no matter how good a life you have led, if you had heard the 'Word of God' and not become a Christian you would fry"

There was a 19th century Russian monk who caused theological chaos by declaring that if there was a hell he wasn't prepared to go to heaven, explaining that it would be immoral to go to heaven knowing that there were people in hell.

Anonymous said...

"It certainly wouldn't be an easy path to follow but I doubt anyone would claim it to be."


Do unto others as you would have others do unto you (paraphrasing).

Its not, and no one can do it 100%, we're human, ego-centric, self-interested and fallible. But people can know when they are making choices out of self interest vs the right decision. We can all delude ourselves otherwise, and maybe some of us simply are taught not to know better.

As far as CS talking about tribalism ->city state->nationalism warfare. Basically all this strife is due to people not sharing & taking from others.

anyways , I'm out

CanSpeccy said...

"evangelicals believe that everything in the Bible is literally true"

It is probably unfair to accuse those who believe everything in the Bible is literally true of doublethink. They must be incapable of any kind of think -- At least not logical thinking.

Bridget said...

Due to my blind and perhaps wilful ignorance of all things biblical would it be fair to say that Evangelical End-Timers would view a Satanic NWO as prophesied and even welcomed as it will hasten the Armageddon they believe will occur before the chosen ones ascend?

Stef said...

What do you think?

Making omelettes ... breaking eggs ... birth pains ... a Good war ... ya boo told you so ...

Anonymous said...

Son of Man?

paul said...

so the idea would be to find research funding to enable these disciplines to work more closely with each other for the purpose of enhancing human beings,’ he says.


Obviously, like his fellow scienticians, he is certain that more funding is needed.

Get in the queue down at the MOD, you fucking wank.

Anonymous said...

"There’s always been a push-back in the idea that humans can raise themselves to this higher level and governments have always been worried about these advance forms of technology and knowledge actually getting into the hands of people who can use them for their own purposes."

In the talk, (near the end) he seems to be saying that we are ready for it now, but it's not that clear.

Stef said...

I haven't listened to the talk yet but use of subjective terms such as 'enhance', rather than a more honest term such as 'alter', doesn't bode well

Generally speaking, I'm no more a fan of scienticians who believe they understand how everything works and the best way to improve it than I am a fan of five year olds jamming screwdrivers into the back of television sets

I'm guessing a greater sense of humility isn't on the list of enhancements

paul said...

"There’s always been a push-back in the idea that humans can raise themselves to this higher level and governments have always been worried about these advance forms of technology and knowledge actually getting into the hands of people who can use them for their own purposes."
Like drink their own clean water,feed their families and get together without being blown to bits by our very best techonoligies

Stef said...

I think the idea is that our very best technologies are utilised by those who can afford them so that they will be able to enjoy being better than everyone else indefinitely

Meanwhile, our less best technologies will be employed to spare everyone else the suffering associated with the Humanity 1.0 experience by ensuring that they're not born in the first place

On my own personal list of curses which plague humanity the fact that the Rockefellers and Kissingers of this world don't live long enough or are lacking in 'enhancements' isn't near the top

Bridget said...

Some of the comments from a Norwegian site - Document - left by Anders Behring-Breivik show him to be a rabid anti-Marxist Christian Zionist of the fundamentalist type:

Here is a nice overview - 10 reasons why the modern church will die:

http://gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2009/11/why-modernist-christianity-will-die.html

I myself am a Protestant and baptized / confirmed to me by my own free will when I was 15

But today's Protestant church is a joke. Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like the minimalist shopping centers. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic. In the meantime, I vote for the most conservative candidates in church elections.

The only thing that can save the Protestant church is to go back to basics.


http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/

Bridget said...

^ I don't understand how that link didn't work, this should:

http://www.document.no/anders-behring-breivik/

paul said...

Some of the comments from a Norwegian site - Document - left by Anders Behring-Breivik show him to be a rabid anti-Marxist Christian Zionist of the fundamentalist type:
No ones perfect

paul said...

You can add transvestite to that list

Bridget said...

Blonde and blue-eyed to boot! A lone gunman narrative that has it all, you couldn't make it up, or could you?

The Antagonist said...

The New Face of the Mythical Al Qaida

Stef said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
CanSpeccy said...

"one of the biggest shockers to me was discovering that some of them believed that no matter how good a life you have led, if you had heard the 'Word of God' and not become a Christian you would fry"

this should be no surprise. Are you not familiar with the ten commandments?

"I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me ...

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, etc."

Christians hold that man was created in the image of God. But obviously Yahweh was created in the image of man, specifically an old, vain, brutal oriental despot. So naturally there was Hell for those who did not worship Him. Hell is basically a virtual torture chamber and dungeon, a necessary fixture in any oriental despot's palace.

Jesus invented a modified God, more father than despot, which was an improvement. But the evangelicals pick and choose from the New and the Old Testaments, and always preferring the Old Testament when it comes to Hell and damnation for their opponents.

CanSpeccy said...

Craig Murray thinks it outrageous that the Sun called the Norwegian atrocity, "Norway's 9/11." But if 9/11 was a false flag, is not the parallel appropriate?

Stef said...

"Jesus invented a modified God, more father than despot, which was an improvement. But the evangelicals pick and choose from the New and the Old Testaments, and always preferring the Old Testament when it comes to Hell and damnation for their opponents."

Yes they do

And in doing so forget that the whole point of Jesus' appearance was supposedly to forge a New Covenant between Man and God

The Old Testament only being retained as a reminder of how awful the old one was

The Antagochrist said...

No mushrooms™ were harmed in the production of this song™ / religion™ / belief™ system™

Stef said...

♫ He was a fungus among us ♫

Stef said...

"But if 9/11 was a false flag, is not the parallel appropriate?"

I think the issue with the Sun headline was the phrase

'Al-Qaeda' Massacre

just above the 9/11 bit

There's no reason to single out The Sun - lots of expert terror pundits feasted themselves on those ever so flexible hallmarks of Al-Qaeda

CanSpeccy said...

"I think the issue with the Sun headline was the phrase

'Al-Qaeda' Massacre"

Well if it was Al Qaeda, doesn't that confirm it was an inside job?

Stef said...

You might think that

I might think that

But I suspect The Sun's editorial team and most of its readers wouldn't

As somebody once said (the day before yesterday)...

"You have to remember that The Sun is written by c*nts for c*nts."

CanSpeccy said...

Ha! I thought Sun readers were all wankers.

In any case, there seem to be only two widely promoted alternative explanations of the Breivik atrocity.

Either Al Qaeda did it, which implies Muzzies did it, but could be inside job since Al Qaeda are now back on side in Libya.

Or it was far right wing extremists, i.e., opponents of mass immigration to Europe, i.e., any of the two thirds of Europe's population that don't want to see a minaret on every hilltop in England's (France's, etc.) green and pleasant land.

The second is apparently Craig Murray's take, as he links Breivik with the EDL.

Stef said...

or this atrocity as carried out by a genuine nutter with fucked up mental wiring who'd find any old excuse to go on a murder spree

that sort of this used to be quite popular

it does happen spontaneously sometimes, like earthquakes

or maybe it as Rupert Murdoch looking to knock the hacking scandal off the world's headlines. Maybe he offed Amy Winehouse as well

or maybe it was done by the Israelis (Zionist links to EDL discussed previously) - though David Duke is also associated with the EDL and people here have assured me that he's sound as a pound when it comes to giving The Jews short shrift and being on the side of the angels

and then there's the question why would The Jews initiate a mind-controlled false flag op which discredits the very ideologies they've been working like bastards to cultivate?

Stef said...

One thing I am sure of is that the narrative most commentators will settle on will be the one that best fits their existing world view - and they're currently working hard looking for 'evidence' which supports their preferred narrative

CanSpeccy said...

"One thing I am sure of is that the narrative most commentators will settle on will be the one that best fits their existing world view"

Everybody creating their own reality. LOL

but I thought that post-modernism was kind of passé. Ain't no one interested in what actually happened?

Stef said...

I've started doubting that of late

CanSpeccy said...

"The Old Testament only being retained as a reminder of how awful the old one was "

My Christian education included a good dose of Old Testament taught as the truth: Pharaoh's order to kill the newborn Hebrew boys, little Moses set adrift in the bulrush basket, the Lord appearing to Moses in the burning bush, etc.

On the whole I found these old Jewish legends more interesting than the miracles, the beatitudes, and even the parables.

I cannot see how Christianity would retain any credibility without the Old Testament, but if so, does that not mean that we have to accept God as a distinctly bipolar individual: a mixture of old bastard and loving father.

Stef said...

@Canspeccy

Back in the day, there were many Christian sects, most notably the Cathars, who squared the apparent contradiction between Old God and New God by concluding that Old God was Satan...

The God found in the Old Testament had nothing to do with the God of Love known to Cathars. The Old Testament God had created the world as a prison, and demanded from the "prisoners" fearful obedience and worship. The Cathari claimed that this god was in fact a blind usurper who under the most false pretexts, tormented and murdered those whom he called, all too possessively, "his children". The false god was, by the Cathari, called Rex Mundi, or The King of the World.


This particular theological debate was resolved to the satisfaction of the Church of Rome in the usual time-honoured fashion...

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius

Stef said...

I could run off at a tangent at this point and chip in that the Christ narrative was maybe an attempt to put a full stop at the end of the practice of ritual sacrifice which characterised pre-Christian religions

The death of the Son of God was the ritual sacrifice to end all ritual sacrifices

The Old Testament is, of course, full of ritual sacrifice - both explicit and implicit, including my personal favourite in Judges 16...

Now the house was full of men and women; and all the lords of the Philistines were there; and there were upon the roof about three thousand men and women, that beheld while Samson made sport.

And Samson called unto the LORD, and said, O Lord God, remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.

And Samson took hold of the two middle pillars upon which the house stood, and on which it was borne up, of the one with his right hand, and of the other with his left.

And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life

paul said...

Theres a reason the priests were so upset about translating the bible and printing it so the masses could read it themselves.

CanSpeccy said...

Re: the "contradiction between Old God"

I'm not clear what the contradiction is. There are said to be 162 references to Hell in the NT.

Here are a few from Luke 16:

22 . . . the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father’s house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. (Luke 16:22-28)

Stef said...

Gnostics saw a contradiction sure enough and had their feet warmed as a reward

"I'm not clear what the contradiction is. There are said to be 162 references to Hell in the NT. "

I haven't counted but, as discussed previously, the New Testament includes a little more than accounts of Jesus' life and teachings. It is riddled with additions and alterations. And returning to Bish Tutu the spirit of Christ is more spiritual carrot than stick

Yahweh is big on stick and, as I recall, Heaven doesn't get much of a look-in in the OT

The few times I've asked scholarly orthodox Jews about their take on immortal souls and the afterlife their response was on the fuzzy side

Stef said...

I'm reminded of a passage in Catch-22 where Yossarian and a girlfriend, both self-avowed atheists, are arguing about what kind of god they don't believe in. She doesn't believe in a kindly, white-haired grandfather figure. He doesn't believe in a vindictive old sadist who invented toothache and cancer. She gets quite upset and bursts into tears

Bridget said...

5.2 During his evidence, it became clear that the Claimant is an adherent to what may be termed “End Time” theological views. That is to say that he has become an adherent to a relatively well recognised strand of, particularly, Protestant Christian theology which, basing itself in large measure upon the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelations, concludes that the end of the world will be presaged by the rising up of something called the New World Order. Mr Farrell's own religious convictions have moved over time. He was brought up a Roman Catholic but relatively recently has become a convert to Methodism and even more recently, based upon his reading of the bible and other texts, has come to hold the End Time theological views outlined above. A full explanation of the Claimant's beliefs in this regard is set out at paragraphs 5 to 10. At paragraph 10 the Claimant says

“I accept that this is not mainstream Christian interpretation but nevertheless it is seen as a valid belief within Christian theology. Such beliefs are arguably most closely match that of a Seventh Day Adventist.”


Node in the Noosphere: Farrell v South Yorkshire Police Authority 2011

Bridget said...

The Claimant is particularly concerned with part of the secret agenda of the New World Order which is the obliteration of bible believing Christianity under a one world religion.

Anyone know anything about this 'one world religion'?

Stef said...

Mention of the Book of Daniel, 7th Day Adventists and End Times invariably obliges me in my usual Pavlovian way to post a link to

The Great Disappointment

Stef said...

"Anyone know anything about this 'one world religion'?"

The authors of the 'Left Behind' series know all about it...

Enigma Babylon One World Faith

gyg3s said...

@Bridget

I'm hoping to get more documents from the hearing next week.

I'm also considering making a complaint to the court for (i) not making the document available electronically, (ii) charging GBP10 for it, and (iii) its pathetic quality (spelling errors, inconsistent spelling of names throughout Siddell/Siddall).

Bridget said...

These lost souls of wanting credulity and noxious certitude believe their shame is their ticket back to paradise…If only they could just hate themselves (and the world enough) — then they will be made perfect in the perfect love of The Lord. They are, of course, insane.

Accordingly, what events and circumstances are responsible for this free-floating psychotic episode extant as the belief system of contemporary, fundamentalist Christianity?

“And all the Arts of Life they changed into the Arts of Death in Albion.” — Jerusalem, Chapter 3 William Blake


“The Arts Of Life They Changed Into The Arts Of Death:” Bachmann, Palin and Robertson and the limits of logic