Trivia

Greg · Post by **Greg** » Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:48 pm

That might be what the church did in it's religion, however such action is contrary to the teaching and the faith. There is a difference and that is why we had crusades, inquisitions, monastery sacking, murder of arch bishop and even the more recent events in Northern Ireland. It is always important to draw a distinctive line between the faith and its teachings and mans religion of establishment and practice. Frequently, and not just in Christianity, the two are not linked. Islam and Muslim Extremism is another very topical example.

Post by **Nick** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:27 am

Yes, agreed Greg, comments about the actions carried out under the name of organised religion shouldn't be seen as affecting individuals faith, as I guess the subject and origins of the faith in quyestion predate any such action by many years at least.

But I must admit Andrew, it is the area of British history that I find most interesting, the social, sexual, and political changes that took place with the widespread forced introduction of the "new" religion. One of Kaye's friends (and one of the patrons of her dog rescue) Manda Scott is a wealth of information about the subject, and if you read some of her work, it seems clear that religion itself was just another tool used to replace British society with the Roman systems.

martin213 · Post by **martin213** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:10 pm

Yes Greg,Andrew,Nick.......

Interesting 'postings'

richardcooper2k · Post by **richardcooper2k** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:49 pm

all sounds a bit trivial to me !

sorry couldn't resist

richardcooper2k · Post by **richardcooper2k** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:54 pm

on a more serious note i'm not sure you can entirely separate a persons faith and their interpretation of it or their groups interpretation of it. just as you can't entirely separate religion from culture or society. the edges of where one starts and the other begins will be different depending who you ask and hence blured and arbitary.
but that doesn't mean to say we don't need to decide what is aceptable, correct or better. the question is who should decide and will anyone take any notice. or prehaps we'll have to make them ! oh dear we're in difficult territory now

Post by **Nick** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:43 pm

Yes, but on the subject at hard, I don't think we can require individuals to be hold responsable for the actions carried out in the past in the name of a shared religious heritege.

However as to if we can hold the organisation that precides over the formal definition of religion to account for past action is a bit (IMO) less clear.

As it happens, it appears the Vatican intends to build a statue of Galileo

.

andrew Ivimey · Post by **andrew Ivimey** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:28 pm

'sfunny they may have sort of apologosed for their part in the Holocaust but it wasn't the Romans oh no who executed that Rabbi so long ago and ...

How radical or just very surprising it that! Will they make him a Saint, even?

numerous examples abound; 'let he who is without guilt cast the first stone'

The the, '...forgotten the message and worship the creed ...'

'all I did is say that piece of Halibut was fit for Jehovah' etc etc It still makes me laugh and I am so glad for a sense of humour, even mine.

ed · Post by ed » Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:12 am

here's a little provocation chaps, for those that havn't seen it yet...personally I would skip the 3 minute intro but don't let it make you abandon the movie itself......

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm

richardcooper2k · Post by **richardcooper2k** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:05 pm

ok i didn't watch it all yet but...
i find the film (so far) negative and skeptical . these things we don't need any more of.

the reason these things are atractive is because they support the position that we are powerless to change anything. we are all victims. the controlling forces are beyond our reach. so the only thing we can do is live our own live as best as we can. in other words lead selfish self obsesed lives.

to function a society needs people to take positions of responsibility and some will be corupted by the power they have in those positions. organisations feel threatened when the status quo is threatened and react visously. the great people in a society expose these things, build transparent and self corecting structures. make personal sacrifices but are rewarded with having satisfing,meaningful ,purposeful lives.

which group do you want to belong to ?

all IMHO of course !

Greg · Post by **Greg** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:49 pm

Richard,

To get the true perspective you do need to watch the whole 2 hour movie through. Certainly it is a conspiracy theory production and the early section that majors on historical faithes is very superficial and seriously incorrect and flawed. The later section that deals with world control by the major bankers in our societies is interesting. Much of the stuff on 9/11 is regurgitated from elsewhere but it raises far too many inconsistancies to ignore. I actually don't doubt the 20th/21st centuary stuff. It probably is right. Bizarrly it actually fits in with unfulfilled Judau/Christian Prophesy recorded within the Bible. To keep this in perspective, realise that the minor Jewish prophets predicted the return of Israel to their home land and after 1945, everything recorded has happened, including their prosperity. Where did the last piece of celery etc you bought in the supermarket come from? Isn't that the laugh. Zeitgeist, seeking the truth, believe they have found it by whatever means which includes rejection of the Judau/Christian belief but actually end up with more or less the same conclusion as recorded in the Christian Scriptures

I'm off to extract a bullet and bandage a foot

Best wishes,

Greg

richardcooper2k · Post by **richardcooper2k** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:28 am

well, i watched the film - very interesting and powerful

it tells you how you're being manipulated while it manipulates you

at the end it says love is the answer to the worlds problems and fear is being used to control us; meanwhile it plays on your fears all the way through.

it tasted very psychologically unsavoury to me

i still stand by my last post

pre65 · Post by **pre65** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:08 am

Hi-there is NO doubt in my mind.

LOVE IS THE ANSWER.

pre65 · Post by **pre65** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:59 am

Hi-having just rescued a BIG spider from the kitchen sink,does anyone know WHY spiders cant escape from sinks and baths ?

They seem to be able to walk up walls,why not sinks and baths ?

Dave the bass · Post by **Dave the bass** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:06 am

pre65 wrote:Hi-having just rescued a BIG spider from the kitchen sink,does anyone know WHY spiders cant escape from sinks and baths ?

They seem to be able to walk up walls,why not sinks and baths ?

They're not trying to escape.

They're in there to wash their little feet, all of 8 of 'em. They're a very clean species.

Thats why you never hear of anyone saying..."phwaor can you smell cheesy spiders feet in the bathroom?"

S'true y'know.

DTB

pre65 · Post by **pre65** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:10 am

Hi-you know what Mr Bass,you ought to have a web site called Bassipedia so one can get an alternative explanation with a humerous slant !

audio-talk

Trivia

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25

#26

#27

#28 SPIDERS

#29 Re: SPIDERS

#30