2020 Post Election MEGAthread

[FatherSioux]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Call me a simpleton if you like, but I don't give special credit for that man for being an ignorant, arrogant, greedy fool who was dead wrong about practically everything he claimed and simply ran into an unexpected landmass, and especially not when the man himself was too proud to ever readily admit it. He was no visionary, just a lucky idiot. The colonization of the Americas certainly happened as a result of him, but in spite of his own purpose. History is funny like that sometimes. Fools and accidents have their impacts just as surely as brilliant minds and deliberate acts. Highlighting such people as they really were is therefore an important aspect of appreciating the often random nature of history more generally.

Danth

Ignorant for his times or ignorant based on todays standards? If you believe he was an idiot I think you're selling him short. He was an adventurer who loved the thrill of exploration. This trait is not common, Columbus is similar to people who volunteered to go into space, they are trailblazers. These people routinely shape and define the future. Columbus gets a bad rap if you judge him based on how you think people should of acted in a time you cannot relate to.

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Call me a simpleton if you like, but I don't give special credit for that man for being an ignorant, arrogant, greedy fool who was dead wrong about practically everything he claimed and simply ran into an unexpected landmass, and especially not when the man himself was too proud to ever readily admit it. He was no visionary, just a lucky idiot. The colonization of the Americas certainly happened as a result of him, but in spite of his own purpose. History is funny like that sometimes. Fools and accidents have their impacts just as surely as brilliant minds and deliberate acts. Highlighting such people as they really were is therefore an important aspect of appreciating the often random nature of history more generally.

Danth

Danth, Im pretty sure this is a 50 year long fake history that our generation has made up because we're cynical and hate our parents.

This is who Columbus was:

A regular person of his stature, who completed an extrodiarny act.

That is all.

Edit: this is actually exactly why i thhink religion is better lol

check it out.

if Columbus was in the bible, we would only remember the good in what he did and we would acknowledge that he was a flawed individual, LIKE ALL MAN that's why people the bible are flawed to teach us that WE are flawed.

So, in the religious sense, for 6 thousand years, Columbus's story would remain intact.

But in ONE GENERATION our trending society, has brainwashed us all into thinking Columbus was a bad guy, or even worse a monster.

So our history is now depressing and shitty. Just like HUMANITY is.

Stay away from humanity it's passion rises and falls, or at least keep humanity away from you with a 10 foot stick. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Man can re-write history with SOCIAL trends, but the bible and tora are the same as they were dating back 6 thousand years ago~

[Domo]

religions are made up to control the low minded

[FatherSioux]

Originally Posted by Domo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

religions are made up to control the low minded

Nice massive broad stroke. You need to investigate religious stories more if you hold this belief. The Bible alone is one of the more deep and complex books out there. The ideas it covers and the way it covers them is truly magnificent. It shows a deep understanding of human nature that is astounding when you consider it's origins.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by FatherSioux [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nice massive broad stroke. You need to investigate religious stories more if you hold this belief. The Bible alone is one of the more deep and complex books out there. The ideas it covers and the way it covers them is truly magnificent. It shows a deep understanding of human nature that is astounding when you consider it's origins.

True, if only Christians acted in a way that aligned with their own book.

“For whoever exalts himself will be humbled by God, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted by God.” Matthew 23:12

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."" Matthew 19:24

One of Jesus' last acts before the shitstorm rained down on him was to expel the money-changers and merchants from the Jewish temple because he and his disciples felt their commerce and usury were antithetical to piety. In fact this is a core message of Christianity, and why that type of usury was outlawed (even if, at times, only in law, not in practice) throughout the Christian world for the next 1.5 thousand years. Jesus loved the poor. American conservatives hate the poor.

So you can imagine how it looks to an outsider when you have modern Christians who read Ayn Rand and subscribe to capitalism in its most wicked form. Note, there is nothing inherently wrong with capitalism as long as it is underlaid by certain values. Modern American capitalism resembles Chinese capitalism nowadays more than the Protestant ethic.

[FatherSioux]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

True, if only Christians acted in a way that aligned with their own book.

“For whoever exalts himself will be humbled by God, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted by God.” Matthew 23:12

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."" Matthew 19:24

One of Jesus' last acts before the shitstorm rained down on him was to expel the money-changers and merchants from the Jewish temple because he and his disciples felt their commerce and usury were antithetical to piety. In fact this is a core message of Christianity, and why that type of usury was outlawed (even if, at times, only in law, not in practice) throughout the Christian world for the next 1.5 thousand years. Jesus loved the poor. American conservatives hate the poor.

So you can imagine how it looks to an outsider when you have modern Christians who read Ayn Rand and subscribe to capitalism in its most wicked form. Note, there is nothing inherently wrong with capitalism as long as it is underlaid by certain values. Modern American capitalism resembles Chinese capitalism nowadays more than the Protestant ethic.

You show a real lack of understanding with your comments. Perhaps the single biggest lesson to learn from The Bible is that human beings are incredibly flawed and we all make mistakes. It's why Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross.

Pointing out that people who wave a certain flag are flawed doesn't discredit an entire belief structure. It discredits you for not seeing the error in your ways.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by FatherSioux [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You show a real lack of understanding with your comments. Perhaps the single biggest lesson to learn from The Bible is that human beings are incredibly flawed and we all make mistakes. It's why Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross.

Pointing out that people who wave a certain flag are flawed doesn't discredit an entire belief structure. It discredits you for not seeing the error in your ways.

lol if you think the core message of the bible is some reductionist, new-agey "humans are flawed and we all make mistakes" you're the one who lacks understanding.

So what you've done is selected a particular biblical theme, said "that's what the bible means", matched it to American culture, and thrown out all the other stuff Jesus said and did.

And yes, it discredits their belief structure when they profess to believe one thing (Jesus' words, actions and teachings), but actually believe something entirely different (Modern American Christianity).

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Modern American capitalism resembles Chinese capitalism nowadays more than the Protestant ethic.

The flags are made in China.

[Gwaihir]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

True, if only Christians acted in a way that aligned with their own book.

“For whoever exalts himself will be humbled by God, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted by God.” Matthew 23:12

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."" Matthew 19:24

One of Jesus' last acts before the shitstorm rained down on him was to expel the money-changers and merchants from the Jewish temple because he and his disciples felt their commerce and usury were antithetical to piety. In fact this is a core message of Christianity, and why that type of usury was outlawed (even if, at times, only in law, not in practice) throughout the Christian world for the next 1.5 thousand years. Jesus loved the poor. American conservatives hate the poor.

So you can imagine how it looks to an outsider when you have modern Christians who read Ayn Rand and subscribe to capitalism in its most wicked form. Note, there is nothing inherently wrong with capitalism as long as it is underlaid by certain values. Modern American capitalism resembles Chinese capitalism nowadays more than the Protestant ethic.

Most people, Christian and non-Christian/atheist, alike, misinterpret the bible, so I'll give you some leeway and explicate here.

Christ chastised the pharisees, and saducees sects because they had transfigured judaism to a system of rote legalism and materialism; ultimately removing God from the equation and positing themselves and the egotistical nature of man in it's stead.

There's plenty of examples of Christ, and by extension his immediate disciples, confronting and dilineating that God's qualm with humanity is Ego. The pride comes before the fall as they say.

That is not to say that Christ took issue with usury specifically. The parable of the talents is a direct mandate for christians to invest and utilize compounding growth (which existed in banks even back then) to increase ones wealth.

A "talent" was essentially the average adult male's weight in silver (70-80kg) in roman times.

After the master leaves his slaves with their "talents", upon his return he praises the two slaves who grew the investment, while chastising the slave who buried his talent and only had the original capital to show for it, stating he could've simply depositted it in the bank and earned interest, then he takes the talent from that slave and gives it to the slave who gained the most profit of the other two, where Jesus then states that from those who have nothing, more will be taken, and to those who have most more will be given.

This concept that Christ was against usury entirely, cannot be substantiated by scripture.

This was a post-hoc addition by the amalgamation of the roman state and the burgeoning catholic church, as well as how this incorporated/conflicted the Jewish segment of the roman commonwealth. That is, the roman empire had a great number of special exceptions, specifically to the advantage of the Jewish people's; who it was fiscally indebted to during the rise of Christianity.

Hope this helps.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Gwaihir [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Most people, Christian and non-Christian/atheist, alike, misinterpret the bible, so I'll give you some leeway and explicate here.

Christ chastised the pharisees, and saducees sects because they had transfigured judaism to a system of rote legalism and materialism; ultimately removing God from the equation and positing themselves and the egotistical nature of man in it's stead.

There's plenty of examples of Christ, and by extension his immediate disciples, confronting and dilineating that God's qualm with humanity is Ego. The pride comes before the fall as they say.

That is not to say that Christ took issue with usury specifically. The parable of the talents is a direct mandate for christians to invest and utilize compounding growth (which existed in banks even back then) to increase ones wealth.

A "talent" was essentially the average adult male's weight in silver (70-80kg) in roman times.

After the master leaves his slaves with their "talents", upon his return he praises the two slaves who grew the investment, while chastising the slave who buried his talent and only had the original capital to show for it, stating he could've simply depositted it in the bank and earned interest, then he takes the talent from that slave and gives it to the slave who gained the most profit of the other two, where Jesus then states that from those who have nothing, more will be taken, and to those who have most more will be given.

This concept that Christ was against usury entirely, cannot be substantiated by scripture.

This was a post-hoc addition by the amalgamation of the roman state and the burgeoning catholic church, as well as how this incorporated/conflicted the Jewish segment of the roman commonwealth. That is, the roman empire had a great number of special exceptions, specifically to the advantage of the Jewish people's; who it was fiscally indebted to during the rise of Christianity.

Hope this helps.

That's a stretch. Jesus spends his entire life championing the cause of and defending the poor, and you interpret a biblical figure rewarding his most productive slaves as a wholesale endorsement of modern predatory Republican crony capitalism.

Oh god lol

Whatever lets you reconcile your hatred of the poor with your religion, I guess