The Holocaust a Myth.

[John_Kunkel]

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (a Muslim and follower of the Prophet Mohhamed) and David Duke (member of the KKK a christian organization) doubt The Holocaust and want proof that it ever occured.

Ask either of them for proof that Mohhamed or Jesus Christ ever existed and watch them spin.

[bull]

... and David Duke (member of the KKK a christian organization) ...

That's a stretch, even by your standards. I can't see you being gullible enough to  believe that, even when they espouse it.

BTW, "Christian" should be upper case.

[Steve P.]

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (a Muslim and follower of the Prophet Mohamed) and David Duke (member of the KKK a Christian organization) doubt The Holocaust and want proof that it ever occurred.

Ask either of them for proof that Mohamed or Jesus Christ ever existed and watch them spin.

You beat me to it, John...

Bull, the KKK is all over Florida and many of them spew out of their mouths all day long about what GOOD CHRISTIANS THEY ARE....   If they had their way around here, it would be hangings all week till Sunday. That's when they go to church and ask to be forgiven their sins...

[bull]

My point is you can call yourself anything you want but it doesn't necessarily mean much in reality. DCX can call a 4-door Magnum sedan a "Charger" but it doesn't mean squat, and that's just a violation of unwritten rules.

[TylerCharger69]

Awe...hell.....just give these idiots in overseas offices a good spanking!!!....lol

[Big Lebowski]

Awe...hell.....just give these idiots in overseas offices a good spanking!!!....lol

  Ya, and warm up the B-1 bombers to send it to them. Send the "spanking" in the form of a nuclear bunker buster.

[chargerboy69]

Awe...hell.....just give these idiots in overseas offices a good spanking!!!....lol

  Ya, and warm up the B-1 bombers to send it to them. Send the "spanking" in the form of a nuclear bunker buster.

That sounds good to me too.

[John_Kunkel]

... and David Duke (member of the KKK a christian organization) ...

That's a stretch, even by your standards. I can't see you being gullible enough to  believe that, even when they espouse it.

The full title of the organization is The Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.  Non-Christians are not allowed to join.

If you would like to argue that the title is a misnomer you are free to do so but you would also need to take notice that the title "Christian" when applied to most avowed Christians is also a misnomer.

[bull]

... and David Duke (member of the KKK a christian organization) ...

That's a stretch, even by your standards. I can't see you being gullible enough to  believe that, even when they espouse it.

The full title of the organization is The Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.  Non-Christians are not allowed to join.

If you would like to argue that the title is a misnomer you are free to do so but you would also need to take notice that the title "Christian" when applied to most avowed Christians is also a misnomer.

Did you miss my last post? I basically said you can call yourself anything you want but it doesn't meet jack squat if your convictions don't remotely match the teachings of the man you claim to follow, that's why I said "even when they espouse it." I don't care what they claim to believe in their ridiculous title, I'm talking about their actions and beliefs which directly violate many key principles of Christianity. Scientology uses the word "Christian" in their full title too but the organization denies the essential doctrines of Christianity. Apparently they and the KKK assume the use of the word will somehow lend credibility to their organization, just like you apparently assume using the KKK's full title will somehow discredit Christianity. You are usually more adept at pointing out the hypocrisy of those who claim to be Christians so I have to believe this is just another lame effort on your part to implicate Christianity in abject behavior or ideals, which is pretty silly considering the context. Word play, funky titles and lip service is not the issue. The issue is beliefs and actions, and that's where the KKK's so-called Christianity fails miserably.

[John_Kunkel]

Did you miss my last post? I basically said you can call yourself anything you want but it doesn't meet jack squat if your convictions don't remotely match the teachings of the man you claim to follow, that's why I said "even when they espouse it." I don't care what they claim to believe in their ridiculous title, I'm talking about their actions and beliefs which directly violate many key principles of Christianity.

By "actions" do you mean like the Catholic priests that molest children, or the Spaniards that decimated an entire culture while carrying crosses and being blessed by Catholic monks? I could fill this page with examples of atrocities commited in the name of Christianity; it's all about interpretation.

That's what's great about a system of beliefs based on a book that nobody agrees on the meanings within. Such ambiguity makes it easy for any person or organization to claim their actions fall within the guidelines of the Bible. Ask any KKK member and he'll show you passages in the Bible that mandate the separation of races.

David Duke is an avowed Christian and was elected to office in a highly Christian district, I'm sure he'd love to debate you on his adherence to the "principles of Christianity".

Back on topic, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v2f-WC4cjo

[TheGhost]

member of the KKK a christian organization

You fail miserably with this.  I always knew you were the guillible type, but, to actually believe them when they claim to be Christians....


As for the Catholic priests who molest children, you act like they are the only ones who do that.  I'm sure there are quite a few liberals, conservatives, athiests, Jews, and (insert stereotypical group here) who also molest children.  Once again, you fail.  And, bringing up something that happened a few hundred years ago is irrelevant.  I could bring up the fact that several religions used to sacrifice people.  But it's inapplicable, as it does not happen today.  That's the third time you have failed in this thread.  3 strikes, my extremist friend.  You're out.

[bull]

Did you miss my last post? I basically said you can call yourself anything you want but it doesn't meet jack squat if your convictions don't remotely match the teachings of the man you claim to follow, that's why I said "even when they espouse it." I don't care what they claim to believe in their ridiculous title, I'm talking about their actions and beliefs which directly violate many key principles of Christianity.

By "actions" do you mean like the Catholic priests that molest children, or the Spaniards that decimated an entire culture while carrying crosses and being blessed by Catholic monks? I could fill this page with examples of atrocities commited in the name of Christianity; it's all about interpretation.

That's what's great about a system of beliefs based on a book that nobody agrees on the meanings within. Such ambiguity makes it easy for any person or organization to claim their actions fall within the guidelines of the Bible. Ask any KKK member and he'll show you passages in the Bible that mandate the separation of races.

David Duke is an avowed Christian and was elected to office in a highly Christian district, I'm sure he'd love to debate you on his adherence to the "principles of Christianity".

Again, John, people have committed all sorts of evil using all sorts of excuses to support their actions and all it means is they were trying to justify what they've done. Christianity is as good of an excuse as any. You can list all the atrocities you want but you'd be hard-pressed to find where the Bible condones any of it. Like I said, I'm not talking about what these supposed Christians say or do while labeling it "Christian" I'm talking about what they say or do and how it defies Christ's teachings. I can go around telling everyone I'm a rocket scientist but if I spend all my time working at a gas station my claims would be highly suspect. It's no different with Duke and his KKK clowns.

But you know all this and that's not the crux of the issue. You have an issue with religion, especially Christianity, so you routinely utilize opportunities to attack it by implicating its followers or claimed followers in sordid activities. That's fine, I do the same thing to point out hypocrisy and remind myself to not to exalt humans above the level of humanity. But you can't touch Christ with your assaults and you never can. People are not perfect, no matter what moral or amoral lifestyle they subscribe to, and you should probably try to accept that at some point in your life before you attack their belief systems.

[69CoronetRT]

And, gentlemen, like the true Americans we are, we have been totally distracted by our own in-fighting and failed to focus on the crux of the post...

The president of Iran is:
1) vocally anti-Isreal and anti-US
2) Surrounding himself with 'Yes Men' to perpetuate his messianic complex and misguided beliefs to unite and lead the Isamic world against Isreal, Europe and the US
3) developing nuclear weapons to achieve those ends.

In the words of Ben Franklin ""We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately."

We will continue to deny, rationalize, and justify our own personal agendas right up until we are destroyed.

Your choice....my 2 cents

[Steve P.]

I get both sides..

[bull]

And, gentlemen, like the true Americans we are, we have been totally distracted by our own in-fighting and failed to focus on the crux of the post...

The president of Iran is:
1) vocally anti-Isreal and anti-US
2) Surrounding himself with 'Yes Men' to perpetuate his messianic complex and misguided beliefs to unite and lead the Isamic world against Isreal, Europe and the US
3) developing nuclear weapons to achieve those ends.

In the words of Ben Franklin ""We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately."

We will continue to deny, rationalize, and justify our own personal agendas right up until we are destroyed.

Your choice....my 2 cents

How is it my choice? Is there really anything I can do about it? Arguing religion with John on a website doesn't mean I'm going to stand by and laugh while a radical muslim (or radical Christian for that matter) tries to take his head off. I have to assume he would defend me too, despite our differences. That's the beauty of this country, we can be unified against a common enemy so long as it is honestly defined as a common enemy. I don't see anyone here supporting the president of Iran, David Duke or any of their "yes-men" clowns. They have the freedom to rattle sabres all they want but that's as far as it's going to go IMO.

[69CoronetRT]

And, gentlemen, like the true Americans we are, we have been totally distracted by our own in-fighting and failed to focus on the crux of the post...

The president of Iran is:
1) vocally anti-Isreal and anti-US
2) Surrounding himself with 'Yes Men' to perpetuate his messianic complex and misguided beliefs to unite and lead the Isamic world against Isreal, Europe and the US
3) developing nuclear weapons to achieve those ends.

In the words of Ben Franklin ""We must hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately."

We will continue to deny, rationalize, and justify our own personal agendas right up until we are destroyed.

Your choice....my 2 cents

They have the freedom to rattle sabres all they want but that's as far as it's going to go IMO.

The 'your' was a general reference and not specific to you and or John. It just followed your thread.

I do so hope you are right but then again if history tells us anything, it repeats itself.

[Charger_Fan]

This time...


















...















...we should just "nuke & pave" and be done with it.

[bull]

I like Part A of that plan but pavement costs money.

[John_Kunkel]

Again, John, people have committed all sorts of evil using all sorts of excuses to support their actions and all it means is they were trying to justify what they've done. Christianity is as good of an excuse as any. You can list all the atrocities you want but you'd be hard-pressed to find where the Bible condones any of it.

That's the point you're missing; it's all about interpreting an ambiguous publication. Even biblical scholars don't always agree on what's written there. Those who condemn certain types of behavior as being "un-Christian" are doing so from their own perspective while those commiting the behavior will cite the Bible as justification.

For example, those who interpret the biblical mandate to "spread the word" often take that to mean doing so by domineering and/or enslaving the recipients of that word. The previously mentioned Conquistadors and the treatment of Native Americans are classic examples; all perpetrated by Christians.

The founding fathers, who are often cited as proof that the U. S. is a Christian nation, wrote a document that proclaimed that all men are created equal yet kept slaves and perpetrated genocide on the native peoples. See any hypocrisy there?

You have an issue with religion, especially Christianity, so you routinely utilize opportunities to attack it by implicating its followers or claimed followers in sordid activities.

Such an easy target is hard to pass up. Considering the documented "sordid activities" that occur on an everyday basis by avowed Christians it wouldn't be a stretch to say that the percentage of "true Christians" is miniscule and the possibility that any lurk here is just as miniscule.

That's fine, I do the same thing to point out hypocrisy and remind myself to not to exalt humans above the level of humanity. But you can't touch Christ with your assaults and you never can. People are not perfect, no matter what moral or amoral lifestyle they subscribe to, and you should probably try to accept that at some point in your life before you attack their belief systems.

You embrace Christianity and, like most Christians, probably allude to being a sinner but claim to be able to "point out hypocrisy". Your everyday "cafeteria Christian" can cite passages in the Bible that relieve him/her from the responsibility of abiding by the more inconvenient aspects of Christianity.  From a "fly on the wall" perspective I dare say that very few Christians actually walk the walk but they damn sure take every opportunity to talk the talk. That's the ultimate hypocrisy.

[bull]

Again, John, people have committed all sorts of evil using all sorts of excuses to support their actions and all it means is they were trying to justify what they've done. Christianity is as good of an excuse as any. You can list all the atrocities you want but you'd be hard-pressed to find where the Bible condones any of it.

That's the point you're missing; it's all about interpreting an ambiguous publication. Even biblical scholars don't always agree on what's written there. Those who condemn certain types of behavior as being "un-Christian" are doing so from their own perspective while those committing the behavior will cite the Bible as justification.

For example, those who interpret the biblical mandate to "spread the word" often take that to mean doing so by domineering and/or enslaving the recipients of that word. The previously mentioned Conquistadors and the treatment of Native Americans are classic examples; all perpetrated by Christians.

The founding fathers, who are often cited as proof that the U. S. is a Christian nation, wrote a document that proclaimed that all men are created equal yet kept slaves and perpetrated genocide on the native peoples. See any hypocrisy there?

Sure I see it. Lincoln saw it too. I see it in myself from time to time but there are those who do not have any sense of introspection. They look outward but not inward and that's where they get into trouble. I have a couple in-laws who are that way, they think they are above reproach and pretty much everyone else is screwed up beyond help. Thus there are a lot of other factors that play into being a human that you conveniently ignore when making these arguments. I get the feeling you think that becoming a Christian means you swallow some magic spiritual "Matrix" pill and are cured of all temptation to sin, therefore if professing Christians do something wrong after that point the whole faith must be a fraud. You're not that narrow-minded are you? Do you honestly think that all a person's past input is magically stripped away and they become angelic? I don't get your line of thinking here.

Just because some points of the Bible are up for debate among scholars does not mean that they all are up for debate. I think the items that really are ambiguous are things like baptism, heaven and hell, miracles, creation, etc., but is there any mainstream denomination you know of that teaches murder, adultery, polygamy and theft (among other things) are vagaries? If there are they are outside the mainstream and are considered "fringe" or "radical" organizations, and that is where the KKK spends all of it's time. Again, they are attempting to use Christianity to lend their theology some credibility and trying to legitimize their words and actions. Most people (even the most staunch liberals) don't bother trying to make hay out of it because it's a load of BS, as you well know. It would be like me getting on here and saying all Democrats support the Animal Liberation Front and their tactics, or all Democrats are for legalizing meth, or all Democrats want to ban guns, or all Democrats are in favor of abortion, or all Democrats are in favor of gay marriage, etc. Life just isn't perfectly laid out with two groups of people on either side of a straight white picket fence.

[TheGhost]

John.  Why do you hate religion so much?  Is it because it advocates a belief in a higher power, and you can't stand the thought that maybe we Humans aren't the top beings?

[Steve P.]

John.  Why do you hate religion so much?  Is it because it advocates a belief in a higher power, and you can't stand the thought that maybe we Humans aren't the top beings?

I think you are a bit off course. I don't think most people have a problem with religion. Just the hypocrites that HIDE behind it.

I think John explains his point rather well..


The full title of the organization is The Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.  Non-Christians are not allowed to join.

[TheGhost]

...And most Christians do not belong to the Clan.  They are a vast minority.  That's like saying all black people are criminals, because there are some black people in prison.  It's a vast generalization, used to make one group of people look bad.  Something I have noticed that our dear Mr. Kunkel is quite good at.

Also, from his posts, John Kunkel has made it quite clear that he hates religion, as he attacks it every chance he can get.  I mearly would like to understand why someone could actively hate another's beliefs like this.

[Steve P.]

...And most Christians do not belong to the Clan.  They are a vast minority.  That's like saying all black people are criminals, because there are some black people in prison.  It's a vast generalization, used to make one group of people look bad.  Something I have noticed that our dear Mr. Kunkel is quite good at.

Also, from his posts, John Kunkel has made it quite clear that he hates religion, as he attacks it every chance he can get.  I mearly would like to understand why someone could actively hate another's beliefs like this.

Some people HATE MOPARS............

[TheGhost]

Mopars are not a deeply held personal belief.  They are merely an automobile preferance.  Someone might hate Mopars, because they once owned one that was a lemon.  Or because they were raised in a Chevy family.

My question is still valid.  Why do you hate religion, John?