Praising Putin.

[Gargovic Malkav]

In the thread discussing St. Paul's take on same-sex marriage, a theory was proffered that, if it's fully understood, leads to praise for Vladimir Putin. While the whole world gangs up on Putin, in truth, Putin is more like the character John Galt in Putin's fellow citizen's universally renown book Atlas Shrugged.

Though today's Christians pile on to the gang rape of Putin, their ancient ancestors, to include St. Paul, and the other Apostles, would be appalled at the Putin haters and not at Putin himself; they'd be appalled that Christians have become so blind and so willing to sell their soul for a crust of bread from their globalist, universalist, humanist, masters.

May our Lord strengthen Putin and enfeeble the feeble-minded oblivious to the fact that in their lust to destroy Putin they're actually destroying the world with whom they're so madly in love (1 John 2:15).




John

This makes me curious..
Do you agree with Putin's agenda?
Or do you consider him more a "necessary evil"; one of the scourges God sends to remind people which things matter in life, and to make more more obvious the differences between the wheat and the chaff so to speak?
Or is this more a criticism towards Christians about how a leader like Putin reflects Christian values more than Western leaders in your view, and are therefore hypocrites for condemning the actions of a man like him?

 

[Mock Turtle]

One can only hope you're not speaking from personal experience.

John

Well not as to being effeminate-looking as a child (just rather handsome), but I have mentioned quite a few times on here that I was sexually abused by an older boy so can attest to the damage that such can cause. He did seem to have a troubled childhood apparently.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It takes a very sick mind to support Putin in this evil war.

Or a very delusional one - and such often comes when one has aligned oneself with some religious belief or other.

 

[ajay0]

I consider both Putin and U.S - Nato expansion evil. I prefer to call a spade a spade rather than sugar-coating stuff.

Putin's christian religious affliliation has nothing to do with this. Hitler used his connections with the catholic church as well for propaganda purposes. So did Bush .

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Or a very delusional one - and such often comes when one has aligned oneself with some religious belief or other.

In this case a sick mind and delusional one, are indistinguishable, one from the other.
To glorify war and its perpetrator in the name of a religious belief, is probably both

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I consider both Putin and U.S - Nato expansion evil. I prefer to call a spade a spade rather than sugar-coating stuff.

Putin's christian religious affliliation has nothing to do with this. Hitler used his connections with the catholic church as well for propaganda purposes. So did Bush .

Nato is a defensive union. so far it has limited its self to peace keeping and anti terrorist roles. see...
Operations and missions: past and present

It is not surprising that more countries wish to join to share the benefits. Nato does not seek out new members.

 

[Heyo]

Putin's christian religious affliliation has nothing to do with this. Hitler used his connections with the catholic church as well for propaganda purposes. So did Bush .

It's not about Putin's Christian affiliation, it's about the Christian affiliation of people like @John D. Brey and their love of war which allows Putin to use them to conduct this attack.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You're not too wrong. I don't believe I'm gifted in any way, transcendentally or otherwise.

Sure, sure. If there is no god (a distinct, even if unproveable, possibility) then everything you're saying and supporting is all you. And you'd be a fool not to acknowledge that that is the most likely case even if a god DOES exist - because you have zero way to verify its existence, or any real way to verify that what it wants is reflected anywhere on Earth by anyone or anything. You "feel" something - not good enough. Not nearly.

But I believe all who are in Christ have access to the Truth, the logocentric truth, the transcendental signified.

Again - just think about what this sentence means if god does not exist. And again - that possibility is all too relatable, given the observable evidence at hand. Since you can't verify or demonstrate a god's existence, it is as good as it not existing. Sure, you can attribute anything you want to to this thing... but I can do the same for any other thing I choose... and people have! For many multiple thousands of years people have attributed all manner of things to all manner of imaginative deific personages! You think yours is "special?" Why? You're no closer to verifying anything related to your deity than anyone in the past ever has been. Not special.

In my opinion, all other truth is unmoored, unanchored, and swimming in a sea of relativity.

And what's the problem with this? You think it means we suddenly all careen into the darkness and want to cut each others throats and steal candy from babies? Why would it mean that? Isn't this how the world operates ANYWAY given that no one can evidence any particular deity they like to put stock in? Your beliefs in this area are a HOBBY. Do as you like trying to glue god together out of dead leaves and excrement, present it to your mom and feel warm and fuzzy as she pats you on the back... leave me out of it.

 

[Heyo]

Nato is a defensive union. so far it has limited its self to peace keeping and anti terrorist roles. see...
Operations and missions: past and present

It is not surprising that more countries wish to join to share the benefits. Nato does not seek out new members.

Unfortunately NATO has one member which hasn't itself limited to peace keeping and anti terrorist roles. Instead it is invading countries willy nilly and even so it doesn't operate as NATO, NATO gets into a bad light by condoning that behaviour.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Nato is a defensive union. so far it has limited its self to peace keeping and anti terrorist roles. see...
Operations and missions: past and present

It is not surprising that more countries wish to join to share the benefits. Nato does not seek out new members.

So the NATO operation in Libya was defensive was it? Which NATO member was being defended?

 

[Ashoka]

Then Ukraine shouldn't fight back. Then it wouldn't be a war. No one should oppose an aggressor and then there would never be war. War, like the Tango, takes two parties. If everyone just gave the aggressor what they want there would be world peace, which is what, I take it, you want?

Better to be red, then a warmonger or dead?



John

I believe that there are better ways to fight back than starting a war. There should be peace talks. But Putin isn't interested in that. He's only interested in being aggressive and cruel. The best thing for Ukrainians to do right now is to flee the country and seek refuge elsewhere. To avoid more needless deaths.

You talk about war so passively, like it's nothing. That's concerning to me.

 

[wellwisher]

Whereas Jesus said nothing about homosexuality but that when it was normalized it would be the primary sign of the end of the age, his disciple, St. Paul, put forth a theological treatise in the first chapter of his letter to the Roman's that takes a stab at why homosexuality will be the final sign marking the final decades of the end of civilization as we know it. In his deconstruction of homosexuality, he implies that a homosexual mind and mentality comes before, and is the root cause concerning, rampant biological homosexuality. Exegesis of the mid to latter part of Romans chapter one justifies the fact that St. Paul explicitly makes this claim. What he's implying is that a mind and or a society that doesn't distinguish between binary-reality versus an infinite anything goes (or merely non-binary) state of affairs, is a mind (and or society) with fatal flaws and fatal liabilities.

This difference is based on the contrast between reason; cause and affect, and statistics; probability. Reason is superior to probability, since probability can make the irrational appear reasonable, at first glance. In science, a rational theory requires that all the data points from experiments need to touch the curve. If one data point is not touching, you may need to revise the theory. In statistical modeling, none of the data has to touch curve, since the curve is based on an average; best fit, with all the data having built in fudge factors; margins of error. This allow bad theory to survive, even with lots of bad data points.

Statistics is not only used by science, but also by pollsters, politicians and gambling casinos. They all depend on bad theory being given better legs than it has. We buy lottery tickets based on the imaginary image and feelings of us winning. It is not based on any form of logic. This fantasy does not have to touch a rational curve. The Left is good at using this to create alternate reality. Censorship goes along with this approach since if there is an appeal to reason, then lack of data fitting, becomes more obvious. This must be suppressed, less people start to reason and think, and use a higher standard.

If you look at science and the theory of evolution, what drives evolution is reproduction. Critters need to mate; male plus female, to pass their selected genes forward. Homosexuality, by its definition, cannot reproduce by biological means so it is detached from natural evolution. It can still be taught and learned; willful, but it cannot be passed forward genetically, due to its very nature. If look at this from the POV of statistics, you can create a mental picture that is not rational, but which may appeal to those who need self assurance, since in this approach the data point do not have to touch the curve directly, but can use margins of error. St Paul was aware of reason versus odds and felt people and culture was better off rational.

 

[viole]

Did the USA "exterminate" women and children at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If you think so (and I don't), who are we to judge Putin?



John

Well, the thing is not symmetric since I am not aware of Ucraine having attacked the Russians without warning. I wonder what you would think if someone bombs your house, kill you kids, while your country was just peaceful and attacking nobody. But that is not what is relevant.

Do you think that if I kill children, then it is perfectly justified if someone kills my children in return?

If yes, is that part of Christian morality? If yes, what is so special about it? What is its real added value? Is that what Jesus came to earth for?
He could have saved Himself the trouble, since that sort of morality seems totally useless to me, and already quite widespread all over the place.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

So the NATO operation in Libya was defensive was it? Which NATO member was being defended?

Libya was funding training and supporting Terrorists in many NATO countries. NATO took advantage of the uprising against Gadaffi.

 

[Colt]

In the thread discussing St. Paul's take on same-sex marriage, a theory was proffered that, if it's fully understood, leads to praise for Vladimir Putin. While the whole world gangs up on Putin, in truth, Putin is more like the character John Galt in Putin's fellow citizen's universally renown book Atlas Shrugged.

Though today's Christians pile on to the gang rape of Putin, their ancient ancestors, to include St. Paul, and the other Apostles, would be appalled at the Putin haters and not at Putin himself; they'd be appalled that Christians have become so blind and so willing to sell their soul for a crust of bread from their globalist, universalist, humanist, masters.

May our Lord strengthen Putin and enfeeble the feeble-minded oblivious to the fact that in their lust to destroy Putin they're actually destroying the world with whom they're so madly in love (1 John 2:15).




John

What kind of twisted mind makes Putin the victim by reasoning that he's just trying to combat the evil Gay people?

God created his gay children and loves them just the same. And Saul was just a bigoted evangelist who hijacked and twisted the original message to his own way of thinking.

I've enjoyed some of your other post but now see a soul sickness.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Moses, under God's command, told Israel to kill every man, woman, child, and even animal, in the lands they were given by God.

Yes, I've seen a lot of use of the Bible to justify the horrors men inflict on one another. It's one of the reasons I discount it altogether. I know enough about right from wrong to know that slaughter of innocents -- even under the FALSE pretense of doing it at the behest of God -- is just plain wrong.

I've seen enough of your posts now to know that I would never speak to you in person. Therefore I think it best I sign off anything to do with you here, too.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Libya was funding training and supporting Terrorists in many NATO countries. NATO took advantage of the uprising against Gadaffi.

So 25 years after Libya was implicated in the Lockerbie bombing, NATO took defensive action? Right...

 

[Colt]

I agree with most of what you say. The point of this thread is that the West is practicing a form of human thought that will bring on destruction that's not even in Putin's arsenal.

Because of the nature of human understanding, and interpretation of facts, truth, history, etc., sovereign nations must assume, as our founding fathers in the US noted in their declaration of independence, the right to conduct wars they see as righteous, and just, though everyone on the other side may label their actions as "evil."

Putin is not evil. He's conducting war for purposes, many of which I agree with, that he sees as necessary for his country. The West can disagree with Putin. But when they claim he's evil for something that is the god-given right of a sovereign nation, i.e., the right to conduct war according to their interpretation of the facts, and history, and not the other sides interpretation of facts, the West is proving why they've sanctified same-sex marriages: they've lost the balance that comes from understanding the binary nature of the current physics of the current world. They're toying with forces they don't believe in such that when they come upon them they will look like the antediluvian's did when they asked with sad wet eyes: "who'll stop the rain?"




John

You are a good example of how Hitler was able to enlist so many intellectuals to his cause. Putin, the Russian mobster and greatest Oligarch will rescue humanity by reestablishing the former Soviet Union and stopping Gay parades! Just WoW!

 

[Colt]

Yes, I've seen a lot of use of the Bible to justify the horrors men inflict on one another. It's one of the reasons I discount it altogether. I know enough about right from wrong to know that slaughter of innocents -- even under the FALSE pretense of doing it at the behest of God -- is just plain wrong.

I've seen enough of your posts now to know that I would never speak to you in person. Therefore I think it best I sign off anything to do with you here, too.

This is where we agree! Unfortunately the Bible is largely a God created in the image of the men who wrote it. That is why the most religious hated Jesus so bitterly! He revealed a very different God!

 

[Colt]

I have Paul Bettany in The DaVinci Code on my mind this morning.