Saddam, Babylon and Bible Prophecy.

[Belteshazzar]

hello everyone,

The following post is something I copied from a contributor on a Christian forum. Most of this post is theology and facts I am already familiar with, but I thought it might make for an interesting discussion on this board, where it did not on the Christian forum.

Here it is in italics:

the media says nothing....and a city 21 miles squared is shown on what map ?


babylon already lives

during the eighties we began hearing stories of rebuilding babylon. dr. joe chambers was invited in 1989 to make an official visit to the rebuilt city as a guest of the iraqi government. when he returned ,he wrote a book titled [ a palace for the anti christ ],
complete with pictures of the walls, the magnificent gate of ishtar
[ the female goddess whose history dates to the mother of nimrod, the worship of whom is growing in the western world] ,
the palace of nebuchadnezzar, and three pagan temples.

on june 28, 1990, diane sawyer and sam donaldson took the nation to this incredible city of babylon via thier t.v. program prime time live. they pointed out that saddam hussein had spent
over a billion dollars of [ his ] oil wealth rebuilding the city as a monument to himself. during the program sawyer said;

now saddam hussein dreams of rebuilding the grandure, reclaming the vision. this is babylon, 2500 years ago, the dazzling center of a rich civilization. there were the hanging gardens, the palaces, all built by a man who managed to unite the country and rule with an iron hand. in fact, right over here there are bricks that bear an ancient stamp. it says, [ i am king nebuchadnezzar, king of babylon, king of everything from sea to far sea.]
but there are new bricks here too, imprinted with a different stamp. this one says , [ i am saddam hussein, president of the republic of iraq.]
the very fact that saddam would mix bricks with his name in the foundation of the rebuilt city that once ruled the world confirms that he envisions becoming the modern counterpart to his life~time hero, king nebuchadnezzar. however preposterous it may appear to westerners, there seems little doubt that the man
dreams of becoming the next leader of the arab world.

it is difficult to explain the [ bizarre behavior ] of saddam husein
without thinking him quite possibly demon possessed.before he ever declared the eight year long war on his closest neighbor, iran-- a conflict that cost both countries over a million men and crippled thousands more for life-- he already had earned the title
[ butcher of baghdad] for killing his own people. and today as this is read if it were not for the u.s. presence in iraq , he would [ EXTERMINATE ] the kurds living in his country.

many westerners still dont understand what hussein was doing when he invaded kuwait and triggered the [ gulf war] . he had his eyes set not on little kuwait alone but on the united arab emirates, saudi arabia, syria, and jordan-- all the enmies of israel
and the very countries who own 70 percent of the worlds oil. most non-oil-producing nations like japan would drop into [ CHAOS ] if the oil of the middle east were halted for even thirty days. we are an oil dependent world, and the meglomaniac of iraq sees oil as his ticket to restoring[ the glory of the chaldeans'
excellency,] the days when babylon ruled the world. he planed to control that oil, thus enabling to rule the world and make [ babylon] his capitol. and his thinking is that his friend russia will
neutralize the west and permit him to carry out his plans.

religiously, saddam may give lip~service to muhammad and act like a devoted muslim, but there is strong indication that he is actually a satanist. a key is found in dr. charles pak's report of his 1975 visit to babylon to witness firsthand the rebuilding of that ancient city. there, for the first time in his life, dr. pak witnessed the worship of the devil at a reconstructed temple to the sun.

when you recall that husein is known to micromanage everything
in his country, including that entire rebuilding project, you can be sure that a temple to satan would not be there without his express approval. certainly husein is not reported to be [ normal]. what normal man would take his revolver and blow the brains out of one of his own generals merely for asking to be excused from a staff meeting [ where husein was rambling on and on ] because his wife had just called to say she had to go to the hospital to deliver their child ? or what normal man would promise safety for his sons in law [ who defected to a friendly country ] if they came home with his daughters, only to murder them when they returned ? saddams disregard for his own people is not news. it is standard procedure.

his abnormal hatred [ if there is such a thing ] for the jews, jesus christ, his followers, and anyone else who would stand in the way of his goal to conquer the world, might best be understood by demonic possession-- a virtual foretaste of the anti christ to follow, who will be indwelt by satan himself. in any event, there
is little doubt that saddam husein sees himself as the replacement for nebuchadnezzar, as the man whose destiny it is to rule the world. of course, he is not fit for such an exalted position; in fact he is little more than a cheap imitation of nebuchadnezzar.

every false religion in the world can be traced back to babylon.
even before it's citizens tried to build the tower of babel, satan had made that city his headquarters and introduced idolatry, the first secret societies, and many of the religious practices that continue to the present day. these eventually appeared as the [ FOUNDATIONAL TEACHINGS ] for hinduism, buddhism, taoism, gaia worship and a host of other cultic systems summed up in the bible as mystery babylon.

and who would deny that man's imagination has repeatedly led him ever deeper into evil?
combine this with the fact that we are now entering an era of global citizenship.....this new conscioness transcends all barriers of race and religion, ideology and NATIONALITY.

satan's plan is intellectually more acceptable and far more appealing to [ human pride]. in the days ahead we will [ ALL ] BE CALLED UPON to work together in promising alliances to forge an edenlike new world of equality and sufficiency for all. LET US BEWARE that we are not duped into joining the wrong side in a seemingly good cause.

i would ask those of you who will..... to try and locate babylon on any western map.and ask your self why that is ? then i would ask why the media says nothing about babylon when our troops are located right in the middle of it, as i write this to you ?

it is imposible to understand the current situation in the middle east, much less anticipate future developments there, except in the context of the religion that grips and [ motivates] the arab world. why were fanatical followers of islam responsible for most of the terrorism and hostage-taking in the world and seemed prone to out do infidels in all manner of atrocities? and if allah was all powerful, why did infidels have to defend mecca--and against muslims? madness !!

the immorality in the west is recognized as CONTRARY to the teachings of the bible and is pursued in defiance of christ rather than in his name, while in islamic countries much evil is due to the koran itself and is practiced in the name of allah and in obedience to his prophet, muhamad.
no one calls for a holy war in the name of christ as is done in the name of allah. yes there were the crusaders , who struck back against the arab invaders , but they did so in disobedience to the bible.

it is no longer possible to remain isolated behind either an iron curtain or an islamic curtain. even the bamboo curtain around china must yeild to world wide pressures. it is only a matter of time.unfortunately the pressure for change is bringing a growing openness to ecumenism that is preparing the muslim world to embrace the antichrist.

the new attitude was expressed by m.a. zaki badawi, principal of the muslim college of london, while in attendance at the august 1990 san francisco assembly of the world religions. in response to sun myung moon's announcement that he was the new world messiah, badawi made this interesting comment; [ we don't accept rev. moon as messiah, but we respect his vision of bringing the world's religions together.] the next step is easy.

satan's messiah will have incredible powers that neithr moon nor any of the other light weight antichrists can display.jesus specifically declared that israel would accept the antichrist. it is no longer so difficult to imagine that with a little more preparation muslims too will be able to embrace and even worship the counterfeit [ christ ] -- while still professing allegiance to islam.

Anyone want to weigh in?

shaz

[Semele]

Wow. This should be fun. :) Lets see if we can keep this civil. Some of the wording used in this piece is a little...uh questionable, so i can imagine why it may not have gone over very well on other boards. it would be nice if we could calmly discuss it here I think.

That being said, let me start by saying i found it an interesting read and was intrigued with the historical aspect and the possibility of Babylon etc. I began to roll my eyes when the mention of Satan came out though. This is because in my own personal views I don't really believe in a Devil. I began to think at that point and continued to do so, that this was another attempt at witnessing or spreading the word. (I know your intentions where not to convert anyone Shaz, but to discuss.)

I actually have become more and more interested in the bible..old testament and what if any events have come to pass that were foretold. So, this is interesting to me. Let me just take a couple of quotes from the piece and respond to them.



Originally posted by Belteshazzar
the very fact that saddam would mix bricks with his name in the foundation of the rebuilt city that once ruled the world confirms that he envisions becoming the modern counterpart to his life~time hero, king nebuchadnezzar. however preposterous it may appear to westerners, there seems little doubt that the man
dreams of becoming the next leader of the arab world.

Well, I don't know if Nebuchanezzar is his hero or if he even knows who he was, but I agree that he does have delussions of grandeur. Of course he wants to be the leader of his world..that is quit evident by the many statues and murials depicting him and his name on everything.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
he had his eyes set not on little kuwait alone but on the united arab emirates, saudi arabia, syria, and jordan-- all the enmies of israel
and the very countries who own 70 percent of the worlds oil.

Again, I agree, although I doubt it had as much to do with demonic possession as it did greed. I also think that Pres. Bush understands this danger and the risks that this man is willing to take to gain that power he seeks.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
religiously,saddam may give lip~service to muhammad and act like a devoted muslim, but there is strong indication that he is actually a satanist. a key is found in dr. charles pak's report of his 1975 visit to babylon to witness firsthand the rebuilding of that ancient city. there, for the first time in his life, dr. pak witnessed the worship of the devil at a reconstructed temple to the sun.

:rolleyes: This is just funny to me. It is likely to offend many Satanists and pagan's alike. The worship of the devil that this man witnessed could very likely have been the worship of God, just in another form that he was unacustomed to. A temple to the sun does not equal devil worship.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
his abnormal hatred [ if there is such a thing ] for the jews, jesus christ, his followers, and anyone else who would stand in the way of his goal to conquer the world, might best be understood by demonic possession-- a virtual foretaste of the anti christ to follow, who will be indwelt by satan himself.

So, anyone who hates (and they are making an assumption here, so I will too) another religion or culture is demonic possessed? Oh man, someone better call Jerry Fallwell! ;)


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
every false religion in the world can be traced back to babylon.

Or..all religion in general? You know without giving titles such as false and true and wrong and right.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
satan's plan is intellectually more acceptable and far more appealing to [ human pride]. in the days ahead we will [ ALL ] BE CALLED UPON to work together in promising alliances to forge an edenlike new world of equality and sufficiency for all. LET US BEWARE that we are not duped into joining the wrong side in a seemingly good cause..

Ok, now this paragraph confuses me. Are they saying here that we have to be careful who we try to join hands with for fear that someone may be pretending to be nice and loving just to trick us into allegiance..and then strike us down? The way I read it..and I may be a little biased so correct me if you will...do not fall into the all religions are right scheme because they will drag you to hell. Which brings me to an interesting question...do you think that Christianity is feeling the burn so to speak. I mean they seem to be faced with more and more folks who are learing all they can of other religious education. The ancient texts are readily availiable for folks to read themselves whereas they used to be only availiable through a scholar/clergy. Now it is feed yourself religion. The Kabala comes to mind. Just some thoughts.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
it is imposible to understand the current situation in the middle east, much less anticipate future developments there, except in the context of the religion that grips and [ motivates] the arab world. why were fanatical followers of islam responsible for most of the terrorism and hostage-taking in the world and seemed prone to out do infidels in all manner of atrocities.

I agree it is deeply rooted in religion. I also believe it is a direct result of religious persecution..from long ago that has been passed on from generation to generation.



Originally posted by Belteshazzar
and if allah was all powerful, why did infidels have to defend mecca--and against muslims? madness .

Well, if God is so powerful then why have Christian churches been assaulted and disrespected by Christian folks? There are goodand bad things that happen to and are done by folks of all religious affiliations. To separate on this level is assinine in my opinion.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
the immorality in the west is recognized as CONTRARY to the teachings of the bible and is pursued in defiance of christ rather than in his name, while in islamic countries much evil is due to the koran itself and is practiced in the name of allah and in obedience to his prophet, muhamad.
no one calls for a holy war in the name of christ as is done in the name of allah. yes there were the crusaders , who struck back against the arab invaders , but they did so in disobedience to the bible..

*sigh* There are extremists on all levels in all religions. I wont go into great detail, but the author very much downplayed the brutality of the Christian Crusades and what was done in the name of Christ, against arab folks, not for invading as he eluded to, but rather because they refused to convert to Christianity.

[Danustouch]

Semele, You summed up my thoughts very well.

I'd like to make One more point, that may not have been mentioned......

This article, is devoid of evidence, and rife on "opinion" or general statements.

What I mean by devoid of evidence, is that there are few details presented, but many opinions presented.

I am no big fan of Saddams. I do see him as greedy, and a bit insane. Not demon possessed, though, that gives demons too much credit, imo. Only a mental problem could cause such "evil" behavior. No demon, imo could.

Yet, this author is making vast claims of what Saddams ultimate plans are, without giving a shred of EVIDENCE about what Saddams Ultimate Plans are. I can see WHY the assumption would be made that Saddam wanted to rule the world..however, without "Evidence" meaning hard cold facts. Transcipted Testimony, etc. This is merely another "opinion".

Even if there IS testimony out there, regarding this. Even if there IS evidence, out there, supporting this, the author leaves it out of its article. And for a critical thinker, and a wise consumer, I'm careful as to what I buy. I'm not going to eat something, if I don't know if it's toxic ...likewise, I'm not going to believe something, without facts backing it up.

The author claimed that Saddam Worshipped Satan. Yet..No evidence is provided. Not the name and location of the temple. Not the name of the deity to which the temple is devoted, not details of the teachings of this temple. Etc. No evidence, equals NO credibility in my eyes.

If the author is trying to say that whatever God or Goddess was being worshipped there, was Satan... well.... I know that in Christian Teaching, ANY God or Goddess who is NOT Jesus or Jehovah, is seen as "Satan" (though, satan is "misleading" the adherants to the deity). However, even THAT opinion, lacks credibility, because it lacks evidence. Facts. Not theory.

As for every "idolotrous" religion being traced back to "Babylon" well..that in and of itsself, is a bit biased. Wasn't Babylon part of the fertile crescent? Thus considered the "Cradle of Civilization", thus, most likely also spawned the earliest Jewish Tribes. And the Romans, in a sense, and thus, Christianity, too? Indeed, Mount Arrarat (which is located in the fertile crescent,) Is one of the sites where Noahs Ark supposedly landed, no? It's kind of like saying "My parents raised the spawn of the devil"..uh...what does that make you ? (know what I'm saying?)


And, where the author mentions contrasts in the Bible, and the Koran, it does NOT list specific passages which are to be compared, and contrasted. Nor does it give the historical background for the Koran. And, if you search the boards..you'll easily find a few threads on THAT topic. It is IMPOSSIBLE to judge the meaning of the Koran. The meaning, and implications of Jihad, and Fatwa, without understanding the cultural influences UPON the authors of the Koran (my suggestion: The Crusades).

So..this article to me, is rife with opinion, and short on fact. If the author presented the article in an academic light, supporting it with facts, and references, it might be more worthy of a second look. However, as it stands, it's no better than any of the conspiracy theories, or hate propaganda that I've seen spread on such sites as Rense.Com. (which, imo, is the cesspool of the internet, as far as academic authorship goes).

[Belteshazzar]

Originally posted by Semele
Wow. This should be fun. :) Lets see if we can keep this civil. Some of the wording used in this piece is a little...uh questionable, so i can imagine why it may not have gone over very well on other boards. it would be nice if we could calmly discuss it here I think.[/B]

hello Semele!

I have just finished my studies for the night and it's kinda late considering how early I get up, so I will try to respong to as much of your post as I can.

First, I want to say that it is not my intention or goal to offend anyone, but considering the nature of the topic, it likely will. In the event that someone finds this grossly offensive I will disengage, or do whatever it take to maintain the harmony of this forum.

You said the wording was a little "questionable", and I can understand your prospective. But keep in mind that we are reviewing a Christian point of view that in my estimation has strong Biblical-Prophetic and Historic accuracy, and that is what I am hoping to discuss, and if possible, not avoiding the Satanic element, yet handling with as much care as possible.

Sound like an easy task? :)


Well, I don't know if Nebuchanezzar is his hero or if he even knows who he was, but I agree that he does have delussions of grandeur. Of course he wants to be the leader of his world..that is quit evident by the many statues and murials depicting him and his name on everything.

This I am sure of. There are a number of people who have spent their lives studying Saddam (secular journalist mostly), and they all generally find the same facts, and come to the same conclusions.

Saddam is a self-educated student of history, and as we may see soon, Stalin is one of his mentors. By this I mean, I believe he may likely kill many more of his own people before this conflict ends, as his last means of damaging the credibilty of colition forces.


Again, I agree, although I doubt it had as much to do with demonic possession as it did greed. I also think that Pres. Bush understands this danger and the risks that this man is willing to take to gain that power he seeks.
When I learn of all the terribly wicked things Saddam has done, I cannot possibly reason that to be simply greed, and greed only. It you are right however, human nature is far more depraved than I have evr imagined.


:rolleyes: This is just funny to me. It is likely to offend many Satanists and pagan's alike. The worship of the devil that this man witnessed could very likely have been the worship of God, just in another form that he was unacustomed to. A temple to the sun does not equal devil worship.
Baal is in essence the Babylonian sun god. It was to Baal that many human sacrifices were made. The Israelites even participated in this practice soon after coming into the promise land, and that is why they were commanded to drive all those people out, which they disobeyed to do. God does charge then with sacrificing their children to devils, and I can give you some references if you are interested. But my point is, this is a sincere Christian position, even though it might offend some Pagans and Satanists. It is certianly not a intolerance of people, but belief in what the Bible teaches about spiritual beings.

That being said, what kind of god do you think Saddam would worship or pay respects to?


So, anyone who hates (and they are making an assumption here, so I will too) another religion or culture is demonic possessed? Oh man, someone better call Jerry Fallwell! ;)
Notice the writer says "abnormal hatred". What he is alluding to is that it is the demonic spirits working in him that have manifested his "abnormal hate" for Jews, Christians and Jesus Christ. Because ultimately Satan wants to be worshiped, and that is what we really see going on in our world, the physical manifestation of a spiritaul battle for control of the world. Why does Satan want control of the world? Why the battle for Jerusalem as predicted in Zechariah 12 some 2500 years ago!!! Simple, Satan wants to be worshped, just read Revelation.

Also:

Isaiah 14:12-14
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning ! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
14:13
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14:14
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High

BTW ...this prophecy has a dual meaning-counter part, which is Nebuchaddazar of Babylon, I wish I had time to espouse, but this is a thread in itself. There is an enormous amount of reference to support what I am saying, ...way too much to be written off as coincidence or propoganda. I for one would have no interest in it if that were the case.


Or..all religion in general? You know without giving titles such as false and true and wrong and right.
I am going to by-pass this if that is okay with you. As you know, the Christian belief in only one God, and exclusively through Jesus Christ.


The way I read it..and I may be a little biased so correct me if you will...do not fall into the all religions are right scheme because they will drag you to hell.
I think you interpreted it right. The writer is basically saying that ecumincalism is part of Satan's plan to bring all world religions together, so in the end, all will worship him. That was his fall, and that is his desire.

I am begining to wonder if this thread was such a good idea, because I really like you and mol, and I don't want you to take any of this personally. However, the purpose is to propose what the Bible predicted, and compare it with current events. So far, we have seen an overview, but it is the detailed accuracy in scripture that amazes me. I would hope that anyone who is highly offended would just not participate. At any rate, I know that I am doing this in the right Spirit, not wanting to hurt anyone.



Which brings me to an interesting question...do you think that Christianity is feeling the burn so to speak. I mean they seem to be faced with more and more folks who are learing all they can of other religious education. The ancient texts are readily availiable for folks to read themselves whereas they used to be only availiable through a scholar/clergy. Now it is feed yourself religion. The Kabala comes to mind. Just some thoughts.
The Bible encourages use to know the Word and study it. 2Timothy 2:15. The Bible takes no interest in other religions, however it does command us to be ready to give an "apologia" (verbal defense) of the Christian faith, which should involve comparative religion in my opinion. So I will be learning as much as I can.


Well, if God is so powerful then why have Christian churches been assaulted and disrespected by Christian folks? There are good and bad things that happen to and are done by folks of all religious affiliations. To separate on this level is assinine in my opinion.
This is a good response to the writers argument. I would not have used this argument to make a point myself, as it has it's logical complications.

Good job!


*sigh* There are extremists on all levels in all religions. I wont go into great detail, but the author very much downplayed the brutality of the Christian Crusades and what was done in the name of Christ, against arab folks, not for invading as he eluded to, but rather because they refused to convert to Christianity.
That would be because the crusades have no Christian basis. I have never seen anyone show me any scriptural support for the crusades. The fact is, the Crusades were contrary to the teaching of Christ, even if they were done in His name.

It is a logical fallacy to say that the Crusades had anything to do with true Christianity. While Christians may have their opinions on politics and war, the Church of Jesus Christ was called to niether.

Anyway, nice job on yur post. I hope to check in this time tommorow.

take care and God Bless,

shaz

[mol]

Originally posted by Belteshazzar

That would be because the crusades have no Christian basis. I have never seen anyone show me any scriptural support for the crusades. The fact is, the Crusades were contrary to the teaching of Christ, even if they were done in His name.


The Crusades obviously went against the teachings of Christ, but that did not stop 'Christians' from slaughtering Muslims, Jews, etc in His name during the Crusades. You cannot deny these things happened...as an apologetic I would hope that you would find a better answer to this problem. Not all Germans are Nazi's. Not all Satanists begrudge Christians. Not all Muslims hate America. As Semele stated, there are extremists in every group.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
It is a logical fallacy to say that the Crusades had anything to do with true Christianity. While Christians may have their opinions on politics and war, the Church of Jesus Christ was called to niether.

Ahhh, but true Christianity seems to be in the eye of the beholder.

[mol]

Originally posted by Belteshazzar

You said the wording was a little "questionable", and I can understand your prospective. But keep in mind that we are reviewing a Christian point of view that in my estimation has strong Biblical-Prophetic and Historic accuracy, and that is what I am hoping to discuss, and if possible, not avoiding the Satanic element, yet handling with as much care as possible.

Sound like an easy task? :)

Also remember the perspective of your current audience. :)

[Semele]

Originally posted by Belteshazzar
First, I want to say that it is not my intention or goal to offend anyone, but considering the nature of the topic, it likely will. In the event that someone finds this grossly offensive I will disengage, or do whatever it take to maintain the harmony of this forum.

Your intentions are always quite clear to me. I, like you, am interested in studying various religious practices and ideals, although for somewhat different reasons. I feel, whatever the urge that leads us to knowledge, it is just as valuable.



Originally posted by Belteshazzar
This I am sure of. There are a number of people who have spent their lives studying Saddam (secular journalist mostly), and they all generally find the same facts, and come to the same conclusions.

Saddam is a self-educated student of history, and as we may see soon, Stalin is one of his mentors. By this I mean, I believe he may likely kill many more of his own people before this conflict ends, as his last means of damaging the credibilty of colition forces.

I agree he will likely kill many more of his own people. I didn't know of his interest in Nebuchanezzar..that is interesting. It's kind of like Danus pointed out, it was hard to tell from the angle of the article what would be the true, factual info and what was the religios beliefs and spin on things. I am not saying that the religious side of the argument is wrong, just less likely to be taken as fact from folks who aren't Christian.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
When I learn of all the terribly wicked things Saddam has done, I cannot possibly reason that to be simply greed, and greed only. It you are right however, human nature is far more depraved than I have evr imagined.

Sad thought huh? I am sure it is more than greed, you are right. I just don't think that demonic possession is a good enough explanation either. There are a lot of things wrong in his head. If I were a Psychiatrist I could probably trace it back to his parents, but I am not, so we will just assume they were terrible. ;) Seriously though, I believe the power trip he and others are consumed with is a result of some kind of faulty wiring in the brain, whether that be from an outside, envirnmental factor or an internal, medical inbalance.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
Baal is in essence the Babylonian sun god. It was to Baal that many human sacrifices were made. The Israelites even participated in this practice soon after coming into the promise land, and that is why they were commanded to drive all those people out, which they disobeyed to do. God does charge then with sacrificing their children to devils, and I can give you some references if you are interested. But my point is, this is a sincere Christian position, even though it might offend some Pagans and Satanists. It is certianly not a intolerance of people, but belief in what the Bible teaches about spiritual beings.

Absolutely. Your belief in the bible is not indicative of intolorance, in fact I find you quite tolorant. Too often the term tolorance gets confused with conformity. We can be tolorant of another persons beliefs while completely disagreeing and doubting the validity. My thoughts are that we learn from others if we choose to, even if it isn't the intended message that we learn. So, your position as a Christian doesn't offend me, just do not be offended when I point out that certain points you will make will not ring true to me, just because it is in the scripture.

Regarding the human sacrifice, didn't Christian folks do those as well...of course I guess that was before the sacrifice of Jesus correct? Also, I remember a story about a man who was told to sacrifice his only son and he was going to do it..but God spared him because he was loyal enough that he was going to do it. I am horrible with names and such so please forgive me and don't take my lack of knowing facts as a disrespectful attitude toward biblical facts. Anyway, this has always confused me, whay would God want a servant so loyal that he would do something forbidden by God, just because God may have asked him to at that time. Couldn't it be the case where the devil possed as God and tried to trick the man? I just try to think of it as a parent, I tell my son not to say certain words and then I try to get him to say them..no I punish him if he doesn't say them. (?)


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
That being said, what kind of god do you think Saddam would worship or pay respects to?

Honestly? I don't think he pays respect to any God. i think he throws around the names of God and Allah because it gets him into the minds of the devout religious folks. He is using religion for his own gain...sound familiar? But, unlike many televangelists or psychic readers, his goalisn't money necessarily but loyalty. Then he can get his followers to do things they would never have dreamed of before. Because they get confused and scared and they act in desperation. Brainwashing 101.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
14:14
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High .

I like this verse. I haven't read it before. I am not sure how it fits into this discussion exactly, but I think it is suppossed to mean something to me. Thank you for sharing.



Originally posted by Belteshazzar
I think you interpreted it right. The writer is basically saying that ecumincalism is part of Satan's plan to bring all world religions together, so in the end, all will worship him. That was his fall, and that is his desire.

Woah, I just realised I am satan! ;) I really would like to see all the world's religions viewed as correct. I feel that they are correct for the persons following them. Of course, if one doesn't feel right, you try another until you eventually get on the road to God or the Most High. We are all searching for a way and I think the road has many on ramps and those are the various religions of the world. We all end up on the same highway in the end..or the beginning, depending on how you look at it.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
I am begining to wonder if this thread was such a good idea, because I really like you and mol, and I don't want you to take any of this personally. However, the purpose is to propose what the Bible predicted, and compare it with current events. So far, we have seen an overview, but it is the detailed accuracy in scripture that amazes me. I would hope that anyone who is highly offended would just not participate. At any rate, I know that I am doing this in the right Spirit, not wanting to hurt anyone.


Shaz, we are not so easily offended. Like I said before, we recognize your efforts to learn and share. I think that if you had written the article yourself, you could have done it in a less evangelic way. Just the facts sir! I think the folks who find offense will do so because of the belief that all religions other than Christianity lead to satan. While this is an important tenant in Christianity, it does little to support this argument. Perhaps we could just look at some of the scripture in the bible and slowly go through the evidence that supports the babylon theory. Then we could go into the satanic aspect later. Perhaps it is just too much all at once to be digested and we only get the message that screams the loudest from that article which is that we are all going to hell. I do think the facts will be interesting and enlightening to learn and I look forward to it.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
The Bible encourages use to know the Word and study it. 2Timothy 2:15. The Bible takes no interest in other religions, however it does command us to be ready to give an "apologia" (verbal defense) of the Christian faith, which should involve comparative religion in my opinion. So I will be learning as much as I can.

I love that about you. I am very curious to know your views on Kabalah. It is something i have been drawn to for a long time, but have only recently begun to study in earnest. It is time now for me. I would love to discuss this with you, but I know your time is prescious so perhaps another thread another time.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
That would be because the crusades have no Christian basis. I have never seen anyone show me any scriptural support for the crusades. The fact is, the Crusades were contrary to the teaching of Christ, even if they were done in His name.

I think Mol summed up my response to that which is that all religions have the extremists. Also all things are done and said to be in the name of religion, that doesn't make all followers of a particular faith the same.

Look forward to hearing more. Have a great day. I may not respond quickly as I work all week-end, so don't give up on me.

[Illuminatus]

The sun-worshippers might have been Zorastrians. That religion is almost as old as the Jews, and it still exists. It's a very basic good/evil light/darkness good-will-eventually-win sun-worshipping type deal. Zorastrians are the one who built the ziggaruts in the middle east all those millenia ago. The sect is still kicking around, even now, a tiny minority in some islamic nations.

Neitzche's work "Thus spoke Zarathrustra" is a story of a journey of a Zorastrian prophet... rather THE Zorastrian prophet in a search of wisdom. Though Neitzche doesn't go in for the clear-cut black-and-white worldview that is traditional in Zorastrianism. Neitzche tries to go beyond good and evil. Like in his OTHER book "Beyond Good And Evil".

Just a few solid facts for you, included here to dilute the vast leviathan of conjecture, heresay, contradictions and misconceptions most people call "Christianity" that is the underlying theme of this thread. Enjoy!

- Illuminatus!

[Illuminatus]

You've heard the old one - "When you're holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Too many people forget that when you're a fanatic Christian, everything you don't like looks like the Devil. Or, more ellegantly put, christains view the world through Satan-colored glasses.

- Illuminatus!

[mol]

Originally posted by Illuminatus

You've heard the old one - "When you're holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Too many people forget that when you're a fanatic Christian, everything you don't like looks like the Devil. Or, more ellegantly put, christains view the world through Satan-colored glasses.

- Illuminatus!

My mom wears those kinds of glasses, but then, I know some folks who know when to take the glasses off.

[Belteshazzar]

Originally posted by mol
The Crusades obviously went against the teachings of Christ, but that did not stop 'Christians' from slaughtering Muslims, Jews, etc in His name during the Crusades.

mol,

No one is denying that these events took place, but I am saying that this "mass movement" was NOT Christian.

You siad: "Not all Germans are Nazi's." Likewise, not all those who profess Christ really possess Christ, which is what it means to be "born again", which is what it means to be a True Christian.

People always geer at the term "True Christian", but that is scripture. Jesus said, not shaz "you shall know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:16; 20)

So what is Christian fruit? Well first, Jesus said "I am the vines, you are the branches, apart from me you can do NO good thing" (John 15) So would you argue that Christ is the vines, and the crusaders are the branches? Of course not.

Jesus siad "if you love me, you will keep my commandments", and the Bible teaches that if you love Jesus, you will be in Jesus, Jesus will be in you, as you both will be in the Father.

It is illogical because the crusaders had a better chance of being devote Muslims than Christians, and that is just a fact.

Anyway, I really was not interested in getting bogged down with apologetics issues that are off the topic. I just read Semele's reply, which is exactly the kind of dialogue I am hoping for, because by it I might see a different perspective than my own.

Illum- I would love to discuss the sun god in reference, Baal and Zoraster, but it is a "specific" that can be another thread entirely, and I have little time and I really want to stay on topic.

Semele, I am out of time, but I will try to respond to you later this weekend. Good post!

shaz

[Danustouch]

I had to respond to this small part of your post, Shaz.


It is illogical because the crusaders had a better chance of being devote Muslims than Christians, and that is just a fact.

Whoah... how is this a fact? First of all, I see no scholarly examination of the Koran in this statement. I see no translation expert for the Islamic Sacred Texts in this thread. I see someone who is a Christian, NOT a Muslim, making conjecture about the Islamic Religion in this thread. Shaz, you are a very talented "apologist" for the Christian Religion. You know your text well and use it..well..with a flaire. However, How much have you studied the Koran, and the Islamic Religion? So how do you feel qualified to say that the crusaders would have made better devout Muslim's than Christians? First of all, I won't get into the numerous POSSIBLE interpretations of Christian scripture, and the fact that the Christian Leadership at the time of the Crusades (i.e, the Pope) was supposed to be the main interpreter of Christian Doctrine, and thus the "instrument" of God..and that HE (the Pope) ordered, or at least, sanctioned the Crusades. Probably with his OWN portions of text from the Bible to back up his sanctioning. (sorry, I guess I just did). But..What I have to comment on, is the assumptions, and conjecture about the Islamic Faith that you seem to be making. Where are you getting this information FROM? Some Portions of the Koran? A few extractions made from Islamic Text? Okay, I'll be the first to admit that there ARE some portions of the Koran which advocate the spread of Islamic Ideals through any use necessary, including force if needed. However, the same could be said about the Bible, especially in the Old Testament. In addition, I don't think it's fair to just pick select verses out of the Koran, and try to divine their meaning, without looking at the text and faith as a whole. I also do not think it's fair to make such conjecture, without an Islamic Apologist, here to defend THEIR view on the subject. Without that very necessary input, it is impossible to say what is fact, and what is opinion, about their religion. And I've already stated, that I think it is quite impossible to make judgements on Islamic Religion without first taking into account the historical context. Much as it would be unfair to understand the evolution of Christianity, without taking into account the historical context.

[Belteshazzar]

Danu-

I have really stressed my desire to stay on topic. In responding to an off topic comment by mol, I made the unsupported generalization which you seem to want to debate. I probably should have left that comment out of my post, but nevetheless that is what I believe.

Here is one of the references you requested from the Qur'an:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued'' (Sura 9.29)

Now that you have what you are asking for, feel free to be the Islamic Apologetic and explain this verse to me.

As far as I can tell, it commands Muslims to fight against unbeliever until they submit. Hence, Islam flies the banner of the sword (and cresent moon ...allah is the "moon god" of ancient Babylon), and True Christians the cross of Jesus Christ.

sincerely,

shaz

[Danustouch]

That's just the thing, Shaz. :) I 'm NOT an Islamic Apologist. Nor do I feel qualified ENOUGH on their text, to make conclusions, based on a few verses I have heard. And..you must agree, that's "A verse" not the entire Koran :) I wish we had a Muslim Apologist, or expert, who was able to give OTHER verses in the Koran (which I know exist, from reading some Muslim Sites, which deplored the terrorist activities) which clearly promote peace, and NOT violence :) I'm just saying, that I think it's a bit unfair, to base our opinions on the Koran, on a few scattered verses that we've found. I'd much rather speak to an Islamic Apologist, and get THEIR take on it, then to accept a Non- Muslims word on it, who may not (and I say, MAY not) have the qualification in translation studies, and historical studies within Muslim context, to answer with certainty :)

[Semele]

Originally posted by Danustouch
I wish we had a Muslim Apologist, or expert, who was able to give OTHER verses in the Koran (which I know exist, from reading some Muslim Sites, which deplored the terrorist activities) which clearly promote peace, and NOT violence :)

Then by all means go invite them to our community for some enlightening conversation. I would love that. Then perhaps we could compare and contrast the bible, the koran, the talmud, the kabala/cabala/qabalah and various other texts...in a seperate thread!

[Semele]

Originally posted by Belteshazzar


So what is Christian fruit?

Oh, come on Shaz, you know it is no fair to tempt me with fruity Christian jokes! ;)


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
Jesus siad "if you love me, you will keep my commandments", and the Bible teaches that if you love Jesus, you will be in Jesus, Jesus will be in you, as you both will be in the Father.

Jesus, as a jew, went to Hebrew school and learned all the texts, including the Talmud and the Cabala, no? Interesting. His words echo the very things I am studying right now, although we may be reading things differently. Translation I guess. but, like I said before I feel that all are correct. I look forward to more friend. I must go pick up my son!

[Belteshazzar]

Originally posted by Danustouch
I'm just saying, that I think it's a bit unfair, to base our opinions

Danu-

But it is okay to call the Crusaders movement Christian, when in fact it was not?

Do you see the point I was trying to subtly make when I made that statement? (although I wish had just let it slide off my back)

Let's face it. I am a Christian posting on a Pagan board, and not that anyone is going admitt it, but it is general wrong to attack faiths, with the exception one ....Christianity.

The "look at the Crusades" rebuttle is not only a starwman, but an ad hominem attack. Notice what you are conveying to the reader:

1. The Crusaders killed Muslims unjustly. (fact)
2. The Crusaders were Christians.
3. Christians kill people unjustly.
(points 1-3 are a strawman based on a partial truth (point 1))

4. Don't listen to shaz, he is a Christian. (ad hominem from the false premise of 2 & 3)

I really did not want to go here, but the truth is that it is hypocritical to criticize my statement that "Crusaders were like Muslims" and not to criticize the same when done to Christians. I am not boo-hooing about it, because I understand that is the risk I take when I post here. But you don't seem to want to let it go. If I truly wanted to make an argument concerning Sura 9:29, I could have. I have observed it carefully, and I have read the defenses for it, none of which logically changes the meaning of the text IN CONTEXT. If I wanted to debate it, I would have started a thread right here, because I know how defensive Liberals get when you say anything negative about Islam, which is exactly why I have no interest in starting such a thread. But I am just a little tired of the illogical and unethical, "Christians are Crusaders" attack. I thought that was not the Pagan way.

And one more thing, the Crusaders (foot soilders) had no idea if what they were doing was Biblical or not, because they were not allowed to read the Bible ....hmmm. So tell me something, Catholics call themselves Catholics, but people rarely say the Crusaders were Catholic. Why is that? Are Catholics the "extremists" everyone keeps refering to? This ought to be an interesting reply.

I really wanted to let this go, but you just keep pushing it.

shaz

p.s. Semele ...sorry, but I am not in the mood to respond right now. I think I will wait til I feel better about this.

[mol]

First of all, if the bickering continues I will have to close the thread. If we cant talk without taking jabs at each other indirectly then we just cant talk.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar

But it is okay to call the Crusaders movement Christian, when in fact it was not?


I, for one, never said it was Christian...but it was a movement led and followed through by Christians! You say they were not True Christians, but I say that you nor anyone else can say who is True to their Path or not.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
Let's face it. I am a Christian posting on a Pagan board, and not that anyone is going admitt it, but it is general wrong to attack faiths, with the exception one ....Christianity.


That is absolutely offensive to me.


Originally posted by Belteshazzar
And one more thing, the Crusaders (foot soilders) had no idea if what they were doing was Biblical or not, because they were not allowed to read the Bible ....hmmm. So tell me something, Catholics call themselves Catholics, but people rarely say the Crusaders were Catholic. Why is that? Are Catholics the "extremists" everyone keeps refering to? This ought to be an interesting reply.


Due to the previous quote I will probably not discuss this matter any more. But I would like to make a comment about this...

Catholics are Christian...are they not? The Crusaders (except for the Knights)...the grunts....were, for the most part, illiterate and led around by their noses when it came to the Church. They were told that the killing was 'Gods work' and that they were fighting a 'Holy war' against evil. Much like Arab Islamic soldiers are told from birth. This doesnt make them any less Christian or any less Muslim.

Earlier you made this statement: "The fact is, the Crusades were contrary to the teaching of Christ, even if they were done in His name."

I dont think anyone has said otherwise. Christians are not bloodthirsty villains. Neither are Muslims. The fact that wars are fought in the name of God is an abomination.

And now I will leave in peace from this thread and let it go back to the original topic intended.

[Belteshazzar]

Originally posted by mol I, for one, never said it was Christian...but it was a movement led and followed through by Christians!

mol-

This is absolutely offensive to me. ...not to mention un-true and logically fallacious.

But I guess you reseve that right. If you did not approve of the original thread topic, why didn't you just say so? ...instead of trying to censor me by using the a logical fallacies to discredit my response. :mad:

Where do you see me taking jabs? The only people taking jabs have been you and Danu- ....and they were off topic! Oy vey!

Close the thread.

shaz

[mol]

Originally posted by Belteshazzar

mol-

This is absolutely offensive to me. ...not to mention un-true and logically fallacious.

But I guess you reseve that right. If you did not approve of the original thread topic, why didn't you just say so? ...instead of trying to censor me by using the a logical fallacies to discredit my response. :mad:

Where do you see me taking jabs? The only people taking jabs have been you and Danu- ....and they were off topic! Oy vey!

Close the thread.

shaz

Excuse me? It is not untrue. Are you telling me that all of the people that fought in the crusades were not true to their faith? They only knew what was told to them by their superiors and were following orders. Just as the Muslims today fight. It was shoved down their throats by those who abused their places in in government and the Church.

You and Semele were the first to discuss the Crusades and I guess since I offer a differing viewpoint from yours...you will not have it in this discussion. That is fine, my friend. Truly fine.

I will leave this discussion. My wife, Semele, really wants to discuss this topic with you and I will respect that. Feel free to discuss your 'topic' further...I will not participate again, or for that matter, even read this thread again. If you wish to reply...do so via pm.

[AmbivalentMirage]

Isaiah 14:12-14
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning ! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
14:13
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14:14
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High

Ahem...
*puts on Jewitch hat*

Well, good day everyone! I'd like to tell you about an angel named Lucifer. Now, first of all, I'd like to clarify that in Judaism, Lucifer is NOT evil. Quite the contrary! He is a high angel on assignment from the Divine to test human strength and bring people to higher levels within their lives. Evil does have a leader...but that's another thread entirely! :lol:

Anway...the scriptures you mentioned are, in fact, NOT about Lucifer himself. They are about the king of Babylon, and the reference to Lucifer was a metaphor because he was sent to challenge the Jewish people. :) My Tanakh does not include the word "Lucifer"...quite to the contrary, it says:

Ishyah 14:12-15
"How are you fallen from heaven,
O Shining One, son of Dawn! (footnote states that this is a reference to a character of a lost myth)
How are you felled tot he earth,
O vanquisher of nations!
Once you thought in your heart,
'I will climb to the sky;
Higher than the stars of G-d
I will set my throne.
I will sit in the mount of assembly, (the assembly of gods in council)
On the summit of Zaphron: (the abode of the gods)
I will mount the back of a cloud
I will match the Most High.'
Instead, you are brought down to Sheol
To the bottom of the Pit (a region of the netherworld reserved for those who do not receive a proper burial)"

I included footnotes for comprehension purposes. Anwyay...it was all referring to the King of Babylon. More than that, however. It was referring to the haughty spirit that that man had.

So, in all reality, Lucifer or Satan or Santa or whatever the heck you want to call him, isn't as evil as we've all been taught...according to we Jews, anyway...

Sliding to a different part of this topic, Babylon cannot be responsible for all "false" religions. Abrahm was taken from the city of Ur, a pagan city, and called out to start a new faith. That was CLEARLY before the Babylonian empire was truly founded. Abrahm's father was an idol maker, for goodness sake! Even we Jews were once pagan...and I'm proud of it.

As for the Crusades...they remind me of the Inquisitions. In a past life, I was killed for being Jewish...and my ancestors came from France...they converted during the Inquisition. Oy! Let's not go there. To this day I get scared when Christians agree on something! ;) (Sorry, just a little joke, I really don't want to offend anyone.)

[FLipsiDE]

Heya Bel!

*shrugs* I've read some of this evidence for a tie to revelation and prophecy... I think it is just about as provable as Nostradamus' verses. At some point the flowery language allows you to define almost everything as having fulfilled verious prophecies. (With the additional ability to bounce randomly in definition and meaning through several different translations and THEN apply those definitions to metaphors...)

For example, I believe I have been told that the verse saying (paraphrased here) "if you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move mountains." has been explained that the mustard seed was a common weed and very tough to kill, but ALSO that it refered to the nation of Israel. These kinds of conjectures are quite acceptable to me. They are taking a known people and time and analyzing their culture for relevant metaphors and symbols. But to take that same process and apply it to a future events leads to a maze of assumptions, guesses and unfounded invented connections. Once again, no different in my mind than Nostradamus.

It IS interesting and I can see why it would hold the interest of someone who came to the table with certain assumptions.

Now... this is going to possibly sound offensive (although not meant so) and if it is taken as such please disregard it, with my apologies: What does worry me is that a born again leader of the most powerful nation on earth might believe this to be true and then taking actions he feels is in the best interest of furthering these prophecies.

As far as you an Mol and Danus... c'mon man. nobody hates you here and Christian bashing is often put down by other pagans here. (Semele, Nefer and Danus have all done so that I recall) BUT, some of the points are valid questions even if they do offend. (Semele very politely explained her disagreement with your article's summation of all other religions as satanic and evil. It IS a valid theological position from a Christian view and she accepted that and moved to questions more appropriate to your desired thread subject.) But when Mol says the crusades were Christian (and yes, The Catholic version of Christianity) he is not doing that to insult you or to Christian-bash. Ask a Catholic if they are Christian and they will say "of course!". Your defining them out of the word doesn't stop it from being the correct adjective until you explain clearly why the definition should be changed. Until then, Roman Catholics are considered to be Christian.
http://hebron.christianitytoday.com/cgi/webx?13@@.ee6b317

[Belteshazzar]

hello everyone,

I am sorry I have not replied in a while. I am in the middle of changing my place of employment. So this is a quick message to let everyone know that I am not angry or anything, just busy. :)

Semele, I will try to pick back up on your last reply as soon as I get an opportunity.

mol, I will pm you at the same time.

Danu- you are just to darn sexy, I better leave you alone. :)

Flip, it is nice to hear from you.

Be well everyone,

shaz

[Danustouch]

Danu- you are just to darn sexy, I better leave you alone.

LMAO...PLEASE tell my husband this. He obviosly doesn't agree. Or else he would be doing a website about me, instead of the women he IS doing it about. LOL. Thanks Shaz. I'm not sure just how sarcastically you meant that, or if it was sarcastic at all..but it didn't hurt to hear at this point in time, anyway:p

PS. Stop bye those threads on Islam when you get a chance:)

[FLipsiDE]

heya Bel,

I was reading and acrticle about this subject on MSN a few days ago and one of the Biblical scholars there said that while it was tempting to try and read these current events into Revelation it isn't the case. The Rapture is supposed to occur before the war and the Rapture has not happened yet. (as well as some other signs that should preceed the war.)

[Marchosias]

Originally posted by AmbivalentMirage
. Evil does have a leader... Marchosias... but that's another thread entirely!

I agree.

Saddam? A Satanist? Uhh...without going in-depth...no.

[Phoenix Blue]

Quoth FLipsiDE:

heya Bel,

I was reading and acrticle about this subject on MSN a few days ago and one of the Biblical scholars there said that while it was tempting to try and read these current events into Revelation it isn't the case. The Rapture is supposed to occur before the war and the Rapture has not happened yet. (as well as some other signs that should preceed the war.)
Bah, he's just saying the Rapture hasn't happened yet because he's still here! :p

[mol]

Originally posted by Marchosias

I agree.

Saddam? A Satanist? Uhh...without going in-depth...no.

Actually...I would like to hear an in-depth no...

[cydira]

Now, I may be putting my foot into my mouth, here, but I think that my limited education as to Christianity and my pagan background gives me enough of a basis to comment.

From what I have learned of the Bible, and from what I have read in about 5 different translations, it is possible to argue that the events depicted in Revelation and other prophetic books (ie: Daniel or Isaiah) are geared to a specific situation. Several promanent Bibilical scholars have published studies as to the age and relative historical context of the different texts published that collectively make up the Bible and the Torah (I believe that's the proper name for the Jewish holy book, but I'm not sure. I'm so confused now!). According to these scholors, these books, known collectively as being of the apcryphical (sp?) genre, are written with the authorship being attributed to an earlier source for the sake of apparent legitimacy and in a heavily veiled and intensely symbolic language to express hope for the people experienceing the crisis at hand to them.

The book of Revelations, if I recall from my studies, dates from during the roughly 10 years after the death of Jesus and is written to provide a sense of hope for the Christians who were being persecuted by the Roman empire. The offical persecution of the Christians by the Roman empire was due to the political and social threat that they represented to the empire. The immense popularity of Christianity amoung the poor and oppressed was only spurred on by the barbarism of Hadrian, which eventually created such pressure that the emperor Constantine decided that the official support and protection of the emperor was necessary to prevent some form of an uprising. Constantine's conversion was mainly an outward expression, serving to bolster the official recognition of Christianity within the empire. During a signifigant portion of Constantine's term as emperor following this conversion, Christians were still persecuted and held with poor regaurd and suspicion by the people of the empire.

The story of Constantine's conversion dates from approximately the 10th century CE (common era, or AD, depending on which you're more comfortable with) and was written to explain why this emperor reversed the mandate that had been upheld so staunchly against the Christian community before hand. With the death of Constantine, his son assumed the role of emperor and the Christian community brought considerable political pressure to bear on this young man. It is possible that he also was converted to Christianity at the same time as his father, but under the rule of this young man (who's name I forget :p) Christiaity was insituted as the State religion of the Roman empire.

[cydira]

Now, following the conversion of the Roman empire, Christianity had a considerable amount of power and wealth at it's disposal. Efforts were made to fund and build public places of worship with these funds, thus the impressive Romanesque churches that can be found through out the Mediterranian area. Also, there were actions taken to prevent the continued oppression of the Christian population by the pagan population of Rome and the empire. While these first legislative acts against this descrimination included fines and various penalties for this oppression, it was gradually increased to an oppression of the pagan population due to the political threat that they presented to the ruling body of the Roman empire, which was officially (but not necessarily truly) Christian.

With the collapse of the Roman empire, many of the pagans reverted back to their beliefs but the Christian community, specifically the highly organized Church, retained a great deal of power and a large percentage of the wealth that they were given by the empire. With the passage of time, political and social pressures began to rise and various heretical beliefs stood out, threatening the ideological structure that represented the basis of the power of the Church. The Crusades, instituted by Pope Innocent IX (I think, it was Pope Innocent, some number), was a combination of actions taken to curtail the growing oppression of the wealthy Jewish community (thus allowing greater money to flow into the nations of Europe and to the Church through tithes); to reduce the internicene warfare between "minor" nobles in the Germanic kingdoms (securing the favored political figures in power); and to elimanate a growing threat to the population of parishioners (Islam).

The Crusades were touted as an activity that would bring those who fought in battle glory on earth and in heaven. It was presented as something pleasing in the eyes of the Christian god. The propoganda presented was such that it lead to the disaster known as the Children's crusade, which ended on the Italian shores of the Mediterranian sea with the deaths of many children, the enslavement of many more, and others making the perilous journey home, an uncertian number actually making it there. While the battles of the Crusades and the actions taken behind it were presented as supported by theology, they were actually motivated by a combination of political and economic forces.

The Inquisition and the period of history known to us of the pagan community as the Burning Times were also poltically motivated. The majority of those killed during this period of history were dissenters from the ruling governments, political prisoners (Joan of Arc is an excellent example of this), and heritics. The greatest conflagration of violence during this period was seen at places where the Protestants and Catholics bordered each other. There were also cases like that of Salem, where a community wide suffering from food poisioning resulted in accusals of practicing witchcraft. In Salem, the year before the "witch craze" had a particularly wet fall. When the grain was harvested, a mould grew on it and continued to do so while in storage. As people consumed the tainted grain in bread and like cereal products, they began to feel the effects of the spores. The effects of the spores and toxins produced by the mould were identical to LSD. Women and children consumed more of the tainted grain, thus more women and children accused others of practicing witchcraft then men submitting accusations.

Now, with this history presented and my earlier post discussing the historical development and basis of Christianity's rise in promanence during the Roman empire and the role of the book of Revelations (from this historical perspective), I can say what I want to with out a large amount of confusion.

Point 1: Saddam Hussein does not fit into the category of the figure of the AntiChrist. This figure was developed specifically to symbolize the Roman oppressors of the early Christians.

Point 2: The historical city of Babylon is not the same as that mentioned in Revelations. The Babylon referred to there is the city of Rome, the heart of the empire oppressing Christianity at that period of history.

Point 3: While Saddam Hussein is a blight upon the earth with his greed and blatant disreguard for human life, I am not inclined to say that these are ear marks of daemonic (demonic, your choice of spelling) posession. Many of the people who state that this is a sign of daemonic posession have failed to present evidence of what this is. Until I see an argument stating why he is believed to be posessed, giving what the symptoms and indicators of posession are, I am holding this as an invalid statement. I'm just going to say that he's quite likely to be clinically insane, and if he was in the U.S. he'd probably be a serial killer, right up there with Charlie Manson or Jeffery Dahmer.

Point 4: This bickering as to if Christians were responcible for oppression of pagans and if the Christians associated with the oppression (not necessarily the same argument as the former, though it appears to be so, often) is foolish. It's true, pagans have been oppressed. So have the Christians, folks. There are still nations where if you're a practicing Christian, you'd better keep quiet or your neighbors will probably kill you. If you want to argue about one group oppressing the other, then how about we just point the finger at bigots in general rather then ones with a particular hat on (Christian, pagan, Muslim, etc.)? They're the one's responcible, not the entire community.

I've said my peice. If any one wants sources, just ask, I'll try to find them and post them as soon as possible. If y'all want to flame me, I don't honestly care. I've enough historical evidence behind me that I think I can say that I'm presenting an educated opinion. I'll accept that I'm possibly wrong, but I'd like evidence refuting this along with the argument that I am wrong.

My pagan background is eclectic. I was raised in an atheist/agnostic household that encouraged me to learn about a wide range of religious views, including but not limited to Protestantism, Methodist Christianity, the Jehova Witnesses, and Native American beliefs. My personal religion is that of witchcraft, legally recognized in the United States as Wicca. And my educational background is that of a Liberal Arts bachelor's from the College of Notre Dame of Maryland. I was educated by the School Sisters of Notre Dame. My major was Liberal Arts with a concentration in Physics, Philosophy, Theology, and English.

Just in case any one was wondering. :)

[mol]

*bump*

Good stuff