[url]http://www.unknownnews.net/cdd040302.html[/url]
Cheryl's Daily Diatribe:
Wednesday, April 3, 2002
The Middle East Conflict - Has it Been Engineered by Extremist Rightwing Christians and Zionists Hoping to "Force" the "Rapture"?

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Bush and Sharon are colluding to force the Middle East into a massive, all-out war as a way to stay in power. But Bush plans to have the last laugh. By encouraging Sharon to escalating excesses, Bush hopes to bait Arabs everywhere — including Iraq — into taking aggressive action, even all-out war. This would of course give Bush the pretext he's sought for launching an attack on Iraq and embroiling America in a war guaranteed to last through election day 2004. But the other part of Bush's plan is just as vicious. By encouraging the bloodthirsty egomaniac Sharon, he may succeed in destroying Israel without ever lifting a finger himself.

It seems insane that Sharon has staked his country's security on an alliance with Bush — a man who describes himself as a fundamentalist Christian (which by definition means anti-Semitic), whose mentor Billy Graham was blatantly anti-Semitic, whose family actively traded with the Nazis in WWII and who has himself made anti-Semitic comments. This is like getting into bed with a rattlesnake and assuming you won't get bitten.

But, there is another dimension to the Middle East insanity very, very few know about :the unholy alliance between the Christian right and their Jewish counterparts, the Zionists. While sane people around the world view the Middle East conflict as "mere" political wrangling with religious undertones, the rightwing Christians and Zionists see the conflict as a prelude to the final chapter in the fulfillment of Biblical scriptures - at least as interpreted byparanoid schizophrenics with religious delusions such as Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and their Rabbinical counterparts in Israel and America . These peoplewelcome the current bloodbath with "rapturously" open arms — it means the "final Chapter" is imminent, at the conclusion of which the faithful will ascend to heaven and the rest of us heathens will die a horrible death. (These people are such great human beings, eh?).

I did not know about this wacked out movement until very recently. I thought this type was confined to small, relatively powerless cults such as the Jim Jones or Hale-Bopp folks. But it seems that the rightwing Judeo-Christian "coalition" is not only just as whacked out as these cults, it is far, far larger and has friends in very high political places — including, it is very likely, Bush himself and most certainly John Ashcroft. Ashcroft is a Pentecostal, and the Pentecostals are the most rabidly fixated on the "coming rapture" and the significance of events in the Middle East.

First, I will give you some background, which was provided to me by a very reliable source.

Cheryl,
The reason why the Christian right has been funneling money into the West Bank is because they are trying to force the Rapture.

According to Evangelical Christian beliefs, the Jews will rebuild the Temple Mount. When that happens the Lord will take all Born Again Christians up into heaven with him where they will live at his right hand for ever and ever Amen.

     But the Jews will not rebuild the Temple Mount because they are all impure from having stepped upon the earth which has dead people buried in it. In order for them to be pure, they must get a pure red heifer that was born in Israel and burn it. The ashes will be mixed with water and this will be used to purify the builders and priests of the temple.

     Reverend Clyde Lott , an Evangelical cattle breeder, has been working with American-Born Rabbi Richman and West Bank settlers to genetically create a perfect red cow. The West Bank is currently populated with Palestinian Muslims who are sworn to protect the Al Aqsa Mosque which must be destroyed because it currently sits exactly where they intend to build the Temple Mount. They also need a male who has taken his bar mitzvah (he would be at least 13 years old) who has been raised "in a bubble" never touching the earth or anything that has become ritually unclean.

     According to the Jews, the Messiah will come once the temple is built.

     According to the Christians, the Jews will almost all die once the Temple is built and an antichrist immediately moves into it. According to the Muslims, both the Christians and the Jews will die violent and bloody deaths if they attempt to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque.

     No, I am not hallucinating!

     We are about to see the biggest mass suicide ever.

     Furthermore, if you listen to the Christians, there also has to be a war with Persia around this same time.

     My source also included the following excerpt:

     ["According to Clyde Lott, the intent of many Evangelical Christians who are helping Israel today is to speed along the time when they will be raptured into Heaven, leaving behind a world in chaos and flames. "It's very sad, but I would say the interest in the Christian world is to see the Temple rebuilt from the Antichrist perspective, for the rapture of the Church, and that's a very selfish point of view," Lott says, "The very people who are advocating this are the ones that are very Semitic in their feelings". Although Evangelical theology forecasts the destruction of the Jews in the Last Days, Lott believes that the Jews are God's Chosen People and that the Bible clearly states that God favors those who help Israel."

     Most Israelis understand the subtext of this alliance, but they are loathe to disclaim it. "Basically, we're a doormat for them to get to their own eschatological culmination," Rabbi Richman says, "It's a pretty scary thing, because the whole rapture thing that is popular in some Evangelical circles, which calls for a fulfillment of the hard times for Jacob, is essentially an invitation to genocide."

     And yet, knowing this Rabbi Richman and the others happily accept the support of those who would destroy them."]

Now that you have digested at least some of this, consider Bush's actions for the past several months. Without even needing to invoke a conspiracy theory, his behavior suddenly makes sense — in a bizarro world way. Thus you have his constant use of the words "evildoers" and his passage of judgment on other nations as "evil," his obsession with attacking Iraq and, if he had his way, also Iran (the modern-day counterparts to "Persia" — at least close enough for government work!), his willingness to use nuclear weaponry (after all, Armageddon is part of the plan), his creation of a shadow government, his seemingly inexplicable refusal to make any effort to restrain Sharon, his surrounding himself with fundies, regardless of their qualifications (only the "pure" can participate in the "glory" of the final hours!), his determination to knock down the wall between church and state, his encouragement of Ashcroft's prayer meetings in the Justice Building, etc.

     So, simply put, we may well have a pack of religious nutcases running the U.S. government as well as in control of Israel. Is it any wonder that the situation in the Middle East has reached the current level of insanity? Sharon has intentionally provoked the current showdown, exhibiting a flagrant lack of concern for human life, be it Jewish, Muslim, or Christian. Yes there are Palestinian suicide bombers, but, as R. D. Laing once said, some forms of insanity are in fact just sane reactions to an insane situation.

     I have no doubt that, with Bush and Sharon at the helm, the insanity will get much, much worse before it gets better — which it never will as long as these two madmen remain in power.

     Meanwhile, as these extremists use the "Holy Land" as a playground for acting out their delusions, the Palestinians are paying the heaviest price: Here are journal entries from those trapped in Ramallah.
[url]http://www.electronicintifada.net/diaries/[/url]




© 2002, Cheryl Seal

Cheryl may be contacted at [email protected].

Was der fick?

Hannahs in the fray! LOL.

Eric, rebuttal?

Sounds more like a crafty lie to me.

'Course, there's another interpretation of those prophecies which seems more accepted.  That version goes something along the lines of a deceitful, initially benign world government having first kick at the cat.

I'm afraid I digested very little of this before it made me sick![puke] I'm sure the Hun may digest a bit more before he becomes as nauseus as I, and will give a much longer rebuttal. I'm not sure where you got your info on Evangelical Christian views, but in the length of time it took to type your rant, you could have read a considerable portion of the Truth. Revelation and Daniel are good reads. They can be quite difficult to understand, but surely one with such an active imagination can stay busy reading them for some time.[:D]

The Revelation to St. John the Divine and the Book of Daniel are both patently Jewish forms of sacred writ.  They are commonly known as apocalyptic literature.  They employ metaphor (often times mixed) and commonly held ancient symbolism to convey the message that GOD WINS.

They do not predict the future.  Trying to intepret these books in such a way is a blatant exegetical error.  

Oh no, I've broken my first rule: Never argue about apocalyptic texts on-line.[>:/]

That was GREAT!!! I love fiction.  Especially anything with the words "unholy alliance" in it.

Don't forget to check out this site for the "fine tuning". [url]http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html[/url]

Trying to intepret these books in such a way is a blatant exegetical error.

Maybe you should not try to interpret....some things are literal! I believe mine from cover to cover, even in the back where it says genuine leather[:D]

JET

Actually I didn't write this, I posted it for comment from some of you "literalists."
Eric actually inspired posting it here, with his rants and delusions about the "Rapture", the "Rebuilding of the Temple", etc., ad nauseum.
Figured the rest of you would get a kick out of religious fanaticism as some see it applying to world politics and wars.
I place no relevance on any the "Religions of the Book," as I find it absurd to try to prove the "Book" with only more quotes from the "Book."
That kind of logic has no place in my thinking, and when I am told to take something "on faith," I always watch for another snake oil salesman.
So, how about it, Eric?
You gonna rebuild that Temple and summon the Sky Spooks? Is THAT what all this nonsense is about?
[:D]

jetcsa,

The literal interpetation of scripture is a recent (Great Awakening) North American phenomenon.  No other expression of the Church abused scripture in such a fashion.

Schnert,

References....please.

JET

 

Hey Hannah,

What if you are right, and nothing in the "book" comes true. Do we just die and that is the end of consciousness?

But what if the Bible, as God's word, is right (regardless of literal vs. figurative translation) and all that is prophesied comes true? It will be too late then to lament your erroneous viewpoint regarding taking things(Christianity) on faith. Play the better odds and 'hedge your bets' just in case you are right. Begin to read the Bible with an open mind instead of trying to make it prove itself to you.

Email me and I would be honored to share my very limited knowledge and experience with you. Listen to or read what I have to say and then make your own decision.

Thank you, I have read it.
No one will really know what happens after death till we die, now will we?
I prefer to base my life on what I KNOW, not what I have to take on "faith."
And, to truly hedge one's bets, so to speak, one would be weighed down by a multitude of religious icons and dogma.
What if the Buddhists are right? Or the Hindus? Or the Zoroastrians? One could barely walk from the weight of the religious medals alone.
You see my point? "What if" just doesn't cut it.
But thanks for your concern.
[:)]

[size=6]Jesus Loves YOU Hannah!![/size=6][:D]

There is irony in your statement.

Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims all believe that Jesus walked the earth but only Christians believe he is the son of God.

"I will either be a stumbling block, or I will be your salvation."

I think that the biggest difference between all of those other faiths and Christianity is that Christianity has a definite negative reward for those who do not follow the 'rules' so to speak. In other words, if any of those others are right, then no harm, no foul. The price for being on the wrong side in the Christian faith is eternal damnation.
If I may assume a few things here? I do not know anyone, personally, on this site but I have read what is posted and have gathered impressions while reading your posts. Hannah, you seem to be well educated and a 'force' of spirit. These characteristics are admirable and I have many of their attributes. My coming to Christ and living the Christian life was and has been difficult. The most difficult aspect that I had to come to grips with was aknowledging the fact that there was a being that was much more powerful than I. I was arrogantly thinking that my world and the way I lived in it was up to me and my decisions. I was smart, I could make the decisions in my life and I could live with the consequences. While I ahd a family and we were a we, still it was I that was charting the course we needed to take. Luck, fate, karma, kismet,and whims of nature were all guiding and affecting my life.....until I finally got to a low enough point that I had to realize that I was controlling nothing. My attempts at living my own life my way had ended in dismal failure. It was at this moment of realization that I realized that I needed help from God. I realized that God could be successful running my life where I had failed. The most amazing thing was realizing that God would lovingly accept me regardless of the time I had spent turning my back on Him.

I'm sorry, I'm not a preaching type. I have my beliefs and try not to foist them off on others. Maybe I was reading too much between the lines in your posts and reacted inapropriately, but I don't think so. Take care and God Bless you Hannah.

"'What does it profit a man to gain the world and lose his soul?' Ellsworth replied, "then to achieve true wealth, one should collect souls?"


Think about it.......

Oh wow, Hannah, how thoughtful! What kindness!

I was pouring over your post trying to figure how to respond to it, thinking I was going to be providing you some insight into what I consider to be very deep and weighty matters.

I actually wrote such a long response that I had to save it to my Word program.

Then I came back here to read a little more of Ms. Seal's rubbish and I caught your later posts.

Needless to say, I was disappointed.

But all is not lost! I still have a few choice words that I feel duty bound to bring to your attention. But just so there will be no  misunderstanding, let me give them to you in the most technical language of all time - German. A language useful in chemical mixtures used for the control of vermin, Mischlings, Untermenschen, um so weiter.

Die Wörter sind Vom [i][b]Evangelium Matthaeus 7:6[/b][/i] - [red][b]'Gebt nicht das Heilige den Hunden; werft auch nicht eure Perlen vor die Schweine, damit sie diese nicht etwa mit ihren Füßen zertreten und sich umwenden und euch zerreißen.'[/b][/red]

Sie wissen Wer hat das gesagt? Jesus Christus.  

Eric Der(Glaubend)Hun[>]:)]

Ich glaube!  Ich glaube!

Ahh Pascal's wager.  I encourage everyone to read Blaise Pascal's "Pensees" which, although it was never completed, is a set of "notes" showing why Christianity is the only worldview that really makes sense.  It's full of interesting ideas and bits of wisdom (and Pensees is where my signature quote is from).

I am a Atheist.

Because I am not blinded by superstition. I can see the Mid East conflict for what it is.

It is a contest between Western Civilization and Modernism and a part of the world that is still dominated by the rabid followers of a backward ideology, yet because it has much of the worlds supply of dead fossilized plants, has the power to destroy Western Civilization and modernism.

If the minority of people in the West who are as backward as the Muslims in the Mid East are made comfortable thinking that fighting them is Gods will. And if because of that they are comitted to victory at all costs. Who am I to argue?

Again, thank you gentle souls for your concern.
I know you speak sincerely and genuinely from your own beliefs.
I am not against anyone else having strong beliefs, it just bothers me when their "Book" starts a political agenda for them.
All cultures that rely on dogma, fail.
Whether they are Christian, Moslem, Jewish, or any other.
More people have been killed in wars over religion than almost any other cause.
To me, this is a really vague reson to kill people.
I have an extensive Roman Catholic upbringing, but was asking unanswerable questions by age 14.
I am very ethical, but I don't expect any "Order" that runs the universe to give a rat's ass about me pleading, whining, or showing up in church.

Amen!!!

TheHappyBlaster and Eric

Amen!!!

And what do you base your ethic's on?

The only godless nations have been abject failures. The most recent being Russia.

Ich habe gewußt, daß Sie geglaubt haben, Schnert!

Eric Der(Lachende)Hun[>]:)]

Just as a side note, interestingly enough, I find the most pious of Christians have usually been unable to keep their "till death do us part, before God" vows, and have been married at least twice, or at least divorced.
I may be an agnostic pagan, but I keep my promises, made not to God, but to my loving spouse.
I will have been married 31 years this May 15th.
So much for "walking the walk", eh guys?
[;)]
Religion does not give one a corner on the market for ethics.

I will have been married 20 years this July, and she is the only one I have been with!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You still have not told us what you base you ethics on.

Ich glaube an Gott Vater Allmaechten

Und an Jesum Christum

Und an den heiligen Geist!

(16. Century Deutsch)

AR10er:
Personal responsibility

Post from Hannah_Reitsch -

Do you have a cite for that statement?

I've never heard it out quite that way - 'almost any other cause.'

BTW, Hannah, if you had simply waited a few more minutes, you may have had mein ganz Weltanschauung in plain view to laugh at and to make fun of to your little teutonic heart's delight!

Timing, it's been said, is everything![:D]

Eric The(Whew!I'llNeverBiteThatLineAgain)Hun[>]:)]

Hannah,

Your are welcome for the concern, but we as Christians are expected, by God, to spread the Word through words and by the way we live our lives. I have been a poor example for much of my Christian life, and I have to confess that I do not know exactly why I am so concerned for your immortal soul. But tha is a large part of my faith, I do not expect to know all of the answers or even the questions sometimes. In fact, I am not a big scripture quoter, except for John 3:16..."For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but will have everlasting life".
Sometimes I get so wrapped up in the properties of Christianity that I forget that this verse is really at the heart of the entire faith. Only through believing in Christ can we have everlasting life, there is no other way to get to heaven, no other way to survive this life.

Hannah,
You sound like you are afraid that the Evangelical interpretation of the Bible is right!
If they are wrong, we rid the world of a large group of people who are trying to kill us. Hannah, remember, the Arabs wanted you to be in the WTC too. You and I, Hannah, all of us Americans.
I say we go in and whoop ass like we did to the Germans in WWII. We beat Germany, Austria, Italy and Japan. I don't think we'll have as many problems with Palestine, Saudi Arabi, Iraq and Iran.

I am assuming that you believe that you are merely an animal, in which case what does being faithful to your wife have any bearing on ethics?

Not a knock, just curious.

After all you need something to base ethics on.

The Law of the Jungle, perhaps?

Lets define religious fanatic here. A religious fanatic in this day and age is defined really as someone who takes thier religious beliefs "seriously" thats soooooooooooo scary. About as scary as [size=5]Gun owners taking thier gun owning rights seriously[/size=5] now we can't have none of that [rolleyes]

Com'on I know some people talk kinda whacked a bit of the time but you are incorrect to call them fanatics. I mean doesn't it seem silly when the left wing democraps call [size=6]YOU[/size=6] a fanatic? In fact the only ones who REALLY know who is a fanatic and who isn't is the ones who are actualy [u]belivers[/u] of that religion. For someone who is NOT a beliver of that religion to call someone who IS a beliver of that religion a religious fanactic is obsurd! I mean how does an [u]unbeliever[/u] know the set standard within said religion. In fact if siad name caller is an atheist, then how in the world do [u]they[/u] even have the slightest freakin CLUE what the set standard is in ANY religion?

As a parting note: I am a christian myself. I am looking forward to the rapture but NOT the consequenses that it will bring. I belive that the ONLY thing we should do to bring about tat time is to continue to live our lives and share Gods word with the world. Anyone who would purposely TRY to bring it about through war,terror ect. ect. is very very wrong. I belive that the events that bring these things about will be caused by people NOT knowing what they are doing instead of nutcases trying to [u]make[/u] it happen for their own glory.

Ill tell you that there are some real nutcases out there. But don't be quick to brand anyone an "extremist" or "fanatic" just because they say somthing that seems wierd to you. After all in the minds of the liberal anti's we are all #1 on the coocoo list anyway. Look at it in perspective.


[edited to say: Im flaming the document hannah posted. Not hannah herself.]

AR10er, To start with, I AM the wife, mmmkay? [;)]
Personal responsibility means that one keeps one's promises.
If one promises to marry, one stays married.
If one promises to be somewhere, do something, pay someone........one DOES so.
This is hardly animal-like, nor a Jungle Law.
It is personal ethics, uninfluenced by myth.
Natural law, like providing for and defending one's home, family, children, and even pets also falls into this category.
One can be a very decent human, and still not follow a myth.

Now, for an example of one of your Christian leader's writings:

"Therefore be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self-glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming his eyes on them.
Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury. Thus they live from day to day, together with wife and child, by theft and robbery, as arch-thieves and robbers, in the most impenitent security.
First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians.  Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.
....Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam."   -Martin Luther
[url] http://www.awitness.org/books/luther/on_jews_and_their_lies_p1.html[/url]

So, it would be better if I was Lutheran?, ROFL!

Hanna the test pilot,

Luther's anachronistic ravings about the Jew have been officially denounced by Lutherans.  In fact, Lutherans hold the scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions and the traditions of the Church to be authoritative.  They don't ascribe "authority" to all of Martin's writings.

-Schnert

P.S. I agree, Luther was being quite a Mensch when he wrote that drivel.  However, historians have claimed that he only wrote that after he was unable to convert his Jewish neighbors.  Perhaps you should read his earlier tract "On That Christ Was Born A Jew."

P.P.S.  Your ar15.com name is a reference to Hanna the test pilot right?[;)]

This is not in the bible I read.

And you still have not given me what you are basing your ethics on.

You see, using mans logic your ethics may not be the same as another atheist.

So if we were all atheist, the strongest and the most evil of us would rule.

Hannah,

Remember that the Jewish leaders in Jesus' time were responsible for changing money in the temple. Christ was inscensed at this insult and physically removed the Jews from the temple. Martin Luther was commenting on the continued 'money changing' that was happening in his time and not villifying the Jewish people as a whole. The charging of interest while lending money is a Jewish invention and the root of years of hatred.
Even though the Jews have turned their back on God innumerable times and began to believe in idols, God always forgave them and allowed them back on his good side. They are His chosen people and they, even though they are STILL waiting on the Messiah, (He already came and died on the cross for your sins, mine and everyone else's) will get a second chance to recognize Jesus as the Messiah during the Tribulation.
Please understand that Jesus loves you and wants nothing more from you than to return to Him in love. I'll pray for you.

Not in my bible either. In fact what MY religious leader (pastor) says almost constantly is somthing to the effect of "if you turn your back on the chosen people of GOD (the israelites i.e. jews) then GOD will turn his back on you.

somebody needs to do some more reading.

And THIS is why we send Israel 3 BILLION DOLLARS every year.

Not an attack WolfAR15, at least you possess the BALLS to state your support is based upon religious faith. Too many other run around looking for 'tangible' justification, when their reasons are the same.

I completely support the first as well as the second amendment. So you guys believe what you want, even if I don't happen to believe the same. I just really wish my tax dollars didn't go to fund your beliefs.

Lots of divorce among "pious Christians" you are acquainted with?  You did mention your catholic background...but I won't start on catholicism.

Try devout Scandinavian protestants [>]:)].  Divorce is practically unheard of in that company.  I actually can't think of an instance of divorce among folks of that category, and I know a lot of them.

Congratulations on your long marriage
[<]:)]

SteyrAUG


I completely support the first as well as the second amendment.


Funny, the founding fathers believed these rights came from the God you do not believe in.

Despite popular misconception NOT all the Founding Fathers were practicing Christians. Several were athiests. And who said "I" don't believe in GOD?

I just don't believe GOD was a author of a book. I also believe the majority of those who profess to speak for him are FOS.

It's unfortunate, or maybe fortunate depending on how you look at it, that you used the phrase "abused scripture."  The Catholic Church, through much of History, used scripture to further their own agenda.  A commoner even reading the scriptures back then would have been a heretical act.  Maybe not in the fashion, but scripture has certainly been abused in the past, and by the Portestant sects as well.

If you don't take parts of scripture literally, then the Bible loses all meaning.  The sections that lay out the law certainly aren't open to interpretation.  And while some of the end times scripture is full of metaphor, it is also full of straight information as well.

God Bless Texas

GodBlessTexas,

True.  The scriptures are full of "straightinformation".  The Church understands the Gospels to be "straigth information".  However we don't read the "Song of Songs" as we would read a Gospel.  We don't read a minor court prophet such as Nahum as we read Romans.  

There are portions of the scriptures that I take VERY literally.  For instance, when th text says that he walked on water I believe it.  God made man can do that.  And then there are other portions that are to be understood in a different light.  

You can't reconcile Christ's teaching that we don't know the time and the hour of his return with a literal interpretation of Revelation that seeks to predict his return.