Christian Militia Members Charged in Police Murder Plot

[native]

...in the case of Jesus. I mean really, if there was such a person, and he was a Jew, how come he had a Mexican name?...

[JohnStOnge]

Nobody knows for certain that the recycled Egyptian sun god myth called "Jesus" even existed, let alone what his real opinions might have been. Everything is third-hand friend-of-a-friend stuff put out by people who had their own agenda.. It really points to how insignificant he was in his own time; a time when the landscape was crawling with people claiming to be the messiah.

Er, John, you don't actually believe any of that Jesus nonsense, do you?

I almost wrote something to the effect of "assuming Jesus existed and the Gospels provide a reasonable account of the philosophy he espoused" just to pre-empt comments such as yours. The answer to your question is that I am agnostic on the question of Jesus. I do not know that He existed or that He was what Christians believe him to be but I do not rule it out either. I do think that most historians do believe he existed .

In any case, the main thing is that if one does believe in Jesus and does think the Gospels generally portray the philosophy he espoused, one would have to conclude that He was a complete pacifist. One case in which he kind of attacked money changers in a Temple. But, otherwise, you'd have to say that if you truely use the Gospels to divine what he would think about things you'd have to say He'd say that if somebody attacked you you wouldn't put up any resistance. And you certainly wouldn't plant bombs and such.

And, yes, I've seen some of the atheist web sites claiming that Jesus is a manifestation of such things as the Egyptian Sun God myth. That is an opinion, not a known fact.

[houndawg]

Nobody knows for certain that the recycled Egyptian sun god myth called "Jesus" even existed, let alone what his real opinions might have been. Everything is third-hand friend-of-a-friend stuff put out by people who had their own agenda.. It really points to how insignificant he was in his own time; a time when the landscape was crawling with people claiming to be the messiah.

Er, John, you don't actually believe any of that Jesus nonsense, do you?

I almost wrote something to the effect of "assuming Jesus existed and the Gospels provide a reasonable account of the philosophy he espoused" just to pre-empt comments such as yours. The answer to your question is that I am agnostic on the question of Jesus. I do not know that He existed or that He was what Christians believe him to be but I do not rule it out either. I do think that most historians do believe he existed .

In any case, the main thing is that if one does believe in Jesus and does think the Gospels generally portray the philosophy he espoused, one would have to conclude that He was a complete pacifist. One case in which he kind of attacked money changers in a Temple. But, otherwise, you'd have to say that if you truely use the Gospels to divine what he would think about things you'd have to say He'd say that if somebody attacked you you wouldn't put up any resistance. And you certainly wouldn't plant bombs and such.

And, yes, I've seen some of the atheist web sites claiming that Jesus is a manifestation of such things as the Egyptian Sun God myth. That is an opinion, not a known fact.

True, but gods that die and are resurrected are more the rule than the exception in history. I personally suspect that Jesus was at least based on somebody who lived, but the fact that that is even in question points to how he was at best a local phenomenon and not very well known outside his neighborhood, at least until he ran afoul of the authorities. The landscape was over run with messiahs back then.

[JohnStOnge]

Hopefully this post will take this time instead of shifting me back to the login thing.

The point is that if somebody believes Jesus was the Son of God and takes the Gospels as a reasonably accurate account that at least paints the general picture of his outlook, there's no WAY they could think that Jesus would advocate what these militias people are alleged to have been planning. Think about it.

He was living in a land occupied by a foreign invader (Rome). If you accept him as the Christ, you believe that he had the power to destroy the Romans and liberate his homeland in an instant. He didn't do it. He made the "turn the other cheek" statement. He allowed himself to be crucified. When his followers drew their swords to protect him, he told them to put them down. He clearly comes off as an ultra pacifist. To me, any honest assessment of what Jesus as presented in the Gospels would have wanted would lead one to believe that he would've said that people should not offer resistance when they are attacked. They should concentrate on more important, non-material things.

As an aside...the Gospels also clearly indicate that Jesus drank alcoholic wine. That's always made me wonder. That has always made me wonder how the Protestant attitude towards drinking developed. Here they are following the Christ of the Bible, who drank, yet they act as though drinking is sinful.

[Chizzang]

Hopefully this post will take this time instead of shifting me back to the login thing.

The point is that if somebody believes Jesus was the Son of God and takes the Gospels as a reasonably accurate account that at least paints the general picture of his outlook, there's no WAY they could think that Jesus would advocate what these militias people are alleged to have been planning. Think about it.

He was living in a land occupied by a foreign invader (Rome). If you accept him as the Christ, you believe that he had the power to destroy the Romans and liberate his homeland in an instant. He didn't do it. He made the "turn the other cheek" statement. He allowed himself to be crucified. When his followers drew their swords to protect him, he told them to put them down. He clearly comes off as an ultra pacifist. To me, any honest assessment of what Jesus as presented in the Gospels would have wanted would lead one to believe that he would've said that people should not offer resistance when they are attacked. They should concentrate on more important, non-material things.

As an aside...the Gospels also clearly indicate that Jesus drank alcoholic wine. That's always made me wonder. That has always made me wonder how the Protestant attitude towards drinking developed. Here they are following the Christ of the Bible, who drank, yet they act as though drinking is sinful.

Frankly I enjoy this a bit more...

Zeus,
Most glorious of the immortals, invoked by many names, ever all-powerful,
Zeus,
The First Cause of Nature, who rules all things with Law,
Hail! It is right for mortals to call upon you,
since from you we have our being, we whose lot it is to be God's image...
we alone of all mortal creatures that live and move upon the earth.
Accordingly, I will praise you with my hymn and ever sing of your might.

[BDKJMU]

I say hang every one of them in Madison Square Garden (or any large sports venue) and have it on pay-per-view; I'll gladly attend or purchase a subscription to watch. These "militia" groups have no busniness calling themselves a militia. Maybe they should look it up in a dictionary. These idiots are a disgrace to anyone who has ever served in the military.

Only if they string up a bunch of gangbangers from some inner city street gangs along with them.

[BDKJMU]

As TMan pointed out in the other thread, there are numerous street gangs all around the country that have and continue to target law enforcement. Yet you don't see the Obama admin and the lamestream media making the same big production of of it. The Obama admin and the lamestream media are making a big production out of this because these yahoos are white male so called "Christians", a demographic the libs love to go after and is politically correct for them to marginalize.

If they were black, brown or yellow you probably wouldn't have heard much about it....

Nothing to see here. Move along....

[AshevilleApp]

onward Christian Soldiers!

That's the Saudi national anthem right?

[houndawg]

As TMan pointed out in the other thread, there are numerous street gangs all around the country that have and continue to target law enforcement. Yet you don't see the Obama admin and the lamestream media making the same big production of of it. The Obama admin and the lamestream media are making a big production out of this because these yahoos are white male so called "Christians", a demographic the libs love to go after and is politically correct for them to marginalize.

If they were black, brown or yellow you probably wouldn't have heard much about it....

Nothing to see here. Move along....

SMFH at the mastermind who came up with this brilliant plan: "Me and my friends from the trailer park are gonna kill us a cop and when we do the whole country gonna rise up and overthrow that nigger in the White House. Sheeeeeit, bubba why do you think they call it a WHITE House, har har........."

Maybe there was nothing to see, judging by the lack of fight in them, and these clowns were garden variety white trash wack jobs that were lucky to avoid shooting their own peckers off. Probably should have stuck to paintball.

[Chizzang]

As TMan pointed out in the other thread, there are numerous street gangs all around the country that have and continue to target law enforcement. Yet you don't see the Obama admin and the lamestream media making the same big production of of it. The Obama admin and the lamestream media are making a big production out of this because these yahoos are white male so called "Christians", a demographic the libs love to go after and is politically correct for them to marginalize.

If they were black, brown or yellow you probably wouldn't have heard much about it....

Nothing to see here. Move along....

Gosh your world sure sounds like a terrible angry place...

[JMU DJ]

As TMan pointed out in the other thread, there are numerous street gangs all around the country that have and continue to target law enforcement. Yet you don't see the Obama admin and the lamestream media making the same big production of of it. The Obama admin and the lamestream media are making a big production out of this because these yahoos are white male so called "Christians", a demographic the libs love to go after and is politically correct for them to marginalize.

If they were black, brown or yellow you probably wouldn't have heard much about it....

Nothing to see here. Move along....

Gosh your world sure sounds like a terrible angry place...

Philadelphia... go figure.

[danefan]

Anybody check out their website? Interesting to say the least.

Straight from it [youtube][/youtube]

Pretty sure I saw this banner on their fatigues.

[youngterrier]

even though no where in the Constitution does it say that Rights are limited to citizens of the United States. I believe the wording is "the people"

It also doesnt say anywhere in the UNITED STATES constitution that rights are not limited to the citizens of the United States.

"We the people in order to form a more perfect union"?

Just spitballin here but when your writing a Constitution for the United States and you use the words "we the people" you are not talking about illegal foreign terrorists. Your talking about the people of the United States.

I am also just spitballin again but I believe the founding fathers believed NOBODY could ever be so stupid and flat ass ignorant that this isnt completely obvious.

For once the founding fathers were wrong.

4th Amendment
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

5th Amendment
"No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

the precedent your putting forward basically says immigrants aren't entitled to these rights either