God is Love.
He loves his enemies and does good to those who hate Him.
He also brings refreshing rain upon the just and unjust alike. If you actually want to hear more...pm me, and I'll share with you how you can hear more.
Netflix: Waco
- Thread starter JackieChiles
- Start date
God is Love.
He loves his enemies and does good to those who hate Him.
He also brings refreshing rain upon the just and unjust alike. If you actually want to hear more...pm me, and I'll share with you how you can hear more.
Religious people absolutely demand that others behave in such a way that favors them. If this wasn't the case then why does the cash in my wallet say "in God we trust" on it? What do you think the reaction would be of the religious community if Congress introduced a resolution to remove that phrase from our currency? I'd bet it would be rather demanding.
Part of the expected behavior of religious people is that they will push their religion onto others as much as possible, religious texts mandate this.
There are laws proposed and passed throughout this country based on the demands of religious people. Laws that require or outlaw certain medical procedures, laws that allow businesses to be discriminatory, we've seen school boards fight to teach psuedo-science to children.
In other countries, we see full religious based law implemented by the government, where people are executed for not conforming to the mandated beliefs and behaviors.
In fact you are, right now, demanding that I alter my behavior and the things I say by calling me arrogant and smug. You're using these as insults to strike at my credibility and belittle me personally.
So as long as religion is continually pushed on me, by individuals, by the government, by the culture at large, then I will continue to, absolutely, criticize those beliefs. I try to avoid personal criticism, but many people cannot separate their religion and their personal identity. How's the saying go? Hate the belief but not the believer.
Seriously? You used my attack on your belittling as proof that people who 100% believe in God are making demands of those who don't believe? I'm no less a sinner than you are. I would be attacking you whether you believed in God or not. You justify your attempts to belittle TI members who believe in God by pointing out it is justified because religious people in this country push their agenda just like all other groups in this country, atheists included.
Here's my point. The only time religious people on this board even suggest anything religious to you is after you've posted one of your asinine attacks. You don't see random responses in threads of how atheists are idiots. We do see random posts from you insinuating that religious people are idiots. You make broad sweeping generalizations with your insults about all those who believe. Even those who would never post anything negative towards you no matter how insulting you become.
So you would prefer it if I just did not respond or post at all in threads where religion is brought up? I'm trying to figure out how you would have me better express my feelings towards religion so that you don't feel attacked on a personal level.
What does it matter what I prefer? You will be you. I haven't felt attacked from you personally or otherwise. This has nothing to do with religion. I've been just as vocal to you when you post outrageous personal attacks on the female poster whose political beliefs do not align with yours. How many people do you really think you're going to "win over" with your methods? Or does it just feel good to insult those different than you?
Last edited:
Yeah, I've always despised bullies. So answer the question. Do you really think you can change minds with the outrageous comments, or does it just feel good to cut to the quick?
I specifically asked you to “try harder” not to offend people and you said you had no interest.
How about don’t lump all “religious people” together. Every person who calls themselves a Christian doesn’t partake in the activities you so despise any more than all Clemson fans complain about every penalty. If I go to church every Sunday and you make a comment that insinuates people in church on Sunday’s are like the folks David Koresh manipulated, that’s gonna be offensive and I don’t have to wear my religious feelings on my sleeve to feel that.
Do religious people believe they can change minds through their various methods of proselytizing? I probably can't change a mind with a singular comment but perhaps I can contribute to the process of changing a mind. Lots of folks used the be religious that aren't any longer, I'm one of them.
Why do you want to debate religion on a sports message board?
Why you got to be like this? All this back and further keeps us all from the only post we want in this thread, which is a 40 paragraph explaination of what happened to @JackieChiles in Waco. All this other garbage is just keeping him from wanting to get into it.
I so hope he want to get into it.
How I live on PTL land in Fort Mill, I have seen pretty close hand how easy it is for people to caught up by religion in just a different way
I so hope he want to get into it.
How I live on PTL land in Fort Mill, I have seen pretty close hand how easy it is for people to caught up by religion in just a different way
Right, I’m not going to make “don’t offend someone” a life goal of mine in general. Especially not on a message board. I don’t expect people to do that for me, and I don’t begrudge someone for being offended. You do have the right to be offended.
I don’t have the time or desire to qualify every single statement I make about religion by having to say now this doesn’t apply to everyone etc etc. If I say something about religion that you don’t feel applies to you then it doesn’t apply to you. You don’t need me to specifically qualify that for you, I don’t think.
And yes there are fundamental similarities between those that join fringe religious groups like the Branch Davidians and those that join non-fringe religious groups like more mainstream protestantism.
I appreciate your football takes. I don’t think it should be this hard for someone as intelligent as you to see that you could do this differently in certain situations and to certain audiences.
Let’s agree to disagree.
Go Tigers!!!
Hopeful to turn someone away from the Father. Quite the noble goal.
Last edited:
I believe it is a noble goal. I believe that it is morally wrong to support or perpetuate the basing of life and decision making and behaviors on a falsehood.
I imagine that if you knew someone who was about to make an important decision in their life but you knew that they were basing that decision on incorrect information, you would feel a responsibility to intervene and attempt to show them that they are making that decision on bad information.
I’m the same way, its a matter of morality and integrity. I believe that there are people making decisions every single day of their lives based on an enormous falsehood and I feel a responsibility to intervene. Not all the time, I’m not militant about it.
I recognize that you disagree with pretty much everything I just typed, and that’s ok.
Actually David Koresh is the one that put Wacko on the map.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
I’m glad to know this life here, whether it’s 45, 65, or 85 years isn’t the end for me... and I’m just passing through. If my beliefs are right, I’ll spend eternity in paradise/heaven. If I’m wrong, and it’s all a “falsehood”... I end up in the ground, food for worms. For someone who believes in science or nothing... the best they can hope for is food for worms. If they’re wrong... well.
@JackieChiles We are waiting on a hero. You are the only one who can save this promising turned garbage thread.
No thread left behind.
No thread left behind.
It sounds like you watched the Netflix series. I still have not watched. Two questions I have before I bring myself to watch? First is just to see how accurate it is. Did they go into Dave’s memory? He had issues other places but he remembered everything. He had a crazy unique mind. Second, did they try to say he had sex with young girls? That was a false narrative put out. You can guess why. Dave had a thing for wives of other members, but the young girl thing was bs.
Yep on both.
Talked about him memorizing the entire Bible and being able to pull a Scripture for any moment.
Made note of the “young girl” thing by stating that as a reason the feds wanted to raid the place, to investigate statutory rape as young as 14 years old.
My one question is this: The series kind of comes off like the BD’s just wanted to be left alone and had no goals of mass suicide/gun trafficking/revolutions, but the government pushed too hard with them and was at least half to blame. The sheriff used to visit unarmed to say hello, and everyone knew them and got along with them.
Would you agree that you guys/they just wanted to be alone and had no crazy plans? Or did you ever hear of any revolution-type plans?
I watched it when it was first on television a few years ago, so I don’t remember all the details.
I think they did discuss that Koresh had a photographic memory, particularly when it came to scripture, but I don’t remember (ha) it being a major point in the show, just a character detail.
On the girls it was a little vague. They clearly show that he mandated not only that he sleeps with the wives but that the husbands could not sleep with their wives, only David could sleep with any of the women. The reason he gives for this is that he believes one of (all?) of his children will be the “7th seal” that leads them into the new world (I may not be right on all the specifics, just going from my memory) and so he needed to impregnate as many of the women as possible so the birth of this 7th seal could happen more quickly.
To my recollection (again, could be hazy) it is not directly stated that Koresh molested any of the children, but it is suggested he made sexual advances to the teenage girls that were old enough to conceive. It seemed implied that his may have been going on without everyone’s knowledge. The show kind of seems to deal more with what it meant for the husbands/wives to not be allowed to have sex with each other rather than take a specific stance on whether Koresh was having sex with underage girls. I think the show tried very hard not to completely demonize Koresh while also not absolving him.
The show mainly focuses on the negotiations between Koresh and the FBI/ATF during the stand off. It goes through the events of Ruby Ridge and tries to let the audience feel sympathy for the Davidians. Its kind of presented as just a series of mishaps where neither side could bend and the ATF thought this would be an easy PR win after a lot of negative press following Ruby Ridge. It paints the Davidians as kind of unwitting participants in any illegal activity that Koresh may have been involved in and Koresh digs his heels in and refuses to budge despite pleadings from others to end the stand off because he doesn’t want to give up his position.
So I thought it was pretty good. It didn’t play David up as some super villain and tried to humanize him and the other Davidians. It tried to be even handed.
Thanks for cliffs but it is not “you guys”. Again appreciate the review and no offense taken, but I was there but not all in. It was a little different than portrayed in the news. I did live there for a period and most were “all in” for lack of better words but what you saw on the news was 10% accurate. Dave definitely had no desire to die.
the protagonist is the fbi's hostage negotiator and he's portrayed to want to prevent violence on either side. He's the guy that filed complaints against the unwarranted force at Ruby Ridge.
Well you don't know that. It's wishful thinking based on no evidence to suggest so. Secondly, that's a false dichotomy. There's not just one purported deity to believe in, or not. There are thousands upon thousands of gods dreamed up by humans. And untold numbers more that we haven't thought of. And precisely zero good evidence for any of them. You're odds of 1/1000s is not better than the guy 0/1000s and I'm willing to bet you have hardly looked into the other religions. That's before even considering if you're practicing correctly
I think we all want more details on this statement.
3/10, thanks for the thread jack
Last edited:
This thread could have been epic.......SMH.......was looking forward to hearing an inside source in it all.
WTF is wrong with yall?
There were up to 1,200 followers of David Koresh, meaning there is a 0.0004% chance we would come across one of them. That figure is probably lower because of deaths since the raid. But here we have someone that was actually there.
Instead of encouraging him to tell us actual events or tidbits from an event that every American over the age of 35 remembers, we instead debate religion.
There were up to 1,200 followers of David Koresh, meaning there is a 0.0004% chance we would come across one of them. That figure is probably lower because of deaths since the raid. But here we have someone that was actually there.
Instead of encouraging him to tell us actual events or tidbits from an event that every American over the age of 35 remembers, we instead debate religion.
Last edited:
welcome to TI...some posters Have convinced me that they have never got to experience a wet dream much less the real thing
You must have missed the previous threads involving OP and his experience with Karesh. They went the same as this - thread gets derailed when we all think we’re gonna get more insight into what happened
It’s so pointless. Christians - take your W and turn the cheek. You are the GOAT religion in the US and it’s not close. You ain’t gonna win over anonymous posters on TI by spouting rhetoric we have all heard before.
Non Christians yes we know how improbable some biblical events are. And yes we know there are hundreds of religions. But this is Clemson and Clemson has a lot of Christians.
Debate away somewhere else.
waco guy - lets hear some good stories from Dave’s Fun Park.
Under the disclaimer that this is not meant to demand any sort of religious view (and I am glad we live in a country where you can have a different religious view than me and, as you've said, not die for it as in other countries), since we are in a place with rabid Clemson football fans, I am interested in whether it makes you squirm that Coach Swinney and a lot of the balance of those who call the Reeves Football Complex their workplace seem convicted in their Christian Faith.
You state above that you "believe it is morally wrong to support or perpetuate the basing of life and decision making on behaviors on a falsehood." Would you tell that to Dabo Swinney? I think basing decisions and behavior at least somewhat on Christian faith is what he and many close to him within the Clemson program have done and continue to do. I'm just interested in whether all this "moral wrong" you see in the Clemson program affects your sentiment toward it.
Again, not a flame whatsoever. To me, always a good thing when there are people to press on what you believe; helps you firm up your own beliefs.
Yes, it does make me uncomfortable when Coach Swinney references his faith. And it concerns me as to how he seems to run the program from a faith based ideology. By that I mean I wonder would he hire a person who didn’t have similar religious beliefs? I don’t know if he would or not or if he has or not, but its a concern.
And I would, absolutely, say that to him or anyone else in the Clemson program. Now if I happened to see him out at Bi-Lo, would I march up to him and just say that to him? No, of course not. But if we were in a situation where such a conversation were appropriate, I would not hold back on expressing my views just because of his status and success at Clemson. I doubt that situation will ever occur.
On the morality front, I do not believe that Coach Swinney is purposefully perpetuating a falsehood. I believe he genuinely holds the religious beliefs he claims he does. I do believe he is wrong about those beliefs, but to me there’s a difference between someone knowingly spreading a falsehood and someone who genuinely believes something that happens to be incorrect.
I think there are people of “faith” who aren’t genuine and who are either knowingly perpetuating a falsehood or just don’t care either way, and I think even Christians will admit those people do indeed exist. I don’t think Dabo is one of those people. The sense of morality in terms of not spreading a falsehood is directed primarily at myself. I believe that its a matter of integrity. Again, its not about militantism, I’m not marching up to people in the streets or protesting at churches. I don’t believe that a person who believes differently than me is a bad person, but I do believe that if I stay quiet and let someone I care about live their life based on something I fervently believe to not be true then that makes me a bad person.
Moreover, although I believe Dabo is wrong about the source and reason for many of the values he has, I do share many of those same values. So I can appreciate and respect many of the things he stands for that have nothing really to do with religious beliefs. You don’t have to be religious to believe in hard work, discipline, accountability. You don’t have to be religious to care about helping other people in times of need, to go out of your way to be kind to others.
Similar threads
