Something for the Christians to consider...
-
'Compulsion'? As if you mean of if a compulsion that is of a ravaged will where we are but robots, then certainly it's not that kind of compulsion and I woudl agree wholeheartedly with you... it is a sort of a compulsion that you would criticize a certain organization of having, and oddly enough also want us to resist.Originally posted by casino_king:You are under no compulsion... a God that has to compel you, what sort of God is that? A God that has to threaten you? A God that has to make you promises? Do you think that you are God.
If you suppose that a compulsion that comes of knowing that God demands certain things, but yet gives us a freedom to choose if we should be compelled to do these things or not, then yes, that is a compulsion. But I would not like to mistake this kind of freedom given as an assumption that this kind of God has no demands of humanity whatsoever... if that was the case then there would be no 'right' or 'wrong' to fight over at all.
And for a moment I do not think that God has to make us promises, but yet He does that for some curious reason. Not for a moment do I actually think we deserve existence or freedom for that matter, but yet we are here.
The thing is this: As you have observed there are some people who indeed have this frame of mind where meaningful existence and freedom are just personal concepts created by human minds to pacify a meaingless existence. These people then have no guilt or any sort of suppressing or oppressing the weak and poor as by and justification all justifications are personal and subjective, and that the only real thing that is worth listening to, and moves things is power. The strong can oppress the weak because the weak don't have any right to begin with... all rights are personal opinions. To them there is no such thing as fairness, and it's the strongest that survive.
If you want to fight such a notion, you must then champion a kind of law that holds absolute over the strong or the weak, that all must listen to regardless of their position or opinion. And this kind of thing must be held above and beyond human ability to change, and is the judge of all human activity. Like gravity that affects both the strong and weak... this right and wrong has plenty of things to say about the validity of an individual's actions against the weak, even if he seems for the moment to have nothing to resist him, eventually he must be made to realize that his force is not the law.
Anyway I am with you in opposing the oppression of the weak and poor... but I would like to know why I want to oppose unfairness at all. -
The arrest of J Go... is just the beginning. It nevertheless an indication of what you can expect in the Rule of the Beast
-
As you can see from here.... CLICK HEREOriginally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Anyway I am with you in opposing the oppression of the weak and poor... but I would like to know why I want to oppose unfairness at all.
I ask more questions than I answer.
Why "oppose unfairness at all?"
Answer from evolution and anthropology. The apes stayed the way they are because, brute force wins all the time. Humans because they can talk, they gang up on the big bullies and that allowed the "Good and Honorable" rather than Brutish to survive. If we see oppressive behavior and we don't "gang" up to oppose it, well what can I say? We are no better than the apes. 666 The winning score. -
How many gamblers have sum up the numbers 0 to 36 in the Russian roulette?
The answer is interesting : 666 ! -
Please explain.Originally posted by googoomuck:How many gamblers have sum up the numbers 0 to 36 in the Russian roulette?
The answer is interesting : 666 ! -
Add up the numbers 0+1+2+3+............36=666Originally posted by casino_king:Please explain.
Gambling is bad. It wrecks many people's life. It's evil,so to speak, but the gommen needs the revenue, so let's build the casino. Let the gamblers lose their souls.
Deck Of Cards
When I look at the Ace, it reminds me that there is but one God.
And the deuce reminds me that the bible is divided into two parts: the Old and the New Testaments.
When I see the trey, I think of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
And when I see the four, I think of the four evangelists who preached the Gospel: there was Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
And when I see the five, it reminds me of the five wise virgins who trimmed their lamps; there were ten of them: five were wise and were saved, five were foolish and were shut out.
When I see the six, it reminds me that in six days God made this heaven and earth.
And when I see the seven, it reminds me that on the seventh day, God rested from his great work.
And when I see the eight, I think of the eight righteous persons that God saved when he destroyed the earth: there was Noah, his wife, their sons and their wives.
And when I see the nine, I think of the lepers our saviour cleansed, and that nine of the ten didn't even thank him.
When I see the ten, I think of the ten commandments that God handed down to Moses on a tablet of stone.
When I see the King, it reminds me that there is but one King of Heaven, God Almighty.
And when I see the Queen, I think of the blessed Virgin Mary who is the Queen of Heaven.
And the Jack or Knave is the Devil.
When I count the number of spots in a deck of cards, I find 365, the number of days in a year.
There are 52 cards, the number of weeks in a year.
There are four suits, the number of weeks in a month.
There are twelve picture cards, the number of months in a year.
There are thirteen tricks, the number of weeks in a quarter.
So you see, my deck of cards serves me as a bible, an almanac and a prayer book." -
You mean the Roulette Wheel? Russin Roulette is the game where you load 1 bullet in the pistol, spin the barrel, point to your head and shoot; your turn; my turn; your turn my turn until BANG!Originally posted by googoomuck:Add up the numbers 0+1+2+3+............36=666
Gambling is bad. It wrecks many people's life. It's evil,so to speak, but the gommen needs the revenue, so let's build the casino. Let the gamblers lose their souls.
Making money out of human weaknesses is evil? -
Instead of indulging in the superstition of numbers, tabulate a list of policies of all political parties and consider which one Christians should support instead. Who is against gambling and casinos? Which is for homosexuality to be legalised? Who is for censorship of pornography etc...
-
I can tell you simply that I have dedicated my life to resisting the casinos and some other forms of gambling (not all.) As for 666, look here, I did not make that up.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Instead of indulging in the superstition of numbers, tabulate a list of policies of all political parties and consider which one Christians should support instead. Who is against gambling and casinos? Which is for homosexuality to be legalised? Who is for censorship of pornography etc... -
but u not christian lehOriginally posted by casino_king:I can tell you simply that I have dedicated my life to resisting the casinos and some other forms of gambling (not all.) As for 666, look here, I did not make that up. -
Whether it is superstition or not it is up to you. Nobody can logically explain or prove it to you. All I ask is that you listen to the still small voice speaking to you. I did. see also HERE
-
[/b][/quote]Originally posted by casino_king:Whether it is superstition or not it is up to you. Nobody can logically explain or prove it to you. All I ask is that you listen to the still small voice speaking to you. I did. see also HERE
u from some anti gambling society or wat? -
Originally posted by casino_king:
PAP won overall by 66.6%
on [b]SATURDAY 6th May 2006
Share of valid votes PAP 66.6% 666
WP 16.34%
SDA 12.97%
SDP 4.09%
ge2006.channelnewsasia.com/election3.php[/b]Originally posted by casino_king:
Don't get too hysterical.
Out of the more than 1.2 million votes cast they couldn't even have won 66.61% or 66.59% They had to win by 66.6%
This is what you get when you vote in a gahman that supports the [b]CASINO[/b]
Assuming they are correct, I have computed the figures from those given at http://www.elections.gov.sg/parliamentary2006.htm
Total Votes received by PAP: 747861
Total Votes received by Opposition: 375080
Total valid votes cast: 1122941
Percentage share of valid votes by PAP: 66.5984232475... %
Since there are 1122941 valid votes cast in total, it means that each voter is responsible for around 0.000089 % of the vote.
Thus, the percentage share received by PAP can be said to be significant to 66.59842%
So, 66.6 is just a rounded value from 66.59842.
So is 66.598.
So is 66.5984.
So while the casino issue is a controversial one, let's don't get too hysterical. -
There is something wrong with your calculations. The figures given are up to 2 decimal places.Originally posted by twocents:Don't get too hysterical.
Assuming they are correct, I have computed the figures from those given at http://www.elections.gov.sg/parliamentary2006.htm
Total Votes received by PAP: 747861
Total Votes received by Opposition: 373080
Total valid votes cast: 1122941
Percentage share of valid votes by PAP: 66.5984232475... %
Since there are 1122941 valid votes cast in total, it means that each voter is responsible for around 0.000089 % of the vote.
Thus, the percentage share received by PAP can be said to be significant to 66.59842%
So, 66.6 is just a rounded value from 66.59842.
So is 66.598.
So is 66.5984.
So while the casino issue is a controversial one, let's don't get too hysterical.
Share of valid votes PAP 66.6% 666
WP 16.34%
SDA 12.97%
SDP 4.09%
666 was printed all over the papers; that makes it more frightening if your calculations are correct, but it cannot be. -
Typo corrected. Total votes received by opposition: 375080 (not 373080).
Calculated percentages remain correct. Feel free to counter-check.
The following rounding from 66.59842 are legitimate.
4 dec places: 66.5984
3 dec places: 66.598
2 dec places: 66.60
1 dec places: 66.6 -
Like I said, the percentages given was up to two decimal places.Originally posted by twocents:Typo corrected. Total votes received by opposition: 375080 (not 373080).
Calculated percentages remain correct. Feel free to counter-check.
The following rounding from 66.59842 are legitimate.
4 dec places: 66.5984
3 dec places: 66.598
2 dec places: 66.60
1 dec places: 66.6
Feel free to click on the link:
ge2006.channelnewsasia.com/election3.php
For PAP all the newspapers quoted 666
While you are at it think about :
the 6th day of the week and the 6th day of the month in the 6th year of the century / millennium
Do you know what an abomination is?
So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand - then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains (Matthew 24:15-16).
When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong--let the reader understand--then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains (Mark 13:14).
Not only does Jesus refer to “the abomination that causes desolation,” but also He tells us to find its description in the prophecies of Daniel. Then Jesus commands us to understand what He is talking about.
Daniel’s first reference to the “the abomination that causes desolation” is found in a portion of the ‘Seventy sevens’ prophecy.
The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He [Antichrist] will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he [Antichrist] will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he [Antichrist] will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him [Antichrist] (Daniel 9:26-27). -
-
Originally posted by casino_king:BTW the Bible study is taken from the internet; not from me. You have to work it out for yourself. You have to discern the still small voice speaking to you.
-
Originally posted by casino_king:
A valid answer, and I tend to agree with you on many points.
I ask more questions than I answer.
Why "oppose unfairness at all?"
Answer from evolution and anthropology. The apes stayed the way they are because, brute force wins all the time. Humans because they can talk, they gang up on the big bullies and that allowed the "Good and Honorable" rather than Brutish to survive. If we see oppressive behavior and we don't "gang" up to oppose it, well what can I say? We are no better than the apes. [b]666 The winning score.[/b]
Hmm....
But then if indeed this thing called 'Good and Honorable' are part of our behavioural evolution, what is to stop some party from saying that we are in the process of evolving some new way of running people? In fact they might argue that going back the way of the apes is the best way to survive. We then must respond that with a resounding no! It is better to be Good and Honorable then their apish ways, but then we can't justify this by using evolution and anthropology unless they are laws that are above us must not be violated...
But of course that party would disagree. They might very well point out that our ideas of Good and Honourable are not any less alterable then our liking for cheese, that mankind is reaching a stage where he has to alter his own evolved notions of good and honourable if he wants to 'progress' and 'survive'.
In fact, many people actually buy this notion when they state that pratical 'carrot' needs are far more important then good and honourable ideas and freedom. Our only response it seems, would be to argue for a view that goodness and honour must hold over our immediate needs.
And to do that we must propose a rationalization higher then basic evolution and antropological justifications, because some party has already co-opted those notions to say that these justifications are but a raw material for survival... for often those who vouchsafe the violent and vicious violation of violition say that what matters is that we use our brains now to alter this raw-material to survive even better, even if it's in a way that flouts our traditional ideas of good and honourable. Our only way it seems, is to suggest an absolute that is not subject to change and that would disagree with what they are doing, not to mention a judge and context for physical reality as well.
But as long as people want to see evolution and antropology as simply self-justifications and raw material, this will not be an easy task.
Sigh...
-
Are you talking about "hegemony?" Where nonsense becomes "common sense" because the authorities say so?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:A valid answer, and I tend to agree with you on many points.
Hmm....
But then if indeed this thing called 'Good and Honorable' are part of our behavioural evolution, what is to stop some party from saying that we are in the process of evolving some new way of running people? In fact they might argue that going back the way of the apes is the best way to survive. We then must respond that with a resounding no! It is better to be Good and Honorable then their apish ways, but then we can't justify this by using evolution and anthropology unless they are laws that are above us must not be violated...
But of course that party would disagree. They might very well point out that our ideas of Good and Honourable are not any less alterable then our liking for cheese, that mankind is reaching a stage where he has to alter his own evolved notions of good and honourable if he wants to 'progress' and 'survive'.
In fact, many people actually buy this notion when they state that pratical 'carrot' needs are far more important then good and honourable ideas and freedom. Our only response it seems, would be to argue for a view that goodness and honour must hold over our immediate needs.
And to do that we must propose a rationalization higher then basic evolution and antropological justifications, because some party has already co-opted those notions to say that these justifications are but a raw material for survival... for often those who vouchsafe the violent and vicious violation of violition say that what matters is that we use our brains now to alter this raw-material to survive even better, even if it's in a way that flouts our traditional ideas of good and honourable. Our only way it seems, is to suggest an absolute that is not subject to change and that would disagree with what they are doing, not to mention a judge and context for physical reality as well.
But as long as people want to see evolution and antropology as simply self-justifications and raw material, this will not be an easy task.
Sigh...
This is why intellectuals write books and participate in forums. This help people see that what they take as "common sense" was "sold" to them.
With regards from a religious point of view and speaking from what I understand is as Christian perspective; Faith in God is righteousness. This would imply a walk with God so closely that you hear God speaks to you.
Well you have to experience it to understand it.
I can attempt to help you have a glipse of what the relationship with God is like. When you fall in love, you "get" married to that person. If you remind that person getting married means sacrifice; he/she will still wants it. If you tell hat person he/she will not gain anything out of it; he/she still wants it.
This is an over simplification but like I said you need to be in 2 way communication with God to understand it. -
You all siao ah?
-
i think so tooOriginally posted by Himbo:You all siao ah? 
-
We are what is commonly known as Mystics.
-
hmmmm CANCER frightens many people.... be prepared.