Jesus & Horus. Coincidence?
April 2nd, 2015 at 4:42:44 AM permalink | |
Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
That sounds like the opposite lesson to the one told to us earlier, about the children being killed in front of their mother for refusing to do something. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
April 2nd, 2015 at 7:36:57 AM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
Things can be very strongly implied even if they're not said. How many saints were martyrs? How revered are martyrs compared to others? For instance, no one did more for Christianity or Christians in the history of the world than Constantine I(*). As far as I know, he's neither a saint nor is he revered. During the early centuries of the church, martyrs were so exalted and their examples give so much extravagant praise, that in the last rounds of Roman persecutions many Christians sought to emulate them. That's a culture which values a mode of death more than it does life. (*) Constantine gave Christianity the backing of the world's most powerful political and military entity of tis time, and one of the wealthiest. He heaped money, land and churches on this congregation, and pressured many to adopt Christianity. He established, in the full sense of the term, Christianity as the religion of Rome in one generation. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
April 2nd, 2015 at 9:11:04 AM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
Truth is, a huge monster lives in a lake in Scotland. Nothing else explains the Loch Ness Monster. People over a period of time claim to have seen him, so of course he exists. It's recorded in books and newspaper articles. That's proof enough for anybody but a damned fool. Can you imagine if everybody were as gullible as religious fanatics? Which of course they were through most of human history. Uneducated, superstitious, ignorant, and gullible. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
April 2nd, 2015 at 10:29:41 AM permalink | |
kenarman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 14 Posts: 4470 |
There is no doubt that they are at fault for their own death when jumping on the grenade or stepping in front of the bullet meant for somebody else. I don't think our discussion is linguistic so I won't bother delving into the definition of suicide however I am sure that it could be argued that those cases are suicide. The case is not so clear for the soldier charging up the hill. He may willingly do it or it is possible he is only doing it because he was ordered to. To disobey an order has it's own consequence so now we have a form of coercion. He also usually has some hope of living during the charge. I am not trying to make light of the above scenerios but this is a very deep question. Many would probably argue (excluding EB), who better to decide than a Priest. I have no moral objection against these decisions and have put my life at risk several times over the years to save both family and strangers and it has always been an instaneous gut reaction that I only analyzed after the fact. The question gets really murky with suicide bombers. Some of the bombers have not been coerced. Should we respect their martyrdom? Notice now that our name for them includes the word suicide that we objected to using with our own soldiers. We are also doing all in our power to stop our "home grown terrorists" from following their conscience and going to fight for ISIS. It seems that for most people that somebody is a martyr only if they agree with the cause they died for. This I think takes us very close to EB's position that it is suicide for everyone. I feel we can indivdually decide after the fact if we approved, but can not arbitrarily change the nature of the act. "but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin |
April 2nd, 2015 at 10:46:35 AM permalink | |
FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 | That was a very good post by kenarman. Another thing we should consider is are those who jump on a grenade or step in front of someone really choosing to die? Are they rather motivated to save another and their death is an unwanted consequence of such actions. Suicide seems linguistically and culturally to be choosing to die on purpose. Those who sacrifice their life to save another or stand up for values they hold dear could be considered to not be choosing death, but if it is an unavoidable and unintended consequence of their actions they accept it. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
April 2nd, 2015 at 11:18:32 AM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
Putting yourself into a position where you will die is suicide, whatever the circumstances. But the Church wants it both ways, as usual. It's OK for Jesus to commit suicide on the cross, that's noble, he did it for a good reason. But if Joe Blow does it because of an incurable disease, that's a sin and he goes straight to hell. So the Church puts on it's tap shoes and dances around the subject as fast as they can. As usual. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
April 2nd, 2015 at 11:41:02 AM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
Killing one's self on purpose. But it doesn't make the death of a martyr any less wrong or wasteful. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
April 3rd, 2015 at 2:08:24 PM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
You may be linguistically correct, but most people don't link suicide and martyrdom, with the exception of punk rockers. Reference |
April 3rd, 2015 at 2:31:34 PM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
Only because the Church has cleaned up suicide if it's for the religion. It's suicide but with a jazzy name. No hell for that kind of killing yourself. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
May 6th, 2015 at 8:26:59 PM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 | Reincarnation explains so much about the here and now, what's happening in the present. Why people are born with terrible defects, sometimes blind or deaf, and this is supposed to be their one and only life? Obviously it's not. Some people get so depressed they take their own lives. How can they do that, squander their one and only life? I think many of them know they're not squandering it, they just want a break for awhile. Ghosts have been a part of every society since the dawn of man. The remotest village knows what a ghost is. It's the spirit of a person trapped outside of time near where they died. To us, who are trapped in time, they linger forever. To them, who knows, it's probably far different. Reincarnation can explain a lot of mysteries that religion creates. It turns out they aren't mysteries at all. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |