Posts by Noah Grant59

Linda Roberts2 said:Look, Jesus wasn't some anti-government radical or against having an army; he said to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. I guess that implies military service is a civic obligation, but it's hardly a holy one. A "holy killer"? That just doesn't sit right with me.

Paying taxes is a duty.

Military service isn't just a duty; it's a calling. Every calling should be honorable, if it can't be holy.
The problem is that in today's twisted value system, the very idea of honor feels like a relic of the past.

Nowadays, it seems some people think honor belongs to those who create scandals just to tear someone else down.
It’s no wonder people like > get rightfully angry. They don't even realize how many others are draining the federal budget, but we're all at the mercy of the media moguls.

George Robinson43 said:Where in the Gospels does it say that, and where did the son of God declare this to be a holy duty? Where specifically in the Gospels does the son of God mention the military?
It’s possible He does. It has been quite some time since I studied them, so my memory might be failing me.
Could you please refresh my memory?

The New Testament builds upon the Old. Nowhere is David condemned for taking down Goliath.

Now, I’m certainly in no position to lecture you.
I can only speak from my own experience as a man who faced massive injustice during wartime. I don't hold hatred toward the perpetrators, their supporters, or an entire nation.
I served from the beginning to the end of the conflict, and I feel I did what was pleasing to God.

When Roman soldiers crucified Jesus, one of the guards believed that Jesus truly was the son of God.
As far as I know, the soldiers aren't even cast as villains here—not even Pontius Pilate. Instead, the focus falls on the Jewish priests, though that is already a significant stretch.

George Robinson43 said:Does the bishop there preach the teachings of Jesus and instruct soldiers to love their enemies, just as the Gospels command?
Do the soldiers realize that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword, or is what Jesus told Saint Peter somehow inapplicable to a soldier?

The apostles (Peter and George J.) have an apostolic duty, while soldiers have a military one.

Just as the apostles have their sacred obligation to teach, soldiers have their own holy duty to defend their country and its people. It's no less significant.

gentlestag3, nearly every military unit at the brigade level has its own chaplain.
The nature of military service means most soldiers are far from home, away from their local parishes—though you could certainly debate the necessity of a dedicated military chaplaincy given how much the troop numbers have changed lately.

gentlestag3 said:I mean, what kind of person stands up at a podium and claims that the religious revival following the shift toward democracy is actually what caused the war?

If there had been any kind of systematic attempt to push atheism, maybe we’d have an atheist population similar to what you see in the Czech Republic. But having only about 5% non-believers isn't really the result of a coordinated effort, I guess.

And honestly, what is the actual purpose of the military chaplaincy anyway?

Someone could make that claim right now—just like they already do here.

It was systematic. That was the official mandate of the sole ruling party, which was obligated to follow its own platform.
Anyone who lived through that era or went to school back then knows this, provided they haven't conveniently forgotten for certain "reasons."
And I’ve mentioned this before: it’s just playing with statistics.
There is no statistic that can accurately measure the shifts in the human psyche or spirituality.
The variables are nearly infinite; people change their minds all the time.
These numbers are often used for political or even financial leverage, but in my view, they are useless.
Besides, you don't need 5% of a population to trigger a war. You only need a few hotheads.

The military chaplaincy exists to serve the spiritual needs of service members, and it operates with the authority of a diocese. Military chaplains and the bishop perform the same duties as any other priests or bishops, even if their working conditions differ. I am no longer part of that system.

wearyowl29 said:http://www.morning.com/juraj-jezerinac...nimke/1000612/

Sex, lies, and all we need now is some scandalous video footage...

So, what does the Morning actually prove? I'll say it again:

- They think their readers are fools. Honestly, they aren't entirely wrong.
- Most of their audience doesn't read past the headline.
- This kind of news spreads easily—using a misleading headline is a classic tactic to drive engagement.
- Most people won't bother fact-checking; they'll just interpret things to fit their own biases, which is clearly happening here.
- For some reason, they serve a specific interest—there could be many reasons for this, such as pushing to abolish military chaplaincies.
- They survive on lies, half-truths, and manufactured scandals.

The bottom line is that Bishop Jezerinac didn't claim atheists were responsible for the war.
To "atheize" someone means to influence anyone who isn't an atheist. That includes believers, agnostics, or even those without a firm stance. In the former regime—if it's even worth mentioning—this was a systematic process.
Furthermore, Americans didn't start the war, nor did the United States (though perhaps according to Protagoras, they did).

As I’ve already stated on this thread, his statement was directed at believers. What the Morning journalist fails to grasp is that the blame lies with those who reject or ignore God (
believers), those who don't know Him (agnostics), and those who have been stripped of faith (atheists).
This is a broad generalization, but it's certainly not cause for a shouting match or the usual nonsense found here on the Forum—arguing over who is stupider or more hypocritical. Usually, the answer to that is simply whoever asks the question.

bluerider63 said:It’s always the same old story with people using that logic—blaming atheists for every single war, acting like some "true" believer would never dream of starting something as disgusting as a conflict 🙂

I repeated the term twice. antiteistUltimately, it will be someone who knows God but opposes Him because they've fallen under the influence of evil.
Even those who claim they don't believe are under the same influence.
As I noted in my final sentence, there is a certain positive spiritual energy surrounding both the atheist Eco and Blessed John Paul II.

Turning our backs on God—and resisting the very source of all goodness—inevitably leads to evil. It’s a fundamental part of the human condition. Left to our own devices, we tend to succumb to our lowest impulses, especially when we grasp at power. In this case, that power comes through bloodshed, seizing land and wealth, and forcing the submission of the masses.

The conversation is drifting away from the Archdiocese of Split-Makarska columnists again.

If Mexico launched an aggression against America, then who is actually responsible for the war?
It’s clearly the Mexicans, driven by a madness that ignited within their own spiritual hubs (the Academy, the Orthodox Church, writers living in France) and fueled by earthly forces—specifically the military and their allies, where Satan held most of his influence. Maddox was simply the embodiment of that evil, which eventually swept up the masses.

Events like this don't happen in a healthy spiritual climate, whether you're religious or an atheist. If the Mexican academic elite had included thinkers like Umberto Eco, this wouldn't have happened. And if their clergy had someone like John Paul II, they wouldn't have been anti-theists inciting people toward war.

The war was fueled by anti-theistic extremists driven by Mexican nationalism.
They were followed by everyone—atheists and believers alike, including those godless communists, as well as religious folks who followed Satanic priests devoted only to evil.

Jezerinac is somewhat correct in saying that war cannot be the work of God.

As for the percentage of believers in the population or any statistical data comparing the IQ of atheists versus believers, it’s all nonsense. You can't calculate either through any form of math or statistics.

Michael Collins

Thanks, I really hope he pulls through and gets better soon. 🙂

casualtrucker72 said:I just wanted to point out the issue with this former member of Congress who only uttered a single word—"Yes!"—during all four years of public votes.😉
Then, he claimed that the window of one year after Congress is dissolved is too short to receive his congressional salary because "he can't find a job that quickly."
And let's be real, everyone knows he spent his whole life chasing a paycheck and blowing it all. I'm just calling it like I see it...😍

If my memory serves, Kit was actually filling in for the Headman in Congress. He took that seat once the Headman moved on to become a Governor after the local elections, so he never actually qualified for a Congressional pension.

You did a good job explaining your reasoning for starting this thread, though. Only a psychopath or someone incredibly immature would play games with a sick person like that. I hope you're the latter.

Daniel Morales32 said:You act so innocent when you're closing doors, but you're suddenly all for the guns coming out of Aurora, huh? What happened, did you finally wake up?

Joe is a decent man, despite how some of you view him.
Let me pose a hypothetical scenario. What would you actually do if you ran into Joe while he was working on his house next door? Suppose you and your family had just endured total devastation, a robbery, and five years of persecution. You fought through the entire war in the US Army, losing plenty of comrades, friends, and even relatives along the way.
Joe can be whatever dream figure you want him to be, if that’s your preference.

Timothy Evans2 said:Well, there are certainly people like that out there.

Exactly like my neighbor Joe. He moved back from somewhere like Chicago, fixed up his house, and is selling it now.
He just shrugs it off, saying politics doesn't matter when you need to borrow a trimmer or a lawnmower from the guy next door. We found a buyer locally, sold the place, and he headed right back to wherever he came from.
Of course we made peace.
The fact that we ended up walking away with his old tractor, his car, and a few other things isn't his fault. They broke down, so we just traded them for someone else's stuff that actually worked. Sure, he still technically owes the old man a couple thousand bucks from before the war, but who's really keeping track of that now?
He acts like he has no idea who killed the old man's brother, though he did hear some rumors about "militants."

I’ve moved on. I don't even ask myself if I should forgive him, because forgiveness is just part of my faith. Besides, the victim's son was the one who settled things.

But, for example, @Jerry.ri and people like him—stop acting like peacemakers. Try making peace with the people who actually consider this country their home first.

Daniel Morales32 said:Oh please. Where exactly did Muslim extremists launch an invasion on America that forced people to defend their own doorsteps from Mostar to Gornji Vakuf back in '93/'94?
Comparing the war in the former America to the Nazi invasion of Russia tells me everything I need to know about how clueless you are.

🙂

He veered too far right and ended up lost somewhere on Vran Planina.
As far as parallels go, you're right—we didn't even make it to Banja Luka, let alone Mexico City.

Linda Howard4 said:You also forgot to mention the American aggression toward Canada through the installation of the HB proto-state, which was essentially like having Appalachia within America itself. Sometimes, we need to take a hard look in the mirror.

It’s all horror stories now, a new narrator. I suppose I should be falling for it.

Read what I wrote one more time.

Anyway, back to the point. I am absolutely for peace. That includes everyone who starts associations just to manipulate people, or those who are being manipulated themselves.
True peace comes from within. Don't hold onto hate, live without prejudice, and handle the small things—that's how reconciliation happens. 🙂

This is just another one of Soros's setups.
From the American side, both the guilty and the innocent have been condemned for war crimes.
America fought a defensive war to reclaim occupied territory, while the so-called America—meaning Mexico and Mexico—along with various paramilitary groups from both Canada and America, acted as the aggressors.
Until everyone, or at least everyone in America, accepts this, we will continue to put a massive part of our history on a pillar of shame. Some people simply hate the idea of an independent America, while others just follow trends out of ignorance. We’ve been prone to this before, and you can see it right here on this Forum over the last couple of days in the thread about the arrest of unnamed; artificially erasing the truth creates problems today, and it will create them in the future if we fall for the trap of equating guilt regarding the last war.
I’ve personally been in touch with some former American People's Army members who fought in America, as well as many civilians. They all still seem to need some kind of catharsis.

To most of them, we are just Nazis. I really wish I were wrong.