DS Forums

 
 

Why do most RELIGIONS not tell their members not to fight and kill in wars ??


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-12-2016, 13:50
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553

I dont follow any organised religion. I dont call myself an atheist either, nor believe in the big bang theory to explain the whole universe, i dont believe in any religion to explain existence. I dont know where the universe came from, thats the most logical stance to take. So thats where i stand on that.

As a thinking human being, i am anti war, and view war as total criminal insanity. What it is, is essentially human beings killing other humans that they have never even met, based on obedience to government and to religious ideology. After thousands of years of murderous wars it just seems we still havent learned, and have ever more ingenious ways of killing people., Along with a highly profitable arms trade who is complicit in the death and destruction orf wars. However, i accept that we dont live in a utopia, and every country has a right to a defence, in the same way that if someone broke in my home and tried to hurt me or my son, i would defend myself. The arms trade is highly profitable, war as they say, is a business.

My question on wars and christianity, having looked at the bible, and especially the teachings of Jesus is this. With an estimated 2 billion Christians worldwide : why dont most christian religions instruct their followers not to join the army and not to kill others in their various governments wars ?? Seriously. Arent the churches supposed to be seperate from the bad things that go on in the world and not just pay lip service in sermons to wars being bad etc. You see a lot of pomp and ceremony in big churches around the time or war rememberance events, attended often by royals and tony blair etc, you see the church and the state become one. Instead of seperate.

I know that many would risk their life if they refused to fight in wars or end up in priison in some countries if they stuck by their biblical/scriptural principles, but isnt the message of the bible to be seperate from the world, to suffer persecution for standing up to your principles ?? So why dont the cahtholics, just to use one example religion, not teach their followers not to join the army and not to shoot a machine gun at a stranger ? Or not to drop a bomb on another human ? And the same with another christian religion. I could take this further and say that all religions who claim to be of god, should outright just have some balls and just say we dont agree with joining the army because war is legalised mass murder, and we will stand firm.

It does seem that at times that religions go along with the times they live in, they give in to pressure of whats going on in the world and end up changing their teachings in order to please people, or for fear of repurcussions, or just dont want to be seen as being old fashioned. All religions cherry pick the parts of the bible, koran, torah etc, that suit them. Give a religion long enough and it will change. be it a big religion or a cult.

To me if someone claims that god is love, then love to me isnt strapping on a machine gun to kill people in a foreign land, or at home. Love isnt dropping a bomb from above, on to houses where mostly innocent people end up dead. Where are the churches prepared to tell their followers not to join the military or be a part of that ? I know it sounds idealistic and im not sure what id do if faced with someone invading me, on an individual level id fight back. My point is that if you really do believe in the teachings of jesus then you would never join the military and you would seperate yourself from what your government gets involved in when its violence.

Theres no point having a bible in one hand and a gun in the other......
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 05-12-2016, 14:45
skinj
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,195
If they told their followers not to fight those people are likely to become the subject of violence. Other communities/religions will take over their land, jobs, wives children etc and force the believers in to the wilderness or kill them. If this happens the religion's following falls & it's ability to create wealth decreases significantly, which is something the leaders of the religions have ever wanted to happen as they are generally at the top of the pyramid basking in the luxury that the religion has brought them.
skinj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 14:49
johnF1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Its a reasonable question. As far as Christianity goes Jesus was pretty clear in where he stood on war and violence - "Turn the other cheek", "Love your enemy", "He who live by the sword dies by the sword" etc - so you'd think that any Christian would refuse to fight in national wars. And there have been many conscientious objectors in the major World Wars for this reason.

There have been many more so-called Christians over the centuries who have readily gone to fight in wars (including politicians and leaders who waged wars in the first place) so it does make you wonder.

In my experience religious people are particularly good at "double-think" as George Orwell coined the phrase. i.e. the ability to hold 2 completely contrasting views without having a problem with the contradictions.
johnF1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 14:50
Arcana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 🖥⌨🖱
Posts: 29,240
It does seem that at times that religions go along with the times they live in, they give in to pressure of whats going on in the world and end up changing their teachings in order to please people, or for fear of repurcussions, or just dont want to be seen as being old fashioned.
Politics and religion are very much interwoven...and not always for the best in my view. Religious leaders have similar pressures and constraints and compromissory pressures to political leaders.

In fact one of the things that drives me nuts in this country is the way our religious leaders somewhat tend to avoid the contempt heaped on our political leaders. It should be a lot more balanced.
Arcana is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 15:10
spiney2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24,092
If you and your family and everyone you know are at risk, due to threatened military invasion, it's a bit difficult to be pacifist. The Quaker Ambulance Service is an ''interesting compromise'', they run the same personal risks, but refuse to kill ...........
spiney2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 15:10
worzil
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 912
I dont follow any organised religion. I dont call myself an atheist either, nor believe in the big bang theory to explain the whole universe, i dont believe in any religion to explain existence. I dont know where the universe came from, thats the most logical stance to take. So thats where i stand on that.

As a thinking human being, i am anti war, and view war as total criminal insanity. What it is, is essentially human beings killing other humans that they have never even met, based on obedience to government and to religious ideology. After thousands of years of murderous wars it just seems we still havent learned, and have ever more ingenious ways of killing people., Along with a highly profitable arms trade who is complicit in the death and destruction orf wars. However, i accept that we dont live in a utopia, and every country has a right to a defence, in the same way that if someone broke in my home and tried to hurt me or my son, i would defend myself. The arms trade is highly profitable, war as they say, is a business.

My question on wars and christianity, having looked at the bible, and especially the teachings of Jesus is this. With an estimated 2 billion Christians worldwide : why dont most christian religions instruct their followers not to join the army and not to kill others in their various governments wars ?? Seriously. Arent the churches supposed to be seperate from the bad things that go on in the world and not just pay lip service in sermons to wars being bad etc. You see a lot of pomp and ceremony in big churches around the time or war rememberance events, attended often by royals and tony blair etc, you see the church and the state become one. Instead of seperate.

I know that many would risk their life if they refused to fight in wars or end up in priison in some countries if they stuck by their biblical/scriptural principles, but isnt the message of the bible to be seperate from the world, to suffer persecution for standing up to your principles ?? So why dont the cahtholics, just to use one example religion, not teach their followers not to join the army and not to shoot a machine gun at a stranger ? Or not to drop a bomb on another human ? And the same with another christian religion. I could take this further and say that all religions who claim to be of god, should outright just have some balls and just say we dont agree with joining the army because war is legalised mass murder, and we will stand firm.

It does seem that at times that religions go along with the times they live in, they give in to pressure of whats going on in the world and end up changing their teachings in order to please people, or for fear of repurcussions, or just dont want to be seen as being old fashioned. All religions cherry pick the parts of the bible, koran, torah etc, that suit them. Give a religion long enough and it will change. be it a big religion or a cult.

To me if someone claims that god is love, then love to me isnt strapping on a machine gun to kill people in a foreign land, or at home. Love isnt dropping a bomb from above, on to houses where mostly innocent people end up dead. Where are the churches prepared to tell their followers not to join the military or be a part of that ? I know it sounds idealistic and im not sure what id do if faced with someone invading me, on an individual level id fight back. My point is that if you really do believe in the teachings of jesus then you would never join the military and you would seperate yourself from what your government gets involved in when its violence.

Theres no point having a bible in one hand and a gun in the other......
So are you suggesting people should not fight for their freedoms .
Should we have allowed Hitler or IS to walk in and take over with everything they have done to Christians and Jews.
I dont do god I class myself as a humanist but that doesn't mean I would stand by and see my family persecuted by invaders even if that meant fighting them on their soil.
worzil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 15:13
spiney2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24,092
In ww2 we had ''Bevin Boys'', coal mining for conscienscious objectors .........
spiney2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 17:16
wns_195
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dewsbury, England
Posts: 8,684
Wow I haven't read a Justmadeit post for years.

Anyway on-topic, religious groups would be stupid to tell their followers not to fight wars. The future of that religion would be at risk the moment a powerful enough force wanted to get rid of it.

If there was a room, and on one side of it were a hundred Jews who refused to fight, and on the other side there were a hundred Nazis armed with guns and enough bullets to kill all the Jews, and who believed all Jews should be exterminated, how many Jews would be left at the end of the battle if there was no way for them to escape the room? All the Jews would all be dead.

In the Second World War, certain Christian denominations refused to fight the Nazis. Those denominations may owe their existence to the people who rejected their pacific beliefs.
wns_195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 17:25
Fairyprincess0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,696
What better way of honouring god, then slaughtering nonbeliever???? (Rolleyes....)
Fairyprincess0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 17:31
johnF1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
There a few examples where you could argue that taking a stand against an evil oppressor was the morally correct "Christian" thing to do. WW2 against the Nazis is perhaps one such an example even though I don't think Britain would have been threatened if they'd stayed out of it.

The majority of wars Britain have been involved in over the last 1000 years though have really had nothing to do with protecting poor British families form evil invaders. They've been all about the elite protecting their economic interests abroad and using a sense of patriotism and nationalism to get ordinary folk to risk their lives for that purpose. What's the Christian justification for that?
johnF1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 17:51
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
The Quaker Ambulance Service is an ''interesting compromise'', they run the same personal risks, but refuse to kill ...........
Do they turn up if you have become dangerously bunged up with their porridge?
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 19:36
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
Wow I haven't read a Justmadeit post for years.

Anyway on-topic, religious groups would be stupid to tell their followers not to fight wars. The future of that religion would be at risk the moment a powerful enough force wanted to get rid of it.

If there was a room, and on one side of it were a hundred Jews who refused to fight, and on the other side there were a hundred Nazis armed with guns and enough bullets to kill all the Jews, and who believed all Jews should be exterminated, how many Jews would be left at the end of the battle if there was no way for them to escape the room? All the Jews would all be dead.

In the Second World War, certain Christian denominations refused to fight the Nazis. Those denominations may owe their existence to the people who rejected their pacific beliefs.
I dont post that many things these days, there was a time when i was more of a regular

As i said in my post, i get why people would defend themselves from attackers. In the same way if someone broke in to my home and tried to attack me or my son then i would try to protect him and me.

Im just thinking that from the point of view of those who follow christ, and especially the leaders of those churches, you would think that all of them would advise their members not to take part in any violence, or killing, and if others wish too, that is up to them. If churches in all countries did this then it would even itself out. Is it more honourable for true believers, to lose your own life because they refuse to take someone elses life by following christs example, or do people think they should take part in the governments policy of warfare ? Most people on all sides dont really want wars, it seems they have to be coerced through propaganda and fear tactics of an enemy etc.

There would still be those on all sides willing to folllow orders and enlist, but the ones who really did believe in 'thou shalt not kill' would not get involved in wars. Should the pope for example tell all his followers that they shouldnt pick up weapons, should islam ic leaders do the same ? Its a hypothetical question, as i know they wont do.
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 19:38
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,450
That's all quite a complicated tangle of questions. The Old Testament is full of battles. It's about the survival of a race and laying down the rules that govern how a society of people should live. In there then there's a contradiction; 'Thou shall not kill', and yet at various points after that commandment was issued the Israelites engaged in some major battles.

Look at the battle to take Jericho. Apart from saving the Harlot and her company the rest of the city was razed to the ground. So clearly it's okay according to the Bible to kill non-believers as long as it's God's commandment, just don't kill members of your own tribe. That's been the pattern ever since. Someone in charge says it's God's will and it's then okay to hack and maim peoples of a different place, race or religion. e.g. the crusades. What you then realise is that religion is just a tool for controlling the masses. That's probably why the establishment had it in for Jesus. He gave people a different option that undermined the power of the ruling elite and upset the status quo.

So in answer to your question, organised religion is simply one aspect of the control of the masses by the state, and since the state is in the business of protecting itself (which really means lining the pockets of the ruling elite and ensuring a continuity of power behind the scenes) then you won't find religious leaders advocating widespread conscientious objection.

This reminds me of that old Gary Cooper movie ' Sergeant York ' (1941). He was a conscientious objector. Have a look from 1hr 25m how he's talked around. That's the establishment in action right there. https://youtu.be/60rq9YsdxWM?t=1h25m
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 19:47
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
That's all quite a complicated tangle of questions. The Old Testament is full of battles. It's about the survival of a race and laying down the rules that govern how a society of people should live. In there then there's a contradiction; 'Thou shall not kill', and yet at various points after that commandment was issued the Israelites engaged in some major battles.

Look at the battle to take Jericho. Apart from saving the Harlot and her company the rest of the city was razed to the ground. So clearly it's okay according to the Bible to kill non-believers as long as it's God's commandment, just don't kill members of your own tribe. That's been the pattern ever since. Someone in charge says it's God's will and it's then okay to hack and maim peoples of a different place, race or religion. e.g. the crusades. What you then realise is that religion is just a tool for controlling the masses. That's probably why the establishment had it in for Jesus. He gave people a different option that undermined the power of the ruling elite and upset the status quo.

So in answer to your question, organised religion is simply one aspect of the control of the masses by the state, and since the state is in the business of protecting itself (which really means lining the pockets of the ruling elite and ensuring a continuity of power behind the scenes) then you won't find religious leaders advocating widespread conscientious objection.

This reminds me of that old Gary Cooper movie ' Sergeant York ' (1941). He was a conscientious objector. Have a look from 1hr 25m how he's talked around. That's the establishment in action right there. https://youtu.be/60rq9YsdxWM?t=1h25m
You make some great points, i like the last bit that ive highlighted too. So true

Im watching that link now, cheers
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 15:29
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
If you and your family and everyone you know are at risk, due to threatened military invasion, it's a bit difficult to be pacifist. The Quaker Ambulance Service is an ''interesting compromise'', they run the same personal risks, but refuse to kill ...........
That is rejecting violence yet helping, so is honourable.

Is refusing to take part in wars a quaker belief? Guessing so
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 16:06
noodkleopatra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ashtray City
Posts: 4,723
So are you suggesting people should not fight for their freedoms .
Should we have allowed Hitler or IS to walk in and take over with everything they have done to Christians and Jews.
I dont do god I class myself as a humanist but that doesn't mean I would stand by and see my family persecuted by invaders even if that meant fighting them on their soil.
Sorry, I don't mean to needlessly pick, but although some denominations of Christianity were persecuted (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses), I'd be a little wary of placing them on the same scale or footing of persecution as the Jews. Afterall, Nazi Germany was overwhelmingly Christian, Hitler appealed and moulded his ideology to the Christian faith, and yes, many other Christians were persecuted, but it was largely due to being anti-Nazi rather than Christian. Although I suppose when you consider a great deal of Europe was Christian and under Nazi rule, then yes, Christians were persecuted, but I wouldn't say it was for their Christianity.

If you and your family and everyone you know are at risk, due to threatened military invasion, it's a bit difficult to be pacifist. The Quaker Ambulance Service is an ''interesting compromise'', they run the same personal risks, but refuse to kill ...........
My Granddad apparently hated "conchies" (conscientious objectors). I know every step of the way I'd be one (I'm a pacifist, obviously) and I say that with a sister currently serving in the military. I've a lot of respect for things like the Quaker Ambulance Service and the like. Took a lot of guts to do that.

In regards to the OP's post: well it's all down to Jesus. Apparently a great many Americans think Jesus loves guns and capitalism. I'm no Jesus-freak, but he always struck me as the antithesis of gun-tooting capitalism.

But religious leaders, like politicians, are easily bought. While it was honourable to fight the Nazis, Christian or not, Christianity certainly didn't stop the spread of worldwide empires, indeed - the Vatican had one of its very own, and supported many others.

That's the wonderful thing about Christ and other religious figures. They have this uncanny ability to preach exactly what those who represent them say they do.
noodkleopatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 16:09
noodkleopatra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ashtray City
Posts: 4,723
That is rejecting violence yet helping, so is honourable.

Is refusing to take part in wars a quaker belief? Guessing so
As far as I'm aware, generally yes, they are pacifists. But Quakers also aren't obliged to live by any doctrine - their outlook is very much about carving your own.
noodkleopatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 18:01
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
Sorry, I don't mean to needlessly pick, but although some denominations of Christianity were persecuted (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses), I'd be a little wary of placing them on the same scale or footing of persecution as the Jews. Afterall, Nazi Germany was overwhelmingly Christian, Hitler appealed and moulded his ideology to the Christian faith, and yes, many other Christians were persecuted, but it was largely due to being anti-Nazi rather than Christian. Although I suppose when you consider a great deal of Europe was Christian and under Nazi rule, then yes, Christians were persecuted, but I wouldn't say it was for their Christianity.



My Granddad apparently hated "conchies" (conscientious objectors). I know every step of the way I'd be one (I'm a pacifist, obviously) and I say that with a sister currently serving in the military. I've a lot of respect for things like the Quaker Ambulance Service and the like. Took a lot of guts to do that.

In regards to the OP's post: well it's all down to Jesus. Apparently a great many Americans think Jesus loves guns and capitalism. I'm no Jesus-freak, but he always struck me as the antithesis of gun-tooting capitalism.

But religious leaders, like politicians, are easily bought. While it was honourable to fight the Nazis, Christian or not, Christianity certainly didn't stop the spread of worldwide empires, indeed - the Vatican had one of its very own, and supported many others.

That's the wonderful thing about Christ and other religious figures. They have this uncanny ability to preach exactly what those who represent them say they do.
A gun in one hand and a Bible in the other, amazing that they cant see a contradiction there
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 21:57
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,450
Sorry, I don't mean to needlessly pick, but although some denominations of Christianity were persecuted (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses), I'd be a little wary of placing them on the same scale or footing of persecution as the Jews. Afterall, Nazi Germany was overwhelmingly Christian, Hitler appealed and moulded his ideology to the Christian faith, and yes, many other Christians were persecuted, but it was largely due to being anti-Nazi rather than Christian. Although I suppose when you consider a great deal of Europe was Christian and under Nazi rule, then yes, Christians were persecuted, but I wouldn't say it was for their Christianity.
BIB to start with..... Are you sure about that?

I thought Hitler was a sceptic when it came to religion. For political appearance-sake wasn't he more neutral, but secretly quite set against organised Christian religion? He had Goering (sp) and Bormann actively persecute the various religious organisations. Something to do with the way Christian values ran contrary to Hitler's ideas of the genetic superiority of the Aryan race. So Christians were persecuted for their beliefs.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 22:01
Fairyprincess0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,696
BIB to start with..... Are you sure about that?

I thought Hitler was a sceptic when it came to religion. For political appearance-sake wasn't he more neutral, but secretly quite set against organised Christian religion? He had Goering (sp) and Bormann actively persecute the various religious organisations. Something to do with the way Christian values ran contrary to Hitler's ideas of the genetic superiority of the Aryan race. So Christians were persecuted for their beliefs.
Hitler grew up a Catholic. When he ruled we would spiritualize the concept of 'providence'.

Another catholic in hitlers inner circle, said he was still a 'good member in standing'....
Fairyprincess0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 22:21
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,450
Hitler grew up a Catholic. When he ruled we would spiritualize the concept of 'providence'.
Yes, he grew up as a Catholic. That was down to his mother, a practising Catholic. But his father was dead-set against organised religion on the grounds of how much it interfered with everyday life, and Adolf rebelled against the Catholic religion.

When he ruled we would spiritualize the concept of 'providence'.
If you mean that he would say it was his divine destiny to rule or that it was Germany's divine destiny to dominate Europe then I can well belief that. However, was this simply powerful political rhetoric to win over the public? (I think it was).

Another catholic in hitlers inner circle, said he was still a 'good member in standing'....
I don't know about that. It's deeper than my knowledge on the subject extends.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 22:23
WhatJoeThinks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,220
If they told their followers not to fight those people are likely to become the subject of violence. Other communities/religions will take over their land, jobs, wives children etc and force the believers in to the wilderness or kill them. If this happens the religion's following falls & it's ability to create wealth decreases significantly, which is something the leaders of the religions have ever wanted to happen as they are generally at the top of the pyramid basking in the luxury that the religion has brought them.
I'm an agnostic pacifist and I've yet to be forced into the wilderness. Is it only believers who are likely to become the subject of violence?
WhatJoeThinks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 22:47
ohglobbits
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,133
Sorry, I don't mean to needlessly pick, but although some denominations of Christianity were persecuted (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses), I'd be a little wary of placing them on the same scale or footing of persecution as the Jews. Afterall, Nazi Germany was overwhelmingly Christian, Hitler appealed and moulded his ideology to the Christian faith, and yes, many other Christians were persecuted, but it was largely due to being anti-Nazi rather than Christian. Although I suppose when you consider a great deal of Europe was Christian and under Nazi rule, then yes, Christians were persecuted, but I wouldn't say it was for their Christianity.
Jehovah's Witnesses won't join any war but are happy for God to destroy the 'nasty ones' (which includes followers of false religions - basically any other than their own) by earthquakes and other natural disasters.
ohglobbits is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 22:53
RobinOfLoxley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Devon
Posts: 12,833
People perceive a threat and some resort to violence.

It may be serious, such as Ethnic Cleansing, or 'just' a change in your way of life (Beards for Muslims etc)

Either way, it is how we humans behave
RobinOfLoxley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 01:02
SULLA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,031
In ww2 we had ''Bevin Boys'', coal mining for conscienscious objectors .........
My understand is that the Bevan Boys were sent down the mines. They never had a choice

Hitler grew up a Catholic. When he ruled we would spiritualize the concept of 'providence'.

Another catholic in hitlers inner circle, said he was still a 'good member in standing'....
The evidence of his actions is that Jesus was not a Christian.
SULLA is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:48.