The Religion of Atheism

I assume you believe that applies to your other posessions as well.

 

I prefer the international idea that land belongs to those now on it.
The premise is that most borders have been established in blood,
and nothing but blood is going to change them. So, although Russia
has valid claims to the Crimea, the world sees it absorption into Russia
as illegal - it upsets the world order. What is next? Japan retaking the
Kurile Islands from Russia? China taking its territorial islands from Japan?

 

I'm sure every owner in every time felt the same way.. they were now the 'rightful!' owner.

IF... there is a world hegemony or alliance strong enough to enforce the current ownership, THEN they are the 'rightful!' owners, by decree of power.

But, IF... someone stronger, or with a more powerful alliance disputes the status quo, who is there to appeal to, other than power?

If any group/tribe/race lf people want to take, take back, or otherwise acquire any lands from anywhere, all they need is the power and ability to do it. Nobody can dispute ownership of the victors.

The problem with 'international ideas', is they require international power to enforce.

 

Agree fully. And putting aside Jewish aspirations about their "Holy land" for the last 2,000
years, they claim it in part with the power of the IDF and nuclear weapons.

 

Natives retaking America.

 

No, that's changing the status quo.
If that's the case then we need to figure out which native owned which at the earliest
possible time. Tribes moved, tribes were defeated by other tribes. There was an ebb
and flow of native tribes in the USA as there was in South and Central America.
What any particularly honest white American activist can do, however, is hand their own
land and job over to a native American, and leave. The trouble then is - leave to where?
Even white Europeans took the land from Neanderthals, and other white Europeans.

 

I'm sure if all the Europeans, Africans, and others left, the natives could resettle where they wanted to.

OK, I know it's absurd, but so are comments of Jews leaving Israel.

 

Ah. Then we can query whether Europeans ever settled Australia? Or the US?

The Histories of Polybius ( Greek historian. He was closely associated with Scipio Aemilianus, the adopted son of Scipio Africanus — the Roman who beat Hannibal and ended the Second Punic War.)
.Book III
In my first Book, the third, that is, from this counting backwards, I explained that I fixed as the starting-points of my work, the Social war, the Hannibalic war, and the war for Coele-Syria. 2 I likewise set forth in the same place the reasons why I wrote the two preceding Books dealing with events of an earlier date. 3 I will now attempt to give a well attested account of the above wars, their first causes and the reasons why they attained such magnitude; but in the first place I have a few words to say regarding my work as a whole.
:First I shall indicate the causes of the above war between Rome and Carthage, known as the Hannibalic war, and tell how the Carthaginians invaded Italy, broke up the dominion of Rome, and cast the Romans into great fear for their safety and even for their native soil, while great was their own hope, such as they had never dared to entertain, of capturing Rome itself

2 other writers around that time also comment on Hannibal.

 

Well, as an Australian I know that SOMETHING must have happened for me,
a European, to get here.
Re Hannibal. He's my favorite General, but his reality isn't much better than
that of Moses. Taking African elephants across the Alps is an interesting fictional
flourish. His going up and down Italy isn't much more realistic than the Australian
army traversing one side of America to the other, defeating all and sundry.
Reality is strange.

Another annoying thing I have noted of late is the supposed "dating" of the bible
from Babylonian times. This time was chosen as the most convenient point to
"explain away" many prophecies (though not all.) BUT... Daniel, who really WAS
from Babylonian times, is dated much later 'cos he too gave confronting predictions.
Thing was - after Babylon and the Return the Jewish bible was "closed" and this is
why many see Maccabees as apocryphal. A 300 BC Daniel would have offended
Jewish sensibilities.

How things get dated:
Find a prophecy in a book, ie Daniel speaking of the Greeks - now date the book to
a time AFTER the Greeks. Indeed, use the Greek reference to "prove" Daniel was
written much later because, after all, how could he have known.
AND, any reference to the Romans and the Messiah, First Century AD, just don't
think about it (self censorship in fact.)

 

No what any honest America activist can do is hand over their land to the animals who were here way before man.

 

Jesus Christ

 

Yan-gant-y-tan, .. here.

The God of the fidget spinners.

 

Polybius Historian Book 1 ' For two months they remained stationary, without any action more decisive than shooting at each other every day: 7 but as Hannibal kept on announcing to Hanno by fire-signals and messengers from the city that the population could not support the famine, and that deserters to the enemy were numerous owing to privation, the Carthaginian general decided to risk battle, the Romans being no less eager for this owing to the reasons I stated above. 8 Both therefore led out their forces to the space between the camps and engaged. 9 The battle lasted for long, but at the end the Romans put to flight the advanced line of Carthaginian mercenaries, 10 and as the latter fell back on the elephants and the other divisions in their rear, the whole Phoenician army was thrown into disorder. 11 A complete rout ensued, and most of them were put to the sword, some escaping to Heraclea. The Romans captured most of the elephants and all the baggage'. .

'The Book of Daniel was not written immediately after the Exile. The post-exilic prophets did not know it, for the four horns to which Israel's enemies are compared in Zech. i. 21, have a local meaning, representing the four points of the compass, and do not refer to the successive kingdoms, as in Dan. ii. 29 et seq. The same is the case with the four chariots in Zech. vi. 1 et seq. These passages are not exactly parallel with the predictions in Daniel, but it is also stated in Hag. ii. 6-9 et seq., that within "a little while" the Messianic time will come. And even Ben Sira says expressly (Ecclus. [Sirach] xlix. 15) that he has never found a man who resembled Joseph, a statement he could not have made had he known the extant Book of Daniel, since Daniel is there drawn as a man who, like Joseph, rose to be prime minister by virtue of his ability to interpret dreams.

The Book of Daniel was written during the persecutions of Israel by the Syrian king Antiochus Epiphanes. This assertion is supported by the following data: The kingdom which is symbolized by the he goat (viii. 5 et seq.) is expressly named as the "kingdom of Yawan"—that is, the Grecian kingdom (viii. 21) the great horn being its first king, Alexander the Great (definitely stated in Seder "Olam R. xxx.), and the little horn Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164). This kingdom was to persecute the host of the saints "unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings" (viii. 14, R. V.); that is, "half-days," or 1,150 days; and Epiphanes did, in fact, profane the sanctuary in Jerusalem for about that length of time, from Kislew 15, 168, to Kislew 25,165 (I Macc. i. 57, iv. 52)'. Jewish Encyclopedia

 

I assure you I want neither a savior nor leader. Intellectually, I’m an atheist because religion explains nothing. By temperament I’m an atheist because I feel no need for a god or savior.

 

Or to put another twist on it, nationalism has slaughtered billions and most probably will be the trigger for unleashing our species extinction.

 

And atheism does?

See how that works out for you.

 

For 66 years it has worked out great.

 

See how that works out for you? That reads as a veiled threat. Maybe the Almighty has whispered in your ear as to what’s going to happen to J W when he departs the planet? On the other hand I find the idea of atheisim very odd. How can you deny the existence of something when the very definition of terms such as
‘God’, ‘The Creator’, ‘Our Father’ “Shiva’, ’ etc are meaningless unless those claims are restricted to ‘the unknowable creator’. Often claims to have communicated with such a being are the more dangerous when the speaker believes themselves to be speaking for and on behalf of ‘The Almighty’ and of having been blessed with (cursed with?) God given authority to force others to obey them.

It seams to me many of our species find it difficult to admit ‘I don’t know’ ; both atheists and believers.

 

What a silly question. Atheism is not meant to explain anything. For most, it's a trait, not a belief.

 

The one thing I have in common with other atheists is not having a belief in gods. Other than that, as a group, we'd be like herding cats.

There are reputed to be thousands of gods, but I believe in only one fewer than a Christian.

 

[QUOTE="Dissily On the other hand I find the idea of atheisim very odd. How can you deny the existence of something when the very definition of terms such as
‘God’, ‘The Creator’, ‘Our Father’ “Shiva’, ’ etc are meaningless unless those claims are restricted to ‘the unknowable creator’. Often claims to have communicated with such a being are the more dangerous when the speaker believes themselves to be speaking for and on behalf of ‘The Almighty’ and of having been blessed with (cursed with?) God given authority to force others to obey them.

It seams to me many of our species find it difficult to admit ‘I don’t know’ ; both atheists and believers.[/QUOTE]

That doesn’t preclude the possibility that there is no “unknowable creator” and god, our father, or Shiva are indeed meaningless.

 

Well, arguably three fewer

 

Another valid comparison is a dozen or so, fewer.
Some pray to the saints, lesser Gods.

 

So, you really think that Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews and the God of the armies, actually exists? According to the fairy tale he used to do a lot of yakking with people but he has shut his yap for the past 2,500+ years. He disappeared when the Babylonian Empire collapsed and it is like he croaked.

 

Then perhaps a more sane species will take over the planet.