Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
DarkHunter

Mass protest in Iran

125 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender
32 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. true.. but how many churches preach that doctrine ? The Papacy - for example - has been continuously 'interpreting' the bible for centuries. 

There are all those weird rules in the Old Testament about not mixing yarns, or planting wheat next to aubergines or whatever. Or even the one about not working on a Sunday. I doubt that ANY christian communities practice them, and yet they are in the bible ? 

The Christian Zionists may practice them, it may be part of their plan to bring about Armageddon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
10 hours ago, and then said:

Your citation of John is puzzling to me.  Do you equate Christ's admonition to His followers about ignoring or straying from their faithful following to a command for them to kill those who don't believe?  If so, I'll need a little more input.  Where did He tell them to kill those who do not accept Him as God/Savior?

In fact John is the main argument generally put forwards by heretic burners... Those vines that do not stay with me should be burned.  I would have thought it pretty obvious and literal.  As for Jesus telling people to kill those who reject him, yeah, right there in John 15:5-6, in his typically occulted language.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
8 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

In fact John is the main argument generally put forwards by heretic burners... Those vines that do not stay with me should be burned.  I would have thought it pretty obvious and literal.  As for Jesus telling people to kill those who reject him, yeah, right there in John 15:5-6, in his typically occulted language.

 

That's pretty nebulous, @Alchopwn. Can you give me any example of any major - or even minor - branch of Christianity that follows that interpretation ? I don't think you can ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
10 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

In fact John is the main argument generally put forwards by heretic burners... Those vines that do not stay with me should be burned.  I would have thought it pretty obvious and literal.  As for Jesus telling people to kill those who reject him, yeah, right there in John 15:5-6, in his typically occulted language.

 

John 15:5-6 5"I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

That is telling people to kill those who stray from the teachings ? I don't see it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
1 minute ago, Habitat said:

John 15:5-6 5"I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

That is telling people to kill those who stray from the teachings ? I don't see it.

Well, when one of the branches/followers is with /faithful to jesus and bears fruit everything is coming up grapes, but when it is away from jesus it bears nothing, and it is beholden on the cultivators to burn the useless faggots (the technical term for bent sticks from grape vines, hot here used in the anti-homosexual connotation) of the vine for they are heretics.  It isn't a difficult concept.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
12 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

That's pretty nebulous, @Alchopwn. Can you give me any example of any major - or even minor - branch of Christianity that follows that interpretation ? I don't think you can ? 

Actually it was cited as one of the scriptural justifications for the formation of the Inquisition in 1229 under Gregory IX I believe.  Hence the specific use of fire to remove heretics.

Edited by Alchopwn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
22 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Actually it was cited as one of the scriptural justifications for the formation of the Inquisition in 1229 under Gregory IX I believe.  Hence the specific use of fire to remove heretics.

1229 ? Really ? Well, that is very interesting. 

OK, permit me to re-phrase the question..... 

Can you give me a single example of any Christian priest urging that non-Christians be killed purely for being non-Christians in the last 800 years ? (with the possible exception of the Westboro Baptist Church ? But then, they want to burn EVERYBODY). 

Edited by RoofGardener

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
48 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Well, when one of the branches/followers is with /faithful to jesus and bears fruit everything is coming up grapes, but when it is away from jesus it bears nothing, and it is beholden on the cultivators to burn the useless faggots (the technical term for bent sticks from grape vines, hot here used in the anti-homosexual connotation) of the vine for they are heretics.  It isn't a difficult concept.

It appears you think the Inquisition deeming it so, makes it so ? Anything else about the Inquisitions thinking you agree with ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
8 hours ago, crookedspiral said:

Every doctrine of the Bible is the teaching of God and therefore requires full agreement.

I disagree.  The OT was CLEARLY written to the Jews.  The unifying thread was the advent of Messiah.  The NT was written to whoever would believe in Christ as Lord.  It also presages Christ's return.  Nowhere that I am aware of did Christ demand worship or the deaths of those who refused.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Alchopwn said:

In fact John is the main argument generally put forwards by heretic burners... Those vines that do not stay with me should be burned.  I would have thought it pretty obvious and literal.  As for Jesus telling people to kill those who reject him, yeah, right there in John 15:5-6, in his typically occulted language.

 

That may be your interpretation but I've never seen anyone else read it that way.  The point He was making was that those who did not believe ultimately would be disposed of like dead vines and branches.  That WILL happen when He returns.  As I said, NOWHERE does He demand that His followers kill nonbelievers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 hour ago, Alchopwn said:

Well, when one of the branches/followers is with /faithful to jesus and bears fruit everything is coming up grapes, but when it is away from jesus it bears nothing, and it is beholden on the cultivators to burn the useless faggots (the technical term for bent sticks from grape vines, hot here used in the anti-homosexual connotation) of the vine for they are heretics.  It isn't a difficult concept.

Yes it is. Because John is talking in metaphors. The burn vines could just relate to their destiny in hell if they do not follow his path. Or it could refer to the emptiness and barrenness of life without Jesus. Like I said earlier; can you give me ANY examples of Christian congregations that actually FOLLOW your interpretation ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Nontheless, you failed to respond to THAT post :) 

I did respond. You just don't like that response. Which is completely inconsequential.

If I ever do see anyone on here actually defending the Iranian regime, I'll be sure to point them to it :sleepy:

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
11 minutes ago, and then said:

I disagree.  The OT was CLEARLY written to the Jews.  The unifying thread was the advent of Messiah.  The NT was written to whoever would believe in Christ as Lord.  It also presages Christ's return.  Nowhere that I am aware of did Christ demand worship or the deaths of those who refused.  

Perhaps.However, in Matthew 5:17, we have "... "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.", suggesting that Jesus confirmed the validity of the Old Testament. (or rather, the Tanahk), which causes a wee bit of a dilemma. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 minute ago, Setton said:

I did respond. You just don't like that response. Which is completely inconsequential.

If I ever do see anyone on here actually defending the Iranian regime, I'll be sure to point them to it :sleepy:

 

Well, what's WRONG with the Iranian regime ? They just want a space where they can practice their religion undisturbed. In what way is Iran worse than Saudi Arabia or Pakistan ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, what's WRONG with the Iranian regime ? They just want a space where they can practice their religion undisturbed. In what way is Iran worse than Saudi Arabia or Pakistan ? 

I don't know much about Pakistan but I don't see much difference between Iran and the Saudis, other than Iran openly supports terrorist groups. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Yes it is. Because John is talking in metaphors. The burn vines could just relate to their destiny in hell if they do not follow his path. Or it could refer to the emptiness and barrenness of life without Jesus. Like I said earlier; can you give me ANY examples of Christian congregations that actually FOLLOW your interpretation ? 

Is it not enough that a great many people were strangled to death, their faces left black and their tongues swollen in death rictus, and then burned as a public spectacle following the Catholic interpretation of this scripture, as it applied to the Office of the Holy Inquisition ?  Just because you don't like the answer, doesn't mean it isn't valid.

Edited by Alchopwn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
5 hours ago, and then said:

That may be your interpretation but I've never seen anyone else read it that way.  The point He was making was that those who did not believe ultimately would be disposed of like dead vines and branches.  That WILL happen when He returns.  As I said, NOWHERE does He demand that His followers kill nonbelievers.

You need to study the history of Christianity with a more critical eye my friend.  It also wouldn't hurt if you were fluent in Church Latin.  The fact is that the Office of the Holy Inquisition used this passage as part of its overall justification for the disposal of heretics.  It may well be that during the earlier persecutions of heresy that it was used as well, but of this matter I am less certain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
6 hours ago, Habitat said:

It appears you think the Inquisition deeming it so, makes it so ? Anything else about the Inquisitions thinking you agree with ?

My effort was to point out that the Inquisition used John 15:5-6 as a justification for turning those they convicted of heresy over to secular authorities to be strangled and then their bodies burned.  I would also point out that it is manifestly simple to make the Bible justify an vast number of criminal and inhuman acts if one has a mind to do so.  I believe the Jesuits call the practice "casuistry".  As Matthew 7:15-20 tells us, so I apply the message to the entire accursed hand-me-down fraud of a religion, for it has been far too long since it bore any good fruit.  It is a bitter and toxic well to sup from, and I choose not to do so, lest I too become tainted and unwell.

Edited by Alchopwn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

Iran has done a complete internet blackout of the country.

I wish the protesters the best. Brave souls.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 11/18/2019 at 6:52 AM, DarkHunter said:

if the stuff coming out is true the protesters have burnt down most if not all of the banks in the province, government buildings have been burned down,

Just a thought, no internet, are there any corroborating  satellite pictures?  Iranians can't block those.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
2 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

My effort was to point out that the Inquisition used John 15:5-6 as a justification for turning those they convicted of heresy over to secular authorities to be strangled and then their bodies burned.

Realizing that Wikipedia is not always reliable, here is something that might be of interest to RoofGardner..  It is at least within the last 400 years.

Another example of the persecution of heretics under Protestant rule was the execution of the Boston martyrs in 1659, 1660, and 1661. These executions resulted from the actions of the Anglican Puritans, who at that time wielded political as well as ecclesiastic control in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. At the time, the colony leaders were apparently hoping to achieve their vision of a "purer absolute theocracy" within their colony .[citation needed] As such, they perceived the teachings and practices of the rival Quaker sect as heretical, even to the point where laws were passed and executions were performed with the aim of ridding their colony of such perceived "heresies".

The Boston martyrs is the name given in Quaker tradition[1] to the three English members of the Society of Friends, Marmaduke Stephenson, William Robinson and Mary Dyer, and to the Friend William Leddra of Barbados, who were condemned to death and executed by public hanging for their religious beliefs under the legislature of the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1659, 1660 and 1661. Several other Friends lay under sentence of death at Boston in the same period, but had their punishments commuted to that of being whipped out of the colony from town to town.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
On 11/16/2019 at 4:50 PM, DarkHunter said:

On friday the Iranian regime increased the cost of gas/petrol by about 50% which has caused wide spread protest throughout Iran.  Protesters have blocked streets, set fire to police stations, held rallies, ect.  The Iranian regime has seemed to of gone for a rather heavy handed response with already using gun men to fire into the protesters.

So far casualties arent really known but a handful of protesters have already being reported as dead with some riot police being killed also.

https://mobile.twitter.com/no_itsmyturn/status/1195707204063641603

https://mobile.twitter.com/no_itsmyturn/status/1195699723744751617

https://mobile.twitter.com/no_itsmyturn/status/1195699341576552449

Those are just a few tweets on the protests that are a lot more from various sources but no mainstream media seems to of picked up on the story yet.

 

Yay! Another great result gleaned from crippling US sanctions.. obviously in an attempt to 'Save the Iranian People from their Evil Regime ©'!

After the US is done with Iran, the people will finally be free to implement a wonderful democracy and gain stability and prosperity, just like all other ME nations that went before her.

Just like the secular days of Mossadeq! Oh wait..


On a more serious note; I think there isnt a destabilization on this earth where a prominent US hand is not present. From Eastern Europe to the Middle East to South America.. Cant wait 'till the chickens come home to roost, until the great 'Defender of Peace' gets a taste of her own vile medicine. By any measure, the US represents the main threat to world peace by way of unilateral economic-, information-, and military warfare, disregarding all international law.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
41 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Just a thought, no internet, are there any corroborating  satellite pictures?  Iranians can't block those.

There probably are satellites pictures somewhere but I havent seen any.  The biggest problem is just having a commercial satellite in the right place at the right time with the right conditions overhead.  

Despite only have about 5% internet access in Iran some pictures are making it out and they have shown burnt structures and vehicles among other things.

Just cause I'm lazy I'm just adding this in even though its unrelated but it seems the initial claim of a 50% increase in gas/petrol may be incorrect.  The Iranian government said it was a 50% increase but according to people in Iran they say the increase in price was actually 200%.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
3 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

My effort was to point out that the Inquisition used John 15:5-6 as a justification for turning those they convicted of heresy over to secular authorities to be strangled and then their bodies burned.  I would also point out that it is manifestly simple to make the Bible justify an vast number of criminal and inhuman acts if one has a mind to do so.  I believe the Jesuits call the practice "casuistry".  As Matthew 7:15-20 tells us, so I apply the message to the entire accursed hand-me-down fraud of a religion, for it has been far too long since it bore any good fruit.  It is a bitter and toxic well to sup from, and I choose not to do so, lest I too become tainted and unwell.

Well, as Shakespeare noted, the "devil can cite scripture for his purpose". And particularly OT scripture. But you are drawing a long bow making that out to be an incitement to kill anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
25 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Just cause I'm lazy I'm just adding this in even though its unrelated but it seems the initial claim of a 50% increase in gas/petrol may be incorrect.  The Iranian government said it was a 50% increase but according to people in Iran they say the increase in price was actually 200%.  

From what I've seen it's effectively rationing. 

Price has increased by 50% for the first 60 litres per month then by 100% for anything over that limit. That might account for the 50 and 200% figures. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.