Reply With QuoteYou don't know what armageddon is?Originally Posted by truthpaste
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I trust you (on this occasion) are correct.
What is 'Armageddon' ???
You don't know what armageddon is?
I was teaching the events of Armageddon as far back as 1981; I want to know what it is to the person who used it?
I hope you were better at it in 1981 than you are now.
I'm sure you are better at your role now than you were 43 years ago.
That's normally how it goes, but on the evidence of your posts here, I hope this is not your peak.
It was obviously used in the context as can be found in dictionaries alongside the original definition. I would be surprised if any other posters were unaware of the secondary meaning. Are you really that insular?
Definitions from 'Oxford Languages' dictionary:
noun
1. As in the New Testament: the last battle between good and evil before the Day of Judgement.
2.The place where the Armageddon will be fought.
a dramatic and catastrophic conflict, especially one seen as likely to destroy the world or the human race.
"nuclear Armageddon"
As both references (1 & 2) grant credibility to the Word of God, I wondered why someone who believes such writings are pure fiction would reference it at all?
The second doesn't give any such credibility. The fact that we use names of the week that reflect the names of Nordic gods doesn't mean we believe in them either.
This place is one fish and loaves thread away from needing a religion board
2. "The place where the Armageddon will be fought"
Where is that stated/ predicted apart from the Bible?
43 years of spouting bilge. You should feel ashamed.
As in the phrase 'nuclear Armageddon', for example, which I quoted previously. Also see the third meaning of the word in Wiktionary.
If you still have any difficulty I won't be submitting any further explanations.
I think the majority of posters understand the word in the context that it was originally raised by the post I responded to. If you don't, that's your shortfall.
All the difficulty is yours, stop digging
Christ, you're hard work. The folk that interact with you must be shattered.All the difficulty is yours, stop digging
Another one from the Truthpaste stable with a fixation on Armageddon?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...nato-alliances
Pete Hegseth, Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense, has attacked several key US alliances such as Nato, allied countries such as Turkey and international institutions such as the United Nations in two recent books, as well as saying US troops should not be bound by the Geneva conventions.
At the same time, the man who would head America’s gigantic military has tied US foreign policy almost entirely to the priority of Israel, a country of which he says: “If you love America, you should love Israel.”
Elsewhere, Hegseth appears to argue that the US military should ignore the Geneva conventions and any international laws governing the conduct of war, and instead “unleash them” to become a “ruthless”, “uncompromising” and “overwhelmingly lethal” force geared to “winning our wars according to our own rules”.
....
Tom Hill, executive director of the Center for Peace and Diplomacy (CPD), told the Guardian that Hegseth’s nomination reflected the fact that for Donald Trump, “one of the bases of support he owes is the Christian nationalist evangelical movement”.
In Hegseth, “what he is offering is Israel policy and a warping of foreign policy around Israel as a reward to this Christian nationalist base,” said Hill.
....
“Our present moment is much like the 11th century,” he writes in AC, adding: “We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians a thousand years ago, we must. We need an American crusade.”
He adds: “We Christians – alongside our Jewish friends and their remarkable army in Israel – need to pick up the sword of unapologetic Americanism and defend ourselves.”
Hegseth continues: “For us as American crusaders, Israel embodies the soul of our American crusade – the ‘why’ to our ‘what’.”
Hegseth concludes: “Faith, family, freedom, and free enterprise; if you love those, learn to love the state of Israel. And then find an arena in which to fight for her.”
Hill said Hegseth’s Christian nationalism, rooted in fundamentalist Christianity, is key to understanding his perspective on Israel.
“He is centering Israel in everything because of theology,” he said. “There’s an eschatology and a prophetic interpretation the Book of Revelations – the Second Coming, Armageddon, the return of Jesus that is really important, and Israel is central to that eschatology.”
....
Hegseth writes in AC that Israel, along with the European far right and Brexit, are among the overseas reservoirs of American values.
“Americanism is alive in Israel, where Benjamin Netanyahu boldly stands against international antisemitism and Islamism,” he writes.
Hegseth continues: “Americanism is alive in the hearts of Brexiters in the United Kingdom who yearn for national sovereignty. Americanism is alive in places such as Poland, which reject the globalist visions of leftist bureaucrats in old Europe.”
Israel, meanwhile, “continues to vanquish its Islamist foes – thanks to the big, beautiful wall and big, beautiful army it has built,” he writes.
Jesus (had it ever existed) would be so proud.
Keep up, it was your Blue side-kick that referenced the Bible's account of Armageddon (Clue: there is no other account), not me; I simply questioned him on it.
And if you are going to mention eschatology and how Israel fits into the equation, try and get a grasp of the subject otherwise we end up with a massive cut and paste that proves you don't know which way is up.
Nice effort though.
Tom Hill mentioned it. He was quoted. It is just a thumbnail sketch of some of the reasons for Christian Zionist's extreme racist and reactionary views.
Useful background I thought - and enough of a grasp of the subject for anyone. It was a nice effort though.
Truthpaste must be creaming over the prospect of Hegseth and the rest of Trump’s administration coming into power.
Does anyone know why the States has this two month delay between election and inauguration?
Presumably another "balance of powers" safeguard, but it does create a strange period such as we are in now.
I'm sure other countries do it and power vacuums are normal in continental Europe with PR negotiations but it does always strike me as strange
Lots of these things are from days of stagecoaches in the late 18th century. States would send electors to report back with who the state wanted as president, and it would take weeks do the counting, traveling, meeting, before the president is even confirmed.
Can you not wait for the Annoying Orange to get into power?
Very interesting!
Quite looking forward to it now tbh.
But irrespective of that, it's a curious delay that I don't think many other countries do?
