Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Antichrist My Butt!

This is a thread/topic I started yesterday on ATS (abovetopsecret.com) on the Conspiracies in Religion board:

First I need to point out that, though it's almost never mentioned anywhere, Islam has its version of the "Antichrist" as well, thereby making the difference between Christianity and Islam primarily insignificant, as I see it. But for now we'll go with the Biblical/"Christian" version:

The reason why the whole AC "prophecy" routine is the most laughable notion in human history is because of the strict specificity of the things that are supposed to transpire in the alleged "End Times." If there is to be only one huge leader of (a) nation(s) to emerge, wouldn't that person be intelligent enough to avoid the specific pitfalls outlined in the Bible so as not to be labeled the "Antichrist?" For examples, wouldn't he or she have nothing to do with, say, a 7-year peace treaty with Israel or the building of a "Third Temple?"

Someone help me out here. Please list as many other specific things or events that are alleged "prophecy" of the "Antichrist," and for every one of them, I can retort with the obvious: Someone intelligent enough to actually become that (hypothetical) level of a powerful leader would be equally intelligent enough to be able to steer clear of anything that could even vaguely smell of religious "prophecy."

Of course it doesn't matter what specific events accompany the (at least hypothetical) arrival of a very powerfully messianic figure. Whoever would be the first to introduce anything of verifiably intelligently nonhuman origin is, to put it scientifically, f-ed. Billions of Christians, Muslims and others would be freaking out and screaming "Antichrist!!!" no matter what. Brilliant. Gotta love the results of hardcore brainwashing... There's your conspiracy in religion. It's religion, or the vast majority of it, itself.

In reality or true sanity, of course (and if possible), the proof of that which is truly messianic (and nothing or no one else) is or would be in the "pudding" - the actual policies of love, forgiveness, truth, justice etc. There would (or should) be none of that most supremely cynical belief of all time that someone could actually be loved/admired and, somehow, also be evil. Real love involves give and take, humility, honesty etc. It's not as complicated as the religious nuts, who simply lack enough love themselves, try to make it.

No comments: