Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 12:14 pm**

Recently our local retard posted a thread claiming that Napoleon was “the Greatest Man who Ever Lived”. Based on his history we all presume that he named Napoleon because he caused so many deaths due to the wars he caused or started and his general policies and leadership principles.

I’m not sure Napoleon deserves this honor. There are many other tyrants and mass murders who have inflicted more horror on humanity. Another poster suggested Genghis Khan, and he’s definitely “in the running” but I’m sure if we put our minds together and work as a team we can find the TRULY GREATEST man. Let’s explore some options and discuss further. Your own suggestions are of course welcome.

*Hitler is of course the first to come to mind… I mean he actively sought to exterminate an entire ethnic group/religion from the face of the planet. That said, he may be too obvious and he really failed to accomplish his goal in the end.

*Stalin is another well known contender. He established the Gulag system and the modern idea of Secret Police. He did a great job cementing the Soviet Gov’t in place, so you might be able to credit him for the deaths of those under future Soviet regimes.

*Mao may not have been as outright vicious as the first two… he really just wanted order and stability and obedience and wasn’t necessarily actively seeking to commit mass genocide of entire ethnic groups. That said, he was more successful than Stalin and Hitler… and you can argue that accomplishment trumps dreams/goals every day.

*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

*Other… there are likely other good candidates…. who do you think is deserving?

*Cats. ‘Nuff Said.

Discuss

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 12:28 pm**

Hitler was an under achiever.

I change my vote to Atilla the Hun.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 12:41 pm**

One religious leader and a bunch military leaders? It's probably the list CC deserves but it's a pretty uninspiring list of options.

Mohammad? Budda? Zarathustra? Alexander the great? Leonardo DaVinci? The unnamed caveman who invented the wheel? Kenneth Copeland (for Hitred)? Einstein? Mahatma Gandhi? John Wayne (for Confed)? CàiLún? Euclid? Putin (for Saxi)? Thomas Jefferson? Your wife's boyfriend (for Jim)? Mahavira? Gwen Shamblin (for bigtoughralf)?

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 12:46 pm**

Actually the wheel wasn't invented by a caveman. It was invented around 3000 BC, apparently at about the same time horseriding appeared.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 1:29 pm**

jonesthecurl wrote:Actually the wheel wasn't invented by a caveman. It was invented around 3000 BC, apparently at about the same time horseriding appeared.

Amber Heard (for Jonesy)

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 2:01 pm**

If we're going to play that game...

Gandhi

Racist pedophile who's now widely known as a martyr and a hero of peace.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 6:49 pm**

Should probably add 'Gord' to the list so Canadians can have someone to vote for.

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 9:32 pm**

jonesthecurl wrote:Actually the wheel wasn't invented by a caveman. It was invented around 3000 BC, apparently at about the same time horseriding appeared.

I don’t trust your “source”.

You are not JP4 and you provided no link and failed to copy&paste from Wiki.

But fat FAIL!

Posted: **Fri May 05, 2023 9:34 pm**

mookiemcgee wrote:One religious leader and a bunch military leaders? It's probably the list CC deserves but it's a pretty uninspiring list of options.

Mohammad? Budda? Zarathustra? Alexander the great? Leonardo DaVinci? The unnamed caveman who invented the wheel? Kenneth Copeland (for Hitred)? Einstein? Mahatma Gandhi? John Wayne (for Confed)? CàiLún? Euclid? Putin (for Saxi)? Thomas Jefferson? Your wife's boyfriend (for Jim)? Mahavira? Gwen Shamblin (for bigtoughralf)?

Maybe Confed-Nazi should get the honors?

I’m sure there are many who went home and shot themselves in the head after listening to him ramble his shit in person.

Posted: **Sat May 06, 2023 12:03 am**

For those with only short term memory, we went down this path about one year ago:

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=237924&p=5252011&hilit=Greatest+Man+to+Walk#p5252011

Today,The Greatest Man to walk the Face of The Earth Died!!!
Postby ConfederateSS on Thu May 05, 2022 1:19 am

On display there is the combined wisdom from jimb and ConfedSS.

Posted: **Sat May 06, 2023 12:21 pm**

Maxleod wrote:If we're going to play that game...

Gandhi

Racist pedophile who's now widely known as a martyr and a hero of peace.

Mother Theresa.

Pretended to be a friend of the poor and sick but actually spent (estimates vary) less than 20% of donations received on taking care of the poor and sick. Probably 80% of her donations went to pushing anti-abortion and other conservative issues in the Church.

Posted: **Sat May 06, 2023 8:19 pm**

When Ma Teresa died, the joke was that Elton John (who'd released a version of 'Candle in the WInd' on Diana's death), was now going to release 'Sandals in the Bin'.

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 8:19 am**

jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 12:53 pm**

jimboston wrote:
jonesthecurl wrote:Actually the wheel wasn't invented by a caveman. It was invented around 3000 BC, apparently at about the same time horseriding appeared.

I don’t trust your “source”.

You are not JP4 and you provided no link and failed to copy&paste from Wiki.

But fat FAIL!

I think jimb MEANT

"BUTT fat fail"

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 6:02 pm**

I am the greatest.

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 7:06 pm**

saxitoxin wrote:
jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

I wonder if jimb understands the meaning of non-Canonical:

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

Simply put, non-canonical means that it did not meet the criteria as a REAL Gospel. It was rejected, along with MANY MANY other books, many CALLED Gospels. It is not the word of Jesus or in the BIBLE. Thus it is worthy of being ignored. That is all the refutation needed.

jimb can IGNORE this quote, TOO:
definition of non-canonical

not part of a set of works or subjects that are generally agreed to be good, important, and worth studying

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 8:38 pm**

jusplay4fun wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

I wonder if jimb understands the meaning of non-Canonical:

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

Simply put, non-canonical means that it did not meet the criteria as a REAL Gospel. It was rejected, along with MANY MANY other books, many CALLED Gospels. It is not the word of Jesus or in the BIBLE. Thus it is worthy of being ignored. That is all the refutation needed.

jimb can IGNORE this quote, TOO:
definition of non-canonical

not part of a set of works or subjects that are generally agreed to be good, important, and worth studying

It was only discovered in 1945 and translation wasn't publicly released until the 70s. It took hundreds of years for the canon gospels to become canon. Thomas hasn't even been known for 80 years.

Thomas has a lot more going for it than Revelation. No less than Thomas Jefferson rejected the authenticity of the Book of Revelation, and even Martin Luther was skeptical. IIRC the Antioch Orthodox Church didn't include Revelation in their Bible until the 1400s or something and only then for political reasons.

Posted: **Sun May 07, 2023 10:10 pm**

Many early Christian sects were aware of and accepted The Gospel of Thomas as authentic Christian scripture, despite its unorthodox, radical doctrine, igniting an ideological battle in and around the Thomasine communities of the ancient world. This ideological war is still raging and conflict renewed and amplified with the discoveries of the Greek and Coptic texts of The Gospel of Thomas in the first half of the 20th Century. Since its discovery, The Gospel of Thomas has presented scholars with ferocious debate, as serious probability exists that Thomas preserves an older tradition of the historical Jesus than that of the Synoptic Gospels.

https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/v ... ontext=lux

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2023 2:14 am**

turns out jesus faked his death and lived to 106 in Japan... (also non-cannon/non-fiction)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 165354242/

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2023 3:35 am**

Hey Saxi, do you think Matthew 10:34 might fit in here?

mookiemcgee wrote:turns out jesus faked his death and lived to 106 in Japan... (also non-cannon/non-fiction)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 165354242/

Seems fairly probable, a missionary showed up.
Tried to say, "I'm here in the name of Jesus."
Local guy recorded the event in a local language. "Met foreigner today named Jesus."

Kind of like when the guy who named this forum dropped by trying to call everyone, "Son of a bitch." but kept using dog instead.

Recently people have difficulty telling the difference between members here.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2023 4:14 pm**

2dimes wrote:Hey Saxi, do you think Matthew 10:34 might fit in here?

mookiemcgee wrote:turns out jesus faked his death and lived to 106 in Japan... (also non-cannon/non-fiction)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 165354242/

Seems fairly probable, a missionary showed up.
Tried to say, "I'm here in the name of Jesus."
Local guy recorded the event in a local language. "Met foreigner today named Jesus."

Kind of like when the guy who named this forum dropped by trying to call everyone, "Son of a bitch." but kept using dog instead.

Recently people have difficulty telling the difference between members here.

Yes, all these non-Canon Gospels are TRUE and many persons died (as Martyrs) trying to cover up a LIE. RIGHT. And all the prophecies of a Messiah (Anointed, Christ, from the Greek) in the Old Testament are false, too. And this Japanese story is based on ....what? A legend? I did not read something to offer anything that even resembles possible evidence or validation. Clothing? And not from some other random Jew who moved there? 2dimes story or theory seems more plausible.

As far as the "Gospel" of Thomas, there are many holes in the entire story to make it believable. It is NOT a Gospel and is NOT Canon.

Read more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

and here:
https://crossexamined.org/why-the-gospel-of-thomas-isnt-in-the-bible/

Of all these “suppressed” Gospels, far and away the poster child is the Gospel of Thomas. Liberal scholars such as John Dominic Crossan and Elaine Pagels faun over this work. The Jesus Seminar even published a book titled The Five Gospels, which includes the canonical four-plus Thomas.

Yet there’s a bit of irony here. If these scholars would treat the canonical Gospels with half the amount of charity they give to Thomas, they’d all be Christians! Instead, they date Thomas very early and the canonical Gospels late. They claim Thomas’ view of Jesus is reliable, while the canonical Gospels contain myths and legends.

By contrast, I’m going to demonstrate, in the remaining pace, that the Gospel of Thomas is unreliable, was never considered as Scripture by the early church, and thus shouldn’t be included in our canon.

and as far as Mother Teresa, I will quote from that PRO-Church website (NOT..!..) Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa

Criticism
Main article: Criticism of Mother Teresa
According to a paper by Canadian academics Serge Larivée, Geneviève Chénard and Carole Sénéchal, Mother Teresa's clinics received millions of dollars in donations but lacked medical care, systematic diagnosis, necessary nutrition and sufficient analgesics for those in pain;[120] in the opinion of the three academics, "Mother Teresa believed the sick must suffer like Christ on the cross".[121] It was said that the additional money might have transformed the health of the city's poor by creating advanced palliative care facilities.[122][123]

One of Mother Teresa's most outspoken critics was English journalist and antitheist Christopher Hitchens, host of the documentary Hell's Angel (1994) and author of the essay The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice (1995) who wrote in a 2003 article: "This returns us to the medieval corruption of the church, which sold indulgences to the rich while preaching hellfire and continence to the poor. [Mother Teresa] was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction."[124] He accused her of hypocrisy for choosing advanced treatment for her heart condition.[125][126] Hitchens said that "her intention was not to help people", and that she lied to donors about how their contributions were used. "It was by talking to her that I discovered, and she assured me, that she wasn't working to alleviate poverty", he said, "She was working to expand the number of Catholics. She said, 'I'm not a social worker. I don't do it for this reason. I do it for Christ. I do it for the church'".[127] Although Hitchens thought he was the only witness called by the Holy See, Aroup Chatterjee (author of Mother Teresa: The Untold Story) was also called to present evidence opposing Mother Teresa's beatification and canonisation.[128]

In 1994, Mother Teresa argued that the sexual abuse allegations against Jesuit priest Donald McGuire were untrue. When he was convicted of sexually molesting multiple children in 2006, Mother Teresa's defense of him was criticised.[129][130]

Abortion-rights groups have also criticised Mother Teresa's stance against abortion and contraception.[131][132][133]

I am sure that Christopher Hitchens and abortion supporters LOVE Mother Teresa and look at the evidence very impartially. NO WAY.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2023 5:13 pm**

jusplay4fun wrote:For those with only short term memory, we went down this path about one year ago:

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=237924&p=5252011&hilit=Greatest+Man+to+Walk#p5252011

Today,The Greatest Man to walk the Face of The Earth Died!!!
Postby ConfederateSS on Thu May 05, 2022 1:19 am

On display there is the combined wisdom from jimb and ConfedSS.

Pretty sure Confart doesn't read any of the responses and just reposts his drivel since no one will listen to him in real life.

Posted: **Sat May 13, 2023 8:55 am**

jusplay4fun wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

I wonder if jimb understands the meaning of non-Canonical:

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

Simply put, non-canonical means that it did not meet the criteria as a REAL Gospel. It was rejected, along with MANY MANY other books, many CALLED Gospels. It is not the word of Jesus or in the BIBLE. Thus it is worthy of being ignored. That is all the refutation needed.

jimb can IGNORE this quote, TOO:
definition of non-canonical

not part of a set of works or subjects that are generally agreed to be good, important, and worth studying

You might want to pay attention to who is typing what here.
You seem to be getting me and Saxi confused lately.

Saxi made the reference to Canon… not me.

FRM

Posted: **Sun May 14, 2023 7:26 am**

saxitoxin wrote:
jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

You can’t really pin those 188,000 deaths on Jesus because it was 700 years before he was born.

Of course the whole idea of him being conceived and born makes no sense if he is “part” of the holy trinity…. I’d think the Trinity would’ve exists forever right? Also, being “God” you’d think time really would have no function or consequence… so maybe he should get those deaths added to his tally?

Religion is fun… it allows you to win any argument because logic means nothing when you have superpowers!

Posted: **Sun May 14, 2023 10:49 pm**

jimboston wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
jimboston wrote:*Jesus is some ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. Sure he talked about “Peace and Love” and all that Hippy Shit… but if you credit him for all the atrocities committed “In His Name” he would win the honor by far. Inquisitions, wars, genocides… His Name has delivered a\on all accounts!

In the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Jesus clarifies the mission:

Jesus said, "Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war."

Jesus was not here to bring harmony and love. Jesus was here to spread the message knowing it would be resisted. And this resistance would have to be overcome ... by hook or by crook. This was foretold in Psalms II; those who seek freedom from Heaven will be destroyed while the One who is enthroned watches, laughing.

In 701 BC a Ravager, possibly the archangel Azrael, descended to Earth and single-handedly killed 188,000 Baal worshippers (2 Kings).

You can’t really pin those 188,000 deaths on Jesus because it was 700 years before he was born.

Of course the whole idea of him being conceived and born makes no sense if he is “part” of the holy trinity…. I’d think the Trinity would’ve exists forever right? Also, being “God” you’d think time really would have no function or consequence… so maybe he should get those deaths added to his tally?

Religion is fun… it allows you to win any argument because logic means nothing when you have superpowers!

But Christ is one dimension of the Triune God, and angels are messengers of the Triune God, and Christ asserts He existed before birth. In John 8:58, Jesus says He existed at least several thousand years before birth:

Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.

"I Am" is also the term the Triune God uses to refer to Himself. (Exodus 3:14 "I Am Who I Am!") So, Jesus appears to be claiming that He is I Am. And if He is I Am, then Azrael is His messenger. Which is easy to imagine because Jesus also claims -- when Peter draws his sword to attack the Roman guards -- that He could take personal command of more than 72,000 combat angels (Matthew 26:53) at any point!

Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?"

If each angel had the killing potential of Azrael, 12 legions should be able to kill 13.5 billion people.

At least that's how I understand it. Where's DY?

Conquer Club

Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?

Re: Who is the “Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”?