Nelson Mandela RIP
That and the Church St, Amanzimtoti and Beach Front bombings were in the 1980s when Mandela was behind bars and I think we have already established he wasn't commanding operations from prison!
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,383
Likes: 0
From: Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,383
Likes: 0
From: Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,383
Likes: 0
From: Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes
I've seen Christianity mentioned earlier in the thread.
I can recall Jesus kicking off in the market, pushing stalls over and generally making a right old nuisance of himself. When he was asked why he would do such a thing he spoke about using reasonable force to achieve an objective if it were the right thing to do. Regardless of your views on religion and all that, it is a good message.
In Mandela's case I am sure the decisions he made and some of the actions he took would have had a significantly detrimental effect on others. There have been suggestions that he may have been indirectly involved in the deaths of a handful of people.
But I find it hard to accept that he ever used anything more than the minimum required to move things towards the good outcome he desired. Mandela could not have achieved what he did without causing some disruption. I am sure we have all made mistakes and as a human he was certainly not infallible.
But there is no doubt in my mind that he was one of the greatest human beings to have ever walked this planet and he leaves the world in a far better way than when he joined it.
So RIP from me.
I can recall Jesus kicking off in the market, pushing stalls over and generally making a right old nuisance of himself. When he was asked why he would do such a thing he spoke about using reasonable force to achieve an objective if it were the right thing to do. Regardless of your views on religion and all that, it is a good message.
In Mandela's case I am sure the decisions he made and some of the actions he took would have had a significantly detrimental effect on others. There have been suggestions that he may have been indirectly involved in the deaths of a handful of people.
But I find it hard to accept that he ever used anything more than the minimum required to move things towards the good outcome he desired. Mandela could not have achieved what he did without causing some disruption. I am sure we have all made mistakes and as a human he was certainly not infallible.
But there is no doubt in my mind that he was one of the greatest human beings to have ever walked this planet and he leaves the world in a far better way than when he joined it.
So RIP from me.
Good to see Chinese hypocrisy is alive and well. Condemning apartheid while maintaining a continued oppression of Tibet and its people! I maybe wrong, but I think Mandela would have liked to have had the Dalai Lama at any memorial service!
I never knew that before. I remember reading bits from the Bible in Travelodge (or was it in Holiday Inn room?
I can't remember that bit), but I don't recall reading about him kicking off in any market.
Before I'm labelled as one I'm not a Christian fundamentalist by the way... just go to church once in a while.
There was a market held in the temple and Jesus took offence to people buying and selling there. He spoke about using reasonable force where necessary. It's a good message (Matthew 21, had to look that bit up).
Before I'm labelled as one I'm not a Christian fundamentalist by the way... just go to church once in a while.
Before I'm labelled as one I'm not a Christian fundamentalist by the way... just go to church once in a while.
Apologies for going off topic.
I've read the New international passages back through John and Matthew and cannot see reference to that in set text. I have read a version where it states specifically where he did I am assuming it is a modern simplified one I have seen it written.
The text implies in the NIV that Jesus was really upset but reasonable force was used - but it doesn't state that.
Unfortunately the bible has been reproduced in so many different ways with quite marked changes in the text that there can be confusion between the exact meanings, though this interpretation is the most commonly accepted view of this text.
I've read the New international passages back through John and Matthew and cannot see reference to that in set text. I have read a version where it states specifically where he did I am assuming it is a modern simplified one I have seen it written.
The text implies in the NIV that Jesus was really upset but reasonable force was used - but it doesn't state that.
Unfortunately the bible has been reproduced in so many different ways with quite marked changes in the text that there can be confusion between the exact meanings, though this interpretation is the most commonly accepted view of this text.
Last edited by thenewgalaxy; Dec 10, 2013 at 10:38 PM. Reason: Clarified point
I thought he whipped out an AK47 from under his sackcloth and mowed them all down in a hail of bullets.
'That'll teach them" he muttered, as he skulked off to Mary Magdelene's to get lashed on her home brew mead and grab a crafty fondle.
'That'll teach them" he muttered, as he skulked off to Mary Magdelene's to get lashed on her home brew mead and grab a crafty fondle.
Last edited by jonc; Dec 10, 2013 at 11:05 PM.



Hard act to follow.

