I hadn’t read Cofnas substack where he exposes the corruption and censorship at Cambridge and other universities and recommend you do
https://t.co/AgDWoI0U9i
It has a long list of examples like this…I only skimmed these first. Only thing I say now is my brain just shuts down on this kind of writing, plagiarized or not. Like I can’t process it… it has no content anyway. I often felt like this in many classes
🚨NEWS: The release of the transcripts around Henry Nowak's murder have revealed that Police Officers went back 6 years in his phone messages to when he was just 12 years old in an attempt to find anything they could use to describe him as a racist
Sickening
I understand that the church later adopted warfare as it integrated with Indo European civilization and ethical system in Rome and among the barbarian tribes
But it’s early history was decidedly pacifist
Tertullian (c. 160–220, On Idolatry 19)
“But now inquiry is made about this point, whether a believer may turn himself unto military service, and whether the military may be admitted unto the faith, even the rank and file, or each inferior grade, to whom there is no necessity for taking part in sacrifices or capital punishments. There is no agreement between the divine and the human sacrament, the standard of Christ and the standard of the devil, the camp of light and the camp of darkness. One soul cannot be due to two masters—God and Cæsar. … But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed; still the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, unbelted every soldier.”
Hippolytus-
“If a catechumen or a believer seeks to become a soldier, they must be rejected, for they have despised God.”
“A soldier of the government must be told not to execute men; if he should be ordered to do it, he shall not do it. He must be told not to take the military oath. If he will not agree, let him be rejected [from the church/baptism]. … A military governor or a magistrate of a city who wears the purple, either let him desist or let him be rejected.”
Lactantius (c. 240–320, Divine Institutes 6.20)
“For when God forbids us to kill, He not only prohibits us from open violence, which is not even allowed by the public laws, but He warns us against the commission of those things which are esteemed lawful among men. Thus it will be neither lawful for a just man to engage in warfare, since his warfare is justice itself, nor to accuse anyone of a capital charge, because it makes no difference whether you put a man to death by word or by the sword, since it is the act of putting to death itself which is prohibited. Therefore, with regard to this precept of God, there ought to be no exception at all; but that it is always unlawful to put to death a man, whom God willed to be a sacred animal [or creature].”
Origen (c. 185–254, Against Celsus)
Christians “no longer take up the sword against nation, nor do we learn war any more, having become children of peace, for the sake of Jesus, who is our leader.” He argued that believers fight for the emperor through prayer rather than arms, and that the Christian lawgiver “altogether forbidden the putting of men to death” and “nowhere teaches that it is right for His own disciples to offer violence to any one, however wicked.”
Justin Martyr (c. 100–165, First Apology / Dialogue with Trypho): “We who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also… willingly die confessing Christ.” And: “We who had been filled with war and mutual slaughter… have… changed the instruments of war, the swords into plows and the spears into farming implements ”
• Cyprian (c. 200–258): Criticized the “bloody horror of camps” and noted that homicide is a crime for individuals but called a virtue when done publicly in war.
• Arnobius (early 4th century): Christians have learned “that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another.”
“The ultimate purpose of freedom of speech is to overturn lies, fraud, and false ideologies. This is precisely what Cofnas was doing”
The US State Department is defending Cofnas. Elections really do have consequences. Very heartening.
imo you literally get that “spark” all over again. everything is a new experience to your kid. seeing a bug? coolest thing ever. eating ice cream. amazing. going for a car ride. painting a picture. even every day normal activities like grocery shopping are an incredible experience with them. holidays like christmas, easter, halloween etc all feel like how they felt like when you were a kid again. everything is exciting again because you are seeing the world for the first time through their eyes
@HomericFuturist It’s funny this argument I see them make like Jesus accepted the soldiers and they converted but so did the whores is that a legit thing too?
This may seem like small ball but you need to grasp what a seismic shift this is
No previous GOP administration would have ever touched Cofnas with a ten foot poll but the Trump admin is offering a full throated defense in the name of free speech
In politics this is a pitch you watch sail by because the political upside of defending Cofnas is basically zero and it could cost you a news cycle, but the Trump admin does it without blinking because it's the right thing to do
You can be frustrated with the foreign policy decisions, but never let anyone lie to you and tell you that there is no difference with Trump in charge
They looked through Henry Nowaks messages when he was 12 years old in a desperate attempt to find anything to paint him as a racist
You really don’t hate them enough
Two years ago today, police say Anthony Brown, 41, robbed a CVS at gunpoint in Saint Helen Island, SC.
Then he murdered a pedestrian, Stephanie Campbell, 33, as he fled the scene.
Brown is still awaiting trial.
The United States Mission to Belgium condemns, in the strongest terms, Ghent University’s retaliation against an American scholar following his accurate whistleblower reporting on academic fraud.
The United States government regularly funds and supports research, academic exchanges, and other engagements with overseas universities. Dishonest, corrupt institutions that engage in, or reward, scapegoating mob behavior are not desirable partners for us. This is particularly true where the purpose and effect of the scapegoating is to punish accurate journalism unearthing academic dishonesty. We are therefore reviewing any relationships we have with Ghent University.
Bad-faith idealogues will try to make this a referendum on the content of Cofnas’s scholarship – or polemical distortions of it. That’s wrong. Free speech means that controversial views are protected. And Cofnas’s views were known to Ghent University when he was hired.
The ultimate purpose of freedom of speech is to overturn lies, fraud, and false ideologies. This is precisely what Cofnas was doing, and precisely the reason his home institution wants to silence him.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.