Revelation

Louis_Cypher
BloggerSuperfan
Louis_Cypher's picture
Posts: 529
Joined: 2008-03-22
User is offlineOffline
Revelation

All religions can be reduced in essence to revelation, that is to say, one person communing with ‘god’ or his agents to gain knowledge. A religion may be based on a singular revelation, or on a series of revelations from a string of ‘prophets’. Revelation is then passed down as oral tradition, which becomes written tradition, or, as in more ‘modern’ situations, passed directly to written tradition.

 


My question would be, is revelation a valid source of knowledge?

What differentiates revelation from imagination or delusion? LC >;-}>

 

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

And no, Jews don't do the "sins of the fathers" thing.  We're all born -- you included -- without any kind of "original sin".  What you do wrong is up to you to fix, what your parents do wrong is up to them.  If you have children, their mistakes are theirs to deal with.

We're not Christians ...

Again, note the difference.

"Social rules" - put together by a society where the members a bound by them  and rule breakers are punished for breaking them.

"God rules " put together by a capricious being who is not bound by them.

Oh wait...you worship God but you aren't bound by his rules either?

Make up your mind please.

What's the difference between "Social Rules" and "G-d's Rules"?  Or are you saying that since G-d said "Do not murder" that murder is "Okay"

I'd really like to understand which "rules" we're talking about here, because the concept of "We get to ignore whatever your god said" seems to be a very common one and I'm trying to figure out if that means you get to rob, murder, rape, perjure, etc. because G-d said you shouldn't.

I'd also like to know how "Might Makes Right" is okay for people (that's the only way to enforce social rules ...) and not for some abstract entity called "G-d".

"Might Makes Right" truly is =the= only morality under Atheism.  Some day I'll get you to understand that and then maybe you'll decide it sucks more than you'd like to have pretended it didn't.

God says "do not murder" then command murder and performs it himself so he apparently thinks murder is OK (when it's by him or for him).

"We get to ignore whatever God said" - Why are you addressing this to me instead of the Christians and Jews who live like this? You guys have forgiveness and atonement and don't need to live with consequences.

You have no knowledge of how the law works - that's obvious. The laws of society manage to protect both perpetrator and victim because we don't use "might makes right". the majority are also bound by thoise laws and agree to the consequences - something God and his followers doesn't feel the need to do.

Are you defending your God so fervently because you are aware of his moral shortcomings as compared to atheists?

 

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:So,

FurryCatHerder wrote:

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

And no, Jews don't do the "sins of the fathers" thing.  We're all born -- you included -- without any kind of "original sin".  What you do wrong is up to you to fix, what your parents do wrong is up to them.  If you have children, their mistakes are theirs to deal with.

We're not Christians ...

 

Excuse me, but the Adam and Eve story clearly states that mankind will forever feel the pain of god's wrath.  Or g-d, whatever.  Pain in childbirth and all that. 

It's like seeing a 2 year old pick up a packet of gum in the store, then punishing him/her for the rest of their life, and their children and their children's children.

I think the idea of Jewish retribution - repaying and repairing those you have injured inadvertently or deliberately to the extent of your ability - is more appealing than the christian idea of getting Jesus to forgive you for free.  But g-d didn't give Adam and Eve the opportunity to redress this wrong, s/he/it/they just dumped on them and their children forever.  See Genesis 3.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:No,

FurryCatHerder wrote:
No, there is no such thing as a "Triune G-d".  G-d is "Echad" (see Deut 6:4), which means "One" in the sense of "Unique" and "Complete", "Indivisible".

I don't believe Deut 6:4 really supports your position. This verse uses 'ehad for one which means "unity from parts" which lends itself to the plurality postion. Here are some other passages where 'ehad is used.

Gen 2.24--the man and his wife will be one (ehad) flesh--clearly a composite unity.

Ex 26:6, 11--the fifty gold clasps are used to hold the curtains together so that the tent would be a unit (ehad).

2 Samuel 2:25--many soldiers made themselves into 'one group' (ehad)

Gen 34:16 --the men of Shechem suggest intermarriage with Jacob's children in order to become 'one(ehad) people'.

Joshua 9.2 -- the western kings agree to fight Joshua as "one (ehad) force"

Josh 10.42-- "And Joshua captured all these kings and their lands at one (ehad) time" (NAS) or "All these kings and their lands Joshua conquered in one (ehad) campaign" (NIV)

Ex 24.3 --"Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one (ehad) voice, and said"

2 Chr 5.12--"and all the Levitical singers, Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons and kinsmen, clothed in fine linen, with cymbals, harps, and lyres, standing east of the altar, and with them one hundred and twenty priests blowing trumpets 13 in unison when the trumpeters and the singers were to make themselves heard with one (ehad) voice to praise and to glorify the Lord"

Gen 11.6--"And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one (ehad) people, and they all have the same language."

From the usage data alone, 'ehad could at least allow a plurality within a strict unity i.e. trinity. Short on time so I'll have to respond to the rest of your post later.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5851
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

BobSpence wrote:

The Adam and Eve story is a poorly conceived story 'teaching' bad 'moral' messages:

1. That disobeying the orders of an authority figure is automatically a 'sin'. So "I was just following orders" is a great defence?

2. Punishing the descendants for the "sins of their fathers" is ok.

It is an attempt to justify the idea of "original sin", which is a half-assed attempt to justify why "bad things happen to good people". The Buddhist idea of past lives and karma is an alternative attempt.

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

What a total  non-sequiter.

Firstly, 'committing any offence for any reason' you want is the very opposite of following any social rules.

And secondly, the question would be what are the rules of society based on. If they are based on a social consensus of how much harm, pain, or distress any action is likely to cause to another individual or group, then I'm fine with that.

If they are based on the imagined edicts of an imagined authority figure, which means they are effectively based on the beliefs and taboos and hang-ups and prejudices of an older and different society, then no.

And "following orders" is not the same thing as following a set of guidelines, which is what ethical behaviour is about. It is about following guidelines, principles, which you accept as essential to a healthy society, and encouraging positive interactions between people, and discouraging harmful ones.

Quote:

And no, Jews don't do the "sins of the fathers" thing.  We're all born -- you included -- without any kind of "original sin".  What you do wrong is up to you to fix, what your parents do wrong is up to them.  If you have children, their mistakes are theirs to deal with.

We're not Christians ...

cj answered that one pretty well. 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Lee2216 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
No, there is no such thing as a "Triune G-d".  G-d is "Echad" (see Deut 6:4), which means "One" in the sense of "Unique" and "Complete", "Indivisible".

I don't believe Deut 6:4 really supports your position. This verse uses 'ehad for one which means "unity from parts" which lends itself to the plurality postion. Here are some other passages where 'ehad is used.

Gen 2.24--the man and his wife will be one (ehad) flesh--clearly a composite unity.

Ex 26:6, 11--the fifty gold clasps are used to hold the curtains together so that the tent would be a unit (ehad).

2 Samuel 2:25--many soldiers made themselves into 'one group' (ehad)

Gen 34:16 --the men of Shechem suggest intermarriage with Jacob's children in order to become 'one(ehad) people'.

Joshua 9.2 -- the western kings agree to fight Joshua as "one (ehad) force"

Josh 10.42-- "And Joshua captured all these kings and their lands at one (ehad) time" (NAS) or "All these kings and their lands Joshua conquered in one (ehad) campaign" (NIV)

Ex 24.3 --"Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one (ehad) voice, and said"

2 Chr 5.12--"and all the Levitical singers, Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons and kinsmen, clothed in fine linen, with cymbals, harps, and lyres, standing east of the altar, and with them one hundred and twenty priests blowing trumpets 13 in unison when the trumpeters and the singers were to make themselves heard with one (ehad) voice to praise and to glorify the Lord"

Gen 11.6--"And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one (ehad) people, and they all have the same language."

From the usage data alone, 'ehad could at least allow a plurality within a strict unity i.e. trinity. Short on time so I'll have to respond to the rest of your post later.

< grabs popcorn and sits down in confy chair.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:

Where do you come up with this nonsense?  Not that I mind reading the LXX all that much, but you need to provide chapter and verse for this "Lucifer" nonsense.  I read English a lot faster than Greek, so I went and read an English translation of the LXX version of Job and found nothing of the sort.

The method that applies to all other ancient gods is to compare their characteristics to see that they are the same or different. Both Ra and Lucifer carried the sun. Both spent time in the underworld. Therefore they are the same. It is related to the later mythology of Amun-Ra as a single deity.

"I made it up" would have been a lot more honest, and a lot more accurate.

Hardly. I learned the method from those studying ancient cultures. I might suggest you spend some time reading up on the subject. You might not make as many ignorant mistakes if you do.

Quote:
The same as your claim that there was no literate culture in "bible land" before the Greeks -- even the Documentary Wild Guess crowd understands that there was culture in Eretz Yisrael from long before the Greeks showed up.

There was none because there is no evidence of a literate culture. Archaeologists have uncovered many ancient literate cultures and have identified what is common in them from the physical evidence. No such physical evidence is found in bibleland.

Of course if you believe you know of some please feel free to post it. Be the first. You might even make a reputation for yourself.

As to the existence of any culture at all, at best it was the flea-ridden goatherds you mentioned. Only believers in unprovenanced religious tradition claim there was otherwise. But again if you have physical evidence of any culture of interest you be sure to post it. Such evidence should litter the museums of Israel. Why not google it and post the results you find. You might be the first to find something. Note Roman and Greek era materials are expected. The pomegranate was discredited years ago and was worthless to the skeptic from the beginning.

Rotsa ruck!

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Hebrew is an invented language of Greek influenced Aramaic. There is no reason to expect it have consistent meanings or usages. It was more of a pigin for dealing with the Greeks.

You're on crack.  Hebrew is an Afro-Asiatic language, while Greek is Indo-European.

You should consider both the Septuagint and the "hebrew" translation. The translation is filled with the same Koine Greek stylings of the Septuagint. Before Koine Greek was discovered this argument was used to claim the Septuagint was the perfectly accurate translation. But when a cache of Koine Greek documents was discovered back in the 1890s the argument reversed and the obvious was confirmed and it was obvious the "hebrew" contained the erronious translations. Considering there is no sign of a literate culture in bibleland until about a century after the arrival of the Greeks it has been known for over a century it could not have been created in bibleland.

What does that have to do with your insane claim that Hebrew is an invented language that's derived from Greek influence Aramaic?

In another post in this group I posted "Hebrew is Greek" which is the bittorrent feed for the largest collection of academic evidence. You are free to grab it and read it if you wish to learn something of the subject.

As to the archaeological evidence there are only four languages found in bibleland prior to the arrival of the Greeks, Phoenician, Aramaic and a bit of Egyptian and Syriac although that may be a phoneticized Egyptian. No "hebrew" at all. The oldest example of "hebrew" remains the DSS from the 1st c. AD. (The bible scrolls date from that century. The oldest DSS scroll is younger than the Septuagint.)

As noted, the "biblical hebrew" is filled with the stylings of Koine Greek. Aramaic does not show a Koine Greek influence. Hebrew is obviously a derivative of the Aramaic. Even today the Israeli language uses the Aramaic alphabet which is an evolution of the root Phoenician alphabet also use by Greek and us for that matter.

The Israeli language, mistakenly called Hebrew, started with the vocabulary of the Masoretic text and the Mishna. As that was insufficient for a functioning language it adopted some 2/3rd of its vocabulary from Arabic before adding modern words like electricity and airplane.

The largest number of passages is found in the Septuagint, fewer in the DSS books and least in the Masoretic, the latter being the official today. Conversely there is nothing in the Masoretic which is not in the DSS which is not in the Septuagint. I should be conclusive evidence to anyone willing to deal with the physical evidence.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Lee2216 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
Well, I don't believe in the Christian =or= LDS concept of a "Holy Spirit".  I'm a Jew.  Strict monotheism -- One G-d, no parts, no divisions, no "persons".

You don't believe in the Triune God? The Torah teaches it. Is not Elohim a plural noun? Plural pronouns are at times used by God when referring to Himself, as in Genesis 1:26. You don't believe in the concept of the holy spirit? The Torah teaches it. How do you explain Genesis 1:2? God's spirit is spoken of in the scriptures as a personality of His own, yet identified as God. Christianity is strict monotheism as well, one God, three distinct co-equal persons.

Sigh.

No, there is no such thing as a "Triune G-d".  G-d is "Echad" (see Deut 6:4), which means "One" in the sense of "Unique" and "Complete", "Indivisible".

Yet Elohim remains plural. Obviously the books needed a good editor.

A simpler explanation is the stories were written as entertainment and were read as such. Absent science fiction types who hang on consistency of premises changes to make a better story are quite acceptable. Several of the premises of Buffy changed over the years. In the second season Angel sired Spike but later it was Drucilla. Same sort of thing.

Keep in mind these were merely god stories. In those days god stories were not taken all that seriously. If you asked if a god story was true you would get a quizzical 'what does that matter' response.

Quote:
G-d's "arm" is also spoken of, as is G-d's "hand".  Is there some "arm" or "hand" entity in that polytheistic pantheon you've got going?  Because if there isn't, there's no reason for a "spirit" entity either.

There is also mention of your hyphenated god's ass and of fire from its mouth and smoke from its nose. It walks and talks and has to travel to Sodom to see what is going on. Where are  you going with this? So much for spirit crap.

Quote:
The word that's translated as "Spirit" is the same word that's used for "breath" or "wind" or "air".  The "spirit" is in our "breathing" -- that's why when someone breathes their last they say "they gave up the ghost".

So you are now claiming your god is air? At least air is asexual like your god.

Quote:
Christianity is anything BUT monotheistic -- and if you'd like to engage in a bit of one-on-one, I'd be more than happy to oblige, but this thread has gotten a bit busy and crowded.

The Yahweh cult is only to that one god. It says nothing about the other gods. What is your point?

Quote:
The short proof is that you can't exchange the "persons" and have the Gospels make any sense.  The "Son" got Mary pregnant, who gave birth to the "Holy Spirit" and the "Father" was then crucified and died for our "sins".  You =can= do this with other instances where there really is only one person -- Mom's Husband got her pregnant then my Father taught me how to ride a bicycle and (insert my father's name here) picked me up after I road my bicycle into the back of a car I managed to hit because I couldn't ride a bicycle in a straight line.

You can do this with other people, too -- exchanging "Barack Obama", "President", "Chief Executive" and "Commander in Chief" for whatever Barack Obama happens to be up to this week.  Try that with your Christian pantheon -- it falls flat immediately.

So you mean there is only one US government so it cannot have three branches. Or do you mean there is only one congress therefore it cannot have 435 members? Thank you for the explanation. It shows you impose post-Islam theology on people who clearly expressed no such idea but rather you jump on the chosen words in entertaining stories.

Quote:
Lee2216 wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
I have G-d, I don't need someone to die for me, I'm perfectly capable of relating to G-d without any special mediators, especially ones that get killed.
 What do you mean you have God? Is it by following all the commandments, or is it by God's grace through faith and repentance? How exactly are your sins atoned for if Jesus didn't need to be crucified? What do you mean by relating to God? No one can get to God except through Jesus Christ.

I mean that G-d, Ha'El Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu, the Lord G-d, the Holy One, Blessed is He, is my Rock and my Redeemer.  If I sin against someone else, I deal with them and clean up my mess -- G-d is completely incapable of forgiving any sin I commit against another person.  If I sin against G-d, it's between G-d and I.  No middle man (or woman or spirit or dead guy) needed.

Again you show you are talking nonsense. Referring to it as male, as having a sex at all, demonstrates conclusively no rational person should take the wording seriously. 

Quote:
Sins CANNOT be atoned for by anyone else.  It is utterly and completely impossible.  My mistakes ("sins&quotEye-wink are mine and mine alone to deal with and learn from.

You are forgetting puttng sin on a ram and driving it into the desert method. Worked for them. It must work for you too. Why not do it?

Quote:
Sin especially cannot be atoned for by the death of an un-kosher animal which was brutally tortured.  All sacrificial animals =must= be of a kosher kind (the "cloven hooves, chews cud" variety, or else one of the bird species listed in the Torah) and must be 100% free of any disease or blemish at the time it is killed.  Furthermore, NO SACRIFICE can be made at any place other than on the Temple Mount, on the altar, by the Temple priests.  Anything else, including the torture of a Jewish man and his execution by Roman soldiers far removed from the Temple isn't just invalid, it is 100% forbidden and abhorrent.

To say that you are sinning by following Christianity is a gross understatement.

BTW: The ram and Shofar horn and forelocks come from Amun who had the head of a ram.

Almost forgot

here is another version of the snake and tree Eden story. It is also the basis for saying the serpent and Lucifer are different characters as this snake is Apophis who attack Ra when he passed through the underworld at night.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

You mean Jews accept following orders as a legitimate defense? Is that how they justify the many genocides and attempted genocides and mass murders they conducted as ordered by your hyphenated god? Or do you know the stories are BS and don't worry about it?

How about the millions with Joshua complexes running around in Palestine these days?

Quote:
And no, Jews don't do the "sins of the fathers" thing.  We're all born -- you included -- without any kind of "original sin".  What you do wrong is up to you to fix, what your parents do wrong is up to them.  If you have children, their mistakes are theirs to deal with.

The sins of the fathers shall be visited on the sons unto the seventh generation. Rather than argue if David was sixth or seventh generation do you just shitcan the entire OT and wing it as it appears?

Quote:
We're not Christians ...

Christians are less savage.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Lee2216 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
No, there is no such thing as a "Triune G-d".  G-d is "Echad" (see Deut 6:4), which means "One" in the sense of "Unique" and "Complete", "Indivisible".

I don't believe Deut 6:4 really supports your position. This verse uses 'ehad for one which means "unity from parts" which lends itself to the plurality postion. Here are some other passages where 'ehad is used.

I'll have to go grab some verbs, but where G-d is "one" the singular form of the verb is used, see Gen 1:3, where the verb is masculine singular in spite of the "plural of majesty" being used.  Were G-d a grouping of people, the verb would have been masculine plural.

Not to worry -- we'll be doing "Why Jesus isn't even close to being the Messiah" shortly after we finish studying person-gender-number in Hebrew.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence

BobSpence wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

What a total  non-sequiter.

Firstly, 'committing any offence for any reason' you want is the very opposite of following any social rules.

No, it's the only rational conclusion that can be reached -- consensus does not guarantee any sort of reasonable moral code.  At best it produces majority rule, at worst, mob rule.  Neither protect the interests of those who need protecting the most -- the people who don't have the power to say "No" to anyone who has the power needed to create such "rules".

And trying to =enforce= some set of social rules is either a pointless exercise in navel gazing, or it devolves into "Might Makes Right".

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Again you

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Again you show you are talking nonsense. Referring to it as male, as having a sex at all, demonstrates conclusively no rational person should take the wording seriously.

Wow.  You are illiterate.

Linguistic Gender is NOT NOT NOT Genital Gender.  Words which are linguistically masculine do NOT have penises, words which are linguistically feminine do not have vaginas.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5851
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

BobSpence wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

What a total  non-sequiter.

Firstly, 'committing any offence for any reason' you want is the very opposite of following any social rules.

No, it's the only rational conclusion that can be reached -- consensus does not guarantee any sort of reasonable moral code.  At best it produces majority rule, at worst, mob rule.  Neither protect the interests of those who need protecting the most -- the people who don't have the power to say "No" to anyone who has the power needed to create such "rules".

And trying to =enforce= some set of social rules is either a pointless exercise in navel gazing, or it devolves into "Might Makes Right".

I agree to the extent that a consensus does not guarantee an ideal moral code, but is more likely to lead to a reasonable one than the alternative, one based on some 'authority'. How do you decide which authority, and what interpretation of 'black-letter' edicts to use? At least this problem is recognized in secular legal systems in more advanced countries, with provision for appeal and re-trial. Multiple religious interpretations leave you back with the same fallible human judgement that secular morality uses, to decide which one is 'good' or 'right', but now contaminated by the ancient prejudices and taboos of the people who recorded the original texts.

Your country is faced with this dilemma right now - whose interpretation and application of the Torah is 'right', the ultra-conservative Jews or the moderates??

Yes, social consensus is imperfect, but it is possible to reform it and update it, whereas religious-based morality is ultimately purely subjective, since which is the 'true' God is unprovable, and the ultimate intentions of such a being, should It actually exist, would be utterly beyond our ability to determine with any confidence. This is why all god-based codes amount to 'might makes right', whereas more enlightened secular systems, such as designed and intended by the Founding Fathers of the US Constitution, try to provide 'checks and balances', to minimize the danger of descent into mob-rule, to protect minorities.

====

The issue of how to enforce any set of rules, whether secular or religion based, is another problem. 

Any social code will contain both rules, which require enforcement, and guidelines, where non-observance is not felt to deserve intervention. More like recommendations. The harder 'rules' become the legal code.

Rules, codes, at least the ones not concerned with dealing with acts like killing and/or seriously physically abusing others, should also make allowance for the variety of individual likes and dislikes, where differences don't amount to matters of serious likelihood of conflict. Those difference are the main problems for the Golden Rule, and less so for the Silver Rule ( the "don't do to others that which..." version ).

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Again you show you are talking nonsense. Referring to it as male, as having a sex at all, demonstrates conclusively no rational person should take the wording seriously.

Wow.  You are illiterate.

Linguistic Gender is NOT NOT NOT Genital Gender.  Words which are linguistically masculine do NOT have penises, words which are linguistically feminine do not have vaginas.

Words have gender. Living things may or may not have sex.

In English gender follows sex when referring to things which have sex. There are a few accepted customary deviations such as ships. In English gods are referred to by their sex, such as he and she Zeus and Hera.

Unless you are accepting Yahweh and Ashara as the god pair of Judea then you are not using correct English.

Herod built a temple to the goddess Astarte in Caesarea. There was one in Tyre in Alexander's time.

BYT YHWH and BYT STRT were in Jerusalem in Roman times. The latter temple was not destroyed until Hadrian rebuilt Jerusalem while Titus destroyed the former in 76.

You can only pretend to be correct if you accept his companion goddess was Astarte/Ashara. If not perhaps you can tell me who was Strato and why did she have so many towers? You are of course aware the english translation for BYT is determined by who or what BYT refers to. BYT aSTaRTe is so very bloody obvious except to believers.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

BobSpence wrote:
...

Your country is faced with this dilemma right now - whose interpretation and application of the Torah is 'right', the ultra-conservative Jews or the moderates??

 

She is one of them?! Fat lot of business a zionist has talking about morality.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:BobSpence

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

BobSpence wrote:
...

Your country is faced with this dilemma right now - whose interpretation and application of the Torah is 'right', the ultra-conservative Jews or the moderates??

 

She is one of them?! Fat lot of business a zionist has talking about morality.

 

Yea, she is a human just like you. Not a sub species.

Your conspiracy crap is really wearing thin with me.

Both sides of that conflict want the same fucking thing, they want states that set up religious pecking orders. Israel is just as ass backwards in that regard as Palestine.

Palestine will never have a Jewish, or Christian or atheist PM, even if I wanted to believe that they would set up a secular government, and you know damned fucking well they would not. Israel will never have a Muslim or Christian PM. And I am certainly sure I couldn't be PM there with my criticism of Israel.

Israel wants to be a "Jewish state" and that to me is just as much a part of the problem as what Palestine would set up if given a state.

BOTH YOU AND HER NEED TO FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHY America's founders got it right with "No religious test", even though since then, American voters never fucking understood what they were given. Although our courts HAVE kept the sectarianism that existed before the Revolution at bay and minimized the division.

You fucking create the same stupid division you accuse "them" of "She's one of them"

GET THIS THROUGH YOUR FUCKING HEAD, she is a human. Not a robot, not perfect. You are human, but do not think you are perfect. I am sick of your hateful bullshit.

That stupid fucking religious division is PRECISELY why America's founders put in "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" and "No religious test" in the oath of office. Jefferson especially talked about a wall between religion and state. Both Palestine and Israel have a back of the buss attitude towards those who do not share the majority religion. Israel is just as guilty as Palestine in not understanding Jefferson's wall.

PALESTINE AND ISRAEL will never set anything like that up because of a beef that started long before you or she were born THOUSANDS of years ago. BECAUSE OF RELIGION. BOTH! She is merely a product of her environment like ALL humans are. Until you see her as a human you will not see how fucking stupid you are being. Just as stupid as the assholes who blow themselves up on buses killing unarmed people. Just as stupid as Sharon and Netencarpetbombhoo.

I see both you and her as humans first. She doesn't get a pass because of her religion , but neither do you for your support of Palestine. I see you as being just as much a prick as the Jews that hate you for supporting Palestine.

You might as well be trying to sell me that Jews were sent here by little green men and you are Tom Cruise in War of the Worlds.

It is pathetic, childish and PART OF THE FUCKING PROBLEM.

There is no conspiracy on either side. There are merely humans not seeing each other as such. You are one of them and just as guilty as any Jew who does the same.

Now, just to prove what fucking asshole bigot you are being.

If she right now said, "I'd be willing to work for laws in politics that protect a Muslim or Christian or atheist's right to run and compete for PM of Israel" would you see her as human?

I don't like any of her religious claims at all, but I bet damned sure that she probably would be fine with that considering she thinks I would make a great Jew.

Now the other day, right here in my country, we had a Muslim a Jew and a Christian, ALL sitting side by side in a TV studio, and guess what, THEY WEREN'T KILLING EACH OTHER, and unlike you, they were not hateful bigots. My only objection was that they didn't have an atheist on as well.

When BOTH Palestine and Israel seek secularism and give up on religious pecking orders in politics, THAT is when problems will get solved.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:
...

Take a stress pill, Dave.

 


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
This thread is losing focus

This thread is losing focus fast... 

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3659
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:This thread is

Ktulu wrote:

This thread is losing focus fast... 

 

 

           Well the majority of exchanges between Furry and Nony are quite interesting and a little drama from Brian with some ALL CAPS thrown in, what's the big deal ?

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Take a stress pill, Dave.

 

Stress pill? Oh, so I am the one who called someone whom they never met "One of them"

You hate Jews. I  am surprised you don't masturbate over a poster of Hitler the way you talk about how the west blindly supports Israel.

The way you talk even I should be put in a gas chamber with anyone who sides with Israel, ignoring the fact that I don't agree with everything it does.

This all stems from the bullshit argument "we were here first" crap.

That has a shelf life which over time loses it's moral value and is based on the same religious principle "sins of the father".

I wont give back America to the natives prior to the Mayflower. Not that what Europeans did to invade and take land that they did not occupy at the time. But because the past is the past and all all humans have is the future. Jews and Muslims don't get this, and this is why that needless conflict continues. And the pathetic "Christian nation" crap is something I still deal with today.

There is no Muslim state, or Jewish state, or Christian state. There are only humans on one planet. Learn from the past so you don't repeat it. But don't ever think you are special.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Ktulu

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Ktulu wrote:

This thread is losing focus fast... 

 

 

           Well the majority of exchanges between Furry and Nony are quite interesting and a little drama from Brian with some ALL CAPS thrown in, what's the big deal ?

You must not read many of Noony's posts. If he is not a bigot, he sure acts like one. Every time he posts everything is a Jewish conspiracy. I try to tell him no, Israel's actions are NOT always good. And I do not agree with everything they do, that is not good enough for him.

"Zionist sympathizer" as if I am aiding the enemy is what he ignorantly throws back at me.

He has been throwing his hateful crap here for years. If he doesn't hate all Jews, or anyone who might agree with them on some things, he sure has never shown it.

He is stuck on one speed, "Jews always wrong" "Palestinians always right"

When I come in and say NEITHER, and life is shades of gray, I become his enemy too.

I am sick of his shit as much as I would be any Muslim who wants to wipe Israel off the face of the planet.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Ktulu wrote:
This thread is losing focus fast...

I presume the lady is capable of responding on her own. I have no idea how she feels about white knights.

 

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...

So, it's perfectly okay to commit any crime or inter-personal offense you might want, for any reason you might want to commit it, because obey social rules is just "following orders" and that's a bad thing?

You mean Jews accept following orders as a legitimate defense? Is that how they justify the many genocides and attempted genocides and mass murders they conducted as ordered by your hyphenated god? Or do you know the stories are BS and don't worry about it?

How about the millions with Joshua complexes running around in Palestine these days?

Quote:
And no, Jews don't do the "sins of the fathers" thing.  We're all born -- you included -- without any kind of "original sin".  What you do wrong is up to you to fix, what your parents do wrong is up to them.  If you have children, their mistakes are theirs to deal with.

The sins of the fathers shall be visited on the sons unto the seventh generation. Rather than argue if David was sixth or seventh generation do you just shitcan the entire OT and wing it as it appears?

Quote:
We're not Christians ...

Christians are less savage.

 

Because of the Age of Enlightenment, not because of Christianity. If there were no secular governments to hold Christianity at bay, it would be as tribal and bloody as it was in the Dark Ages. As tribal and sectarian as it is between Muslims in Islamic states. As tribal as Muslims treat non Muslims in most of the middle east.

Even with that secular leash, there are still Christians today who would if they could and had the political power outlaw atheist rights and gay rights. There are politicians and plenty of voters who WOULD turn back the clock if given the power.

Ron Paul just had to back off the backing of a fundie Christian because his staff didn't do a good job vetting a supporter who ADVOCATED THE EXECUTION OF GAYS.

Now in Saudi Arabia and Iran who would support Palestine before Israel, how much rights do gays have?

What do you think the hatred of gays even in the states is based on? Science? All three treat gays as an "abomination" And with what? Tribal books written in an fucking ignorant age.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Take a stress pill, Dave.

Stress pill?

Make that two and a shot of tequila.


 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Take a stress pill, Dave.

Stress pill?

Make that two and a shot of tequila.

 

 

You got called on your bigotry and now you are pretending that I am the one who needs a chill pill.

Ok, lets put this to the test.

Is there any Jew you know personally that you like whom you could see being the Prime Minister of Palestine?

Here is what I can do that you cant.

Muslim Keith Ellesson I would vote for. He is a Congressman. He swore in on a Koran and not a bible, which was his right as per "no religious test". I hate Furry's religious arguments as to why being Jew is the greatest thing since sliced bread. But I would vote for her for President before I would consider you. You are just as bad as Pat Robertson, and I do not care that you are an atheist.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Ktulu

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Ktulu wrote:
This thread is losing focus fast...

I presume the lady is capable of responding on her own. I have no idea how she feels about white knights.

 

Don't look now, you are defending a GASP "Jew".

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Lion

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:
Yadda Yadda. You're doing exactly what you accuse and assert as mandatory for me and Furry - you're sitting around splitting hairs and straining at gnats and making petty criticism of someone elses religious denomination. Divide and conquer...yeah, yeah I get it. Nothing subtle about this. Or original.

I think Brian37 was warned, or else did the warning, that I enjoy slicing and dicing Christianity about as much as I do Atheism.  It won't be "Divide and Conquer".  It will be more like me and the Atheists against you, followed by me against the Atheists.

It things get bad enough, I'll probably suggest you become a Muslim.  At least they are monotheists.

Right because Jews got it right and Muslims got it wrong and well, when faced with that paradox belief in an unprovable non material god is better than saying they don't exist.

I am sure the Egyptians who believed the sun was a god were gracious hosts to outsiders. They would have had to have done that to some extent to survive for 3,000 years.

No, what is really going on with Muslims and Christians and Jews is the same damned thing. All of you think you got it right. What none of you do is consider that your myths are merely products of marketing.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
A little help on ancient bibleland culture

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...Wow.  You are illiterate.

To give you a little help I have two examples of the archaeological evidence for ancient civilizations. First I give you two typical images from Egypt, Luxor to be precise.

&

Then I give you a typical image from bibleland.

Just show me some equivalent images from biblical Israel.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...Wow.  You are illiterate.

To give you a little help I have two examples of the archaeological evidence for ancient civilizations. First I give you two typical images from Egypt, Luxor to be precise.

&

Then I give you a typical image from bibleland.

Just show me some equivalent images from biblical Israel.

Noony, here is where I want you and Furry and even atheists who hate me for my bluntness.

WORDS and arguments, not assumption of hate or implications of violence.

What far too many humans do, including atheists, is equate hate of a claim for hate of an entire group.

I HATE your bullshit argument of "Jews stole the land"

Yea, they did. And European Christians stole America from the natives that lived here. And even stole black people from Africa, whose descendants still suck up to Jesus and cling to Jesus no matter how much I argue they would not be Christians if slavery had never brought blacks to the states.

I HATE the fact that it is almost 2012 and both Muslims and Jews still claim an invisible friend. I HATE the fact that people claim that Astrology is as valid as Astronomy. I hate that jocks in sports think lucky socks or 4 leaf clovers will help them win a game.

But no matter what I hate AS A CLAIM, even the people I want to metaphorically bitch slap in life, come from the same product of evolution as I do.

It is ALWAYS ok to attack a claim. It does not help humanity, in attacking the claims of others, to treat them as a sub species.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...Wow.  You are illiterate.

To give you a little help I have two examples of the archaeological evidence for ancient civilizations. First I give you two typical images from Egypt, Luxor to be precise.

&

Then I give you a typical image from bibleland.

Just show me some equivalent images from biblical Israel.

Noony, here is where I want you and Furry and even atheists who hate me for my bluntness.

WORDS and arguments, not assumption of hate or implications of violence.

What far too many humans do, including atheists, is equate hate of a claim for hate of an entire group.

I HATE your bullshit argument of "Jews stole the land"

Yea, they did. And European Christians stole America from the natives that lived here. And even stole black people from Africa, whose descendants still suck up to Jesus and cling to Jesus no matter how much I argue they would not be Christians if slavery had never brought blacks to the states.

I HATE the fact that it is almost 2012 and both Muslims and Jews still claim an invisible friend. I HATE the fact that people claim that Astrology is as valid as Astronomy. I hate that jocks in sports think lucky socks or 4 leaf clovers will help them win a game.

But no matter what I hate AS A CLAIM, even the people I want to metaphorically bitch slap in life, come from the same product of evolution as I do.

It is ALWAYS ok to attack a claim. It does not help humanity, in attacking the claims of others, to treat them as a sub species.

 Attack the claim, but in that process the human holding that position is still a human.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:

...

I think Brian37 was warned, or else did the warning, that I enjoy slicing and dicing Christianity about as much as I do Atheism.  It won't be "Divide and Conquer".  It will be more like me and the Atheists against you, followed by me against the Atheists.

It things get bad enough, I'll probably suggest you become a Muslim.  At least they are monotheists.

But tearing up Judaism is so much easier than all of the above as it is only a ritual/taboo life style which barely passes for a religion these days. I know people try to pretty it up but adding Moses to Universal Unitarianism doesn't buy much. The problem is compounded by those who claim to belong to the Fraternal Order of Jews knowing so very little about it. How many know the Bar Mitzvah was invented in the late 19th c.? Even fewer know its sole basis is the gospel story on the young Jesus in the Temple. How many have actually read Israel Shahak on Jewish history?

It is hardly surprising the entire Jewish narrative is bound up in being the eternal victim. Who else would insist upon living apart and then complain about being considered outsiders? Take for example the whining about antisemitism in the US. EVERY new immigrant group had its time in the barrel. Jews were no different from the Irish and Italians in that regard. That which is the same cannot be considered different.

Judaism survived in Europe and Muslim countries solely because it was a protected religion. If it had not been Jews would be as scarce as Druids.

Back to the subject. I have replied to you regarding the juvenile nature of the "teachings" of the Torah and the entire Tanakh for that matter. Even if the Torah were by some miracle as old as the chronology suggests the Code of Hammurabi is centuries older, addresses the real, adult world and in fact reads rather modern.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:
...

Noony, here is where I want you and Furry and even atheists who hate me for my bluntness.

Hate you? That is your ego hoping.

Quote:
WORDS and arguments, not assumption of hate or implications of violence.

What far too many humans do, including atheists, is equate hate of a claim for hate of an entire group.

I HATE your bullshit argument of "Jews stole the land"

They claim they did with the Joshua story. And Josephus says the Judeans imposed their Yahweh cult on Samaria and the Galilee by military conquest.

Why do you think that is not theft? Because everybody did it?

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

Yea, they did. And European Christians stole America from the natives that lived here. And even stole black people from Africa, whose descendants still suck up to Jesus and cling to Jesus no matter how much I argue they would not be Christians if slavery had never brought blacks to the states.

Minor correction. Cortez never owned the land. His wife, an Aztec, owned the land. Cortez merely ruled it in accordance with Aztec law.

Despite the efforts of many prominent people including Abraham Lincoln all but a handful of those stolen slaves declined repatriation. Maybe they think Jesus saved them from Africa. In that spirit Amistad is being revived on cable TV this month. The leader of the Amistad group returned to Africa and became a slave supplier.

To keep this on topic and to delight our local furry fetishist Jewish law is very pro-slavery.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

BobSpence wrote:
...

Your country is faced with this dilemma right now - whose interpretation and application of the Torah is 'right', the ultra-conservative Jews or the moderates??

 

As there is no way to retract posts I should have been more specific in my response. As you can read here

Hundreds of ultra-Orthodox protesters riot in flashpoint town of Beit Shemesh

www.haaretz.com/news/national/hundreds-of-ultra-orthodox-protesters-riot-in-flashpoint-town-of-beit-shemesh-1.404470

it is a matter of real Jews according to the law against the Europeans colonists of Palestine.

"The incident began as a small local gathering of about 20 people, who waved signs with slogans attacking Zionism." 

The locals do not consider either the Reform or Conservative to be Jews. It is a matter of adherence to the Law of Moses.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:In

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In English gender follows sex when referring to things which have sex. There are a few accepted customary deviations such as ships. In English gods are referred to by their sex, such as he and she Zeus and Hera.

Hebrew isn't English.

It also isn't derived from Greek, but Hebrew is most certainly NOT English.

In Hebrew, nouns have gender, as do the verbs which reference the nouns.  It is very well understood that the =linguistic= gender of a word is NOT it's sex.

Likewise, words have "number" -- plural, if you will.  Masculine and feminine words have different ways of being pluralized -- "yom", which is "day" becomes "yomim", which is "days".  "Yom" is a masculine word -- it doesn't mean it has a penis.  "Mitzva", which is "commandment" becomes "mitzvot", which is "commandments".  "Mitzvah" is a feminine word -- it doesn't mean it has a vagina.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Yea, they did. And European Christians stole America from the natives that lived here. And even stole black people from Africa, whose descendants still suck up to Jesus and cling to Jesus no matter how much I argue they would not be Christians if slavery had never brought blacks to the states.

Minor correction. Cortez never owned the land. His wife, an Aztec, owned the land. Cortez merely ruled it in accordance with Aztec law.

Despite the efforts of many prominent people including Abraham Lincoln all but a handful of those stolen slaves declined repatriation. Maybe they think Jesus saved them from Africa. In that spirit Amistad is being revived on cable TV this month. The leader of the Amistad group returned to Africa and became a slave supplier.

To keep this on topic and to delight our local furry fetishist Jewish law is very pro-slavery.

 

Way to miss the point again.

THAT WAS THEN, THIS IS NOW

For someone who rightfully points out the Abraham narrative as a victim you cant even see "I was here first" and "they stole my land" is the same fucking shit.

Jews have been victims, but right now they are not. Native Americans were victims, but right now they are not. Blacks were victims, but right now, they are not.

You make suffering yourself as special and unique to a label as you rightfully accuse Israel of.

And yes the religion of all the Abraham traditions DID NOTHING to condone slavery or sexism, because the books of all three didn't condemn it. THAT INCLUDES the Abraham god of Islam as well which a majority of Palestinians are.

There is only one species. Unless you or "those people" learn to let go of the past and deal with now and the future, this needless bullshit conflict will not stop. Israel has plenty to be blamed for, but considering the majority Muslims in Palestine who worship the same childish martyr deity with a book that teaches them that they are special and chosen, just like Jews, you miss the point that BOTH books are cut from  the same cloth.

FICTION

But in reality which you don't want to face yourself is that you as well have a "poor me" virtue of the oppressed "victim" crap that you rightfully accuse Jews today of.

Labels don't make a human superior or a sub species. Until you or your Jewish counterparts skip the fucking labels and see the species as the same species, you will be as much a part of the problem as you rightfully accuse them of.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
...Wow.  You are illiterate.

To give you a little help I have two examples of the archaeological evidence for ancient civilizations. First I give you two typical images from Egypt, Luxor to be precise.

Just show me some equivalent images from biblical Israel.

Thanks for the pictures, it's always nice to look at photos of ancient temples to false gods that are lying in ruins.

I'd love to show you lots of photos of ancient temples in Israel for all of the false gods that were being worshiped, with all of their temples scattered throughout the country, all lying in ruins, but there's this small problem with Judaism -- there's only one G-d, and only one place for the Temple for G-d.  Not one city, not one province -- one place, on top of one hill, on top of one rock.

The ruins are still there -- sacked by the Romans in 70CE.  It was in all the papers.  A mosque was built on the same site and it's still there, today.

But you know that.  You also know that the one place on top of one hill has been the site of the Temple in Jerusalem since Solomon's Temple was built, and destroyed.  And that after Solomon's Temple was rebuilt, Herod had a new Temple rebuilt.  Right on top of the same rock, on the same hill, in the same town, in the same province.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Noony's taking to "one of

Noony's taking to "one of them" and his dick isn't falling off. AMAZING!

Noony, if you are willing to debate "one of them" on the web, then you need to get over your black and white thinking with the conflict and stop the same arbitrary starting point in history that you rightfully accuse "one of them" of.

Our species evolution has always produced fluxing in power and power shifts. You are as guilty as she is in thinking that being a "victim" makes you always immune from doing the same horrible things humans have always been capable of.

She wrongfully thinks her religious morals make her good, despite that speed limits are not Allah based or Yahweh based or atheist based.

But you are doing the same damned thing thinking that whatever suffering that Palestinians rightfully complain about means that turning to Hamass is fine is just as stupid and sectarian as a "Jewish state".

Now that you have experienced what it is like to talk to "one of them" and your dick has not fallen off, do the right thing and treat her like a human and not "one of them".

I am with you on attacking claims of invisible friends. But what comes first to me, before even that, is we are all humans FIRST. Every human can be a victim but there is no such thing as "the virtue of the oppressed" in a species history when power has always shifted and abuse has always happened.

And to Furry, you are a recent new member. Noony and I have fought about the conflict for years and he cannot see why I do not chose sides one way or the other and everything to me is case by case and conditional.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Noony, here is where I want you and Furry and even atheists who hate me for my bluntness.

Hate you? That is your ego hoping.

Quote:
WORDS and arguments, not assumption of hate or implications of violence.

What far too many humans do, including atheists, is equate hate of a claim for hate of an entire group.

I HATE your bullshit argument of "Jews stole the land"

They claim they did with the Joshua story. And Josephus says the Judeans imposed their Yahweh cult on Samaria and the Galilee by military conquest.

Why do you think that is not theft? Because everybody did it?

 

Get your head out of your ass. Europeans stole land from Native Americans. I am NOT responsible for that. Some Hispanics think California and Arizona and Texas should be returned to them because the land was once occupied by a majority of Spanish. Missing the point that even Mexico itself was invaded.

1945 happened. And Sharone since the 60s has been a Jewish Dirty Harry. Dwell in "they started it" all the fuck you want, but that does not do a fucking thing to bring peace.

There is not a fucking thing we can undo now. What is done is done. If I had been a powerful politician back at the end of the war, I would have invited Jews to move to America or Europe and not where they ended up. But we cannot change that anymore than America can go back to belonging to Native Americans.

Our actions good and bad as a species are a result of our evolution, not an invention of ANY label. Until you learn to stop dwelling in the past instead of collective problem solving, that conflict will not stop.

The future is all you the atheist and Muslims and Christians and Jews collectively have. Pissing contests over things that cannot be undone don't solve shit.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In English gender follows sex when referring to things which have sex. There are a few accepted customary deviations such as ships. In English gods are referred to by their sex, such as he and she Zeus and Hera.

Hebrew isn't English.

It also isn't derived from Greek, but Hebrew is most certainly NOT English.

Your mis-statement of what I wrote does not change what I wrote. Nor does it change the liguistic comparison of the languages.

Quote:
In Hebrew, nouns have gender, as do the verbs which reference the nouns.  It is very well understood that the =linguistic= gender of a word is NOT it's sex.

For example you are noting in Hebrew number and gender follow the nouns as it does in Aryan languages. Number and gender do not follow in semitic languages such as Aramaic and Arabic. Do you have a ready explanation for this exception?

Quote:
Likewise, words have "number" -- plural, if you will.  Masculine and feminine words have different ways of being pluralized -- "yom", which is "day" becomes "yomim", which is "days".  "Yom" is a masculine word -- it doesn't mean it has a penis.  "Mitzva", which is "commandment" becomes "mitzvot", which is "commandments".  "Mitzvah" is a feminine word -- it doesn't mean it has a vagina.

It is not surprising pigin Aramaic has Greek grammar.

Have you gotten Hebrew Is Greek from the message I posted yet? It is certainly worth a quick read.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Have you

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Have you gotten Hebrew Is Greek from the message I posted yet? It is certainly worth a quick read.

I've learned that you are an idiot and a bigot based on what you've written.

The origins of Hebrew are very well understood, and the answer isn't "Greek".

Nor is Aramaic a single language that you could say "THIS is Aramaic, and nothing else is."  Nor are all Aramaic dialects uniformly consistent such that minor phonetic differences are all that's required to translate between dialects.  The same can be said of Arabic, though less so than with Aramaic.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Just a quick note --I had

Just a quick note --

I had thought that is thread had some promise, but it has drifted so far from the original topic that it's pointless.  It's either yet another forum for certain people to shout about Atheism, or one for certain other people to make outlandish claims that =might= be interesting in another thread, but are completely unrelated to =this= thread.

I don't normally bow out of threads, but this was one I'd hoped would have gone somewhere and it has gone in a completely different direction.

To the people who derailed the topic, congratulations.  Whatever perverse satisfaction you get from doing so, I hope you enjoy it.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3659
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:I don't

FurryCatHerder wrote:

I don't normally bow out of threads, but this was one I'd hoped would have gone somewhere and it has gone in a completely different direction.

 

 Call it a form of "mission creep" when topics drift.  It happens all the time.  Don't bail.  Academically speaking, I like the higher level of debate between you and Nony.  He's the "matter" to your "anti-matter" and that makes for an interesting debate.   You're both educated and with strong opinions.  That's a good combination.

 

FurryCatHerder wrote:
To the people who derailed the topic, congratulations.  Whatever perverse satisfaction you get from doing so, I hope you enjoy it.

                    

       Ignore the people who derail and engage only who you wish to debate.  If this thread is too far gone for you then start a different thread.  I was really getting interested.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

I don't normally bow out of threads, but this was one I'd hoped would have gone somewhere and it has gone in a completely different direction.

 Call it a form of "mission creep" when topics drift.  It happens all the time.  Don't bail.  Academically speaking, I like the higher level of debate between you and Nony.  He's the "matter" to your "anti-matter" and that makes for an interesting debate.   You're both educated and with strong opinions.  That's a good combination.

I'd have preferred not to name-names, but Nony is very poorly educated and seems to be following more of a "any anti-Jewish / anti-Israel conspiracy is a good conspiracy!" approach.

Any time someone says "go read this bittorrent feed" instead of "Here are a list of scholarly works that have been subjected to peer review" they are trying an approach that's closer to "baffle them with bullshit" than reasoned debate.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3659
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  Well suit yourself.  I

  Well suit yourself.  I thought calling people out on their bullshit is what happens here almost daily.  Look at the level of debate that occurs here from most theists that come here, especially regarding hard science supposedly "proving" their particular god belief.  Yet they are engaged by the atheist science nerds almost ad infinitum.

We atheists here are subjected to an anti-atheist bigotry almost from the get-go.  We are reviled by most all of the "True Believers™"   We deserve to go to Hell, we have no real Morals....blah blah.

 

edit:  as far as the tactic of "baffling with bull shit" well sorry to say but that seems to be the major tactic that most theists of any category throw at  atheists.  But really, what else have they got to fall back on ?  ....yet the dialog continues between us.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Well suit yourself.  I thought calling people out on their bullshit is what happens here almost daily.  Look at the level of debate that occurs here from most theists that come here, especially regarding hard science supposedly "proving" their particular god belief.  Yet they are engaged by the atheist science nerds almost ad infinitum.

We atheists here are subjected to an anti-atheist bigotry almost from the get-go.  We are reviled by most all of the "True Believers™"   We deserve to go to Hell, we have no real Morals....blah blah.

edit:  as far as the tactic of "baffling with bull shit" well sorry to say but that seems to be the major tactic that most theists of any category throw at  atheists.  But really, what else have they got to fall back on ?  ....yet the dialog continues between us.

Nony could provide a limited number -- let's call it 2 or 3 -- of peer-reviewed scholarly articles on the subject of the supposed Greek origins of Hebrew.  What's happened instead is repeated assertions and references to some "bittorrent stream" of documents.

Hebrew "works" like other Semetic languages and the amount of effort needed to go from, say, Hebrew to Arabic, is far less than the effort needed to go from Hebrew to Greek.  That the LXX is NOT a representation of some originally Greek document is proven by errors in idiomatic translation between "some original language" and the LXX where the Hebrew makes sense and the Greek does not.  That's "jacks or better to open".  The rest of the proof has long since been provided by linguists which, to this very day, place Hebrew within a specific set of Semetic languages and the Afro-Asiatic language family, and NOT within any form of Greek or the Indo-European language family.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13668
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Well suit yourself.  I thought calling people out on their bullshit is what happens here almost daily.  Look at the level of debate that occurs here from most theists that come here, especially regarding hard science supposedly "proving" their particular god belief.  Yet they are engaged by the atheist science nerds almost ad infinitum.

We atheists here are subjected to an anti-atheist bigotry almost from the get-go.  We are reviled by most all of the "True Believers™"   We deserve to go to Hell, we have no real Morals....blah blah.

 

edit:  as far as the tactic of "baffling with bull shit" well sorry to say but that seems to be the major tactic that most theists of any category throw at  atheists.  But really, what else have they got to fall back on ?  ....yet the dialog continues between us.

Prozac, Noony IS a bigot, he is going way beyond merely saying "bullshit". He has had a few years here blaming Jews for everything. It is conspiracy crap on the level of faked moon landing.

If he had just been saying "The Jewish god is bullshit, like every other claimed deity in human history" that would be one thing.

I think Furry is capable from separating her claims from her person. We do attack claims, but hating an entire label of people is absurd. Noony cannot get it through his head that the reason that conflict has been going on is because BOTH sides and because it is tradition based and religion based.

If BOTH Israel and Palestine had a majority that took on secular constitutions like America, and their majorities on both sides wanted such, this conflict would not be happening. Noony sees every Jew and Jew supporter as an enemy, which is fucked up.

Atheists are right to attack all god claims, whatever label. I find the entire idea of any type of invisible friend to be absurd. But this world is far to small and connected to hate every single person in a group even if we may hate the claims they make.

I am quite sure if Noony would pull his head out of his as and look, he would find plenty of good people in Israel and even here in the states that are Jews. He is stuck on the "they stole my land" and "virtue of the oppressed", which is why he has his head up his ass.

He also refuses to see that while there certainly decent Muslims and Arabs in Palestine, THEY WOULD NOT set up a secular state.  And he wont accept that I am NOT for a Jewish state, just an Israeli state. And would be for a secular Palestinian state, but not a Muslim state.

It is NOT that  he attacks Jews claims, it is that he hates them for no good fucking reason, other than picking an arbitrary starting point in a conflict that has been going on for 1400 years.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Ktulu wrote:
This thread is losing focus fast... 

           Well the majority of exchanges between Furry and Nony are quite interesting and a little drama from Brian with some ALL CAPS thrown in, what's the big deal ?

He has yet to fully grasp that failing to damn Zionism is like praising the Nazis or the Klan.

Anti-zionism is a moral imperative.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Ktulu wrote:
This thread is losing focus fast... 

           Well the majority of exchanges between Furry and Nony are quite interesting and a little drama from Brian with some ALL CAPS thrown in, what's the big deal ?

He has yet to fully grasp that failing to damn Zionism is like praising the Nazis or the Klan.

Anti-zionism is a moral imperative.

Believe me, if Zionism were even remotely on par with the NAZIs or the Klan, I'd be all over Zionism like white on rice.  And having mentioned the NAZIs, according to Godwin's Law, you've now lost the debate, so kindly STFU.

"Zionism" is nothing more than the realization that there is only =one= place on this entire planet where we have enough of a legitimate claim to "belong there" that we can go that doesn't involve being murdered because we don't "belong" wherever else we happen to be.

Contrary to whatever bogus propaganda you've read -- the same bogus propaganda that has you completely lost when it comes to fundamental laws of Physics -- the problem of Jews in Eretz Yisrael is NOT NOT NOT caused, in any way, shape or form, by Zionism.  The problems are caused by theological imperatives with Islam.  There is a THEOLOGICAL belief that once a land has been conquered by Muslims, it must be protected and defended, at any and all costs, against the loss of that land to any other religion.  Furthermore, because Islam is a displacement theology, there is a THEOLOGICAL belief that Judaism is wrong and that Jews need to convert or be subjected to discriminatory practices as well as military action.  Failure to drive out the "infidel" from lands that were once conquered by Muslims is a SIN within Islam.

But more to the historical point, what created the earliest conflicts between Zionists and Muslims in Eretz Yisrael is that we did whatever they wanted when we went to buy land because they thought "Hey, it's okay to screw the Jews!"  We bought marsh and swamp land, malaria-infested parts of Eretz Yisrael, from the Ottoman Turks as well as Arabs, and turned in into productive land.  And this caused the next religious showdown -- the only way a non-Muslim, according to Islamic THEOLOGY, prospers is by theft, fraud, deceit, etc.  As we recovered more and more land, they jacked up the prices, and Jews outside of Eretz Yisrael poured money into the Zionist movement to pay what they were demanding -- that's why so much land, all with valid records for PURCHASING the land from its rightful Ottoman or Arab land-owners, was bought by the Jewish National Fund.

But it gets better -- as we developed the land for agricultural purposes, many of the Jewish families who'd contributed to BUY the land and PAY for its reclamation, moved to Eretz Yisrael.  Arabs, who saw the new kibutzim as opportunities for agricultural work, flocked to Eretz Yisrael and then discovered that the people who PAID to BUY the land that was RECLAIMED were intending to work it.  This created intense animosity which resulted in frequent attacks on Jews who were living on land they had BOUGHT and PAID FOR, often at significant multiples to it's price, had it been offered for sale to a Muslim.

The final coup de gras, they thought, was the attack in 1948 by the surrounding Arab states.  After several decades of continual attacks by Arab Muslims against the Jewish population, including aligning with Germany in both WWI and WWII, the Arab states tried to destroy the newly declared State of Israel.  Arabs that stayed put and didn't attack or pose a threat to Israel were left alone, for the most part -- that's why there is a large Arab population =inside= of Israel today.  Many Arabs living in Israel were promised that they'd be given Jewish property if they'd just kindly get out of the way of the advancing Arab armies.  So they did -- they FREELY CHOSE to side with the aggressors in the 1948 war and tried to aid in the destruction of Israel.  When the war was over they wanted to move home, but they'd demonstrated their willingness to help destroy Israel and, thankfully, haven't been allowed back in.  Our victory in the '48 war, and every other war since, continues to be seen through the lens of Islam -- we only won those wars because we "cheated" -- non-Muslims cannot have anything "good" happen unless we "cheat" somehow.

Since the '48 war, the same types of antics that prevailed from about 1890 through the '30s and '40s continued.  We'd buy something from an Arab, and actually expect to get to live in or use our property.  They'd engage in acts of violence, the same as from the 1890's through the 1920's when Great Britain tried to straighten things out, and when the negative consequences of their actions happened, they'd cry "Foul!" and want a do-over.  When the Jews who bought and paid for whatever it was we bought and paid for, Arabs would be further infuriated because we actually expected to use what we actually bought and paid for, many times at greatly inflated prices.  As a result of violence wherever Jews and Muslims interacted, more moderate Arabs would sell out, almost invariably to Jews, who'd then be accused of whatever crime was en vogue at the moment.  And if Jews engaged in self-defense, we'd be accused of still more crimes.

This is where we stand today.  Arab Muslims attack Jews, Jews engage in self-defense, this creates conflict at the borders of the conflict, Arabs sell out to Jewish buyers, Jews move in to their property, more attacks, more violence, more selling out.  If you look at land ownership patterns throughout Judea and Samaria, there is a gradual erosion of Arab land ownership as their co-religionists' violent acts drive them from their own land.  Because the problem is that Jews refuse to convert to Islam, it's our fault, period.  It is simply never the fault of the Muslims who are turning their children into walking bombs and it is never the fault of their political and religious leaders who've not pointed out that the Qur'an also says that when Muslims =don't= prevail, it really can be their own damned fault.  Which it is, and which it has been, for well over 100 years now.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3659
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Prozac, Noony

Brian37 wrote:

Prozac, Noony IS a bigot...

 

Everyone for varied reasons is a bigot toward someone.  The OWS protestors certainly despise the 1% crowd and they lump them all together as a class of people.   I don't speak for Nony but my perception is that his gripe is against Israeli occupation ( Zionism, which at one time the United Nations equated with racism ) and not against people of Semitic ancestry, which I assume the Palestinian Arabs would also qualify as.

 

Brian37 wrote:
he is going way beyond merely saying "bullshit". He has had a few years here blaming Jews for everything. It is conspiracy crap on the level of faked moon landing.

 

Okay, so ignore him then.  I mean what are you suggesting, something beyond that ?  Censorship based upon "hate speech" ?

 

Brian37 wrote:
If he had just been saying "The Jewish god is bullshit, like every other claimed deity in human history" that would be one thing.

 

For some religious Jews even your level of so-called objective criticism ( "the Jewish god is bullshit )  might qualify as a bigoted response.  It's a matter of perception in many instances.

 

Brian37 wrote:
I think Furry is capable from separating her claims from her person. We do attack claims, but hating an entire label of people is absurd. Noony cannot get it through his head that the reason that conflict has been going on is because BOTH sides and because it is tradition based and religion based.

 

I am absolutely certain that Noony favors one side over the other but perhaps not for the reasons that you are asserting.  As I stated both sides are Semitic peoples, and most racial bigots that hate Jews generally don't make exceptions for Arabs.

 

Brian37 wrote:
If BOTH Israel and Palestine had a majority that took on secular constitutions like America, and their majorities on both sides wanted such, this conflict would not be happening.

 

Yes we do have a secular constitution and yet we still had a Civil War that cost more American lives than all subsequent American wars since then. 

 

Brian37 wrote:
Noony sees every Jew and Jew supporter as an enemy, which is fucked up.

 

 So educate him.  I suggest you tone down the angry rhetoric if you want him to take you seriously, though. Even Rednef went ballistic over you and left the forum and he's a fellow atheist.

 

Brian37 wrote:
Atheists are right to attack all god claims, whatever label.

 

And have any Christians embraced your effort to "attack all god claims" ?  One man's freedom fighter is another man's anti-christian bigot.

 

Brian37 wrote:
I find the entire idea of any type of invisible friend to be absurd.

 

So do I.

 

Brian37 wrote:
But this world is far to small and connected to hate every single person in a group even if we may hate the claims they make.

 

  I consider myself to be a misanthrope.  That means for various legitimate reasons I despise the entire human race.  How's that for bigotry ?   Nevertheless I don't "hate" every human I come in contact with.  Some persons are quite valiant and admirable,  and I willingly make exceptions for them yet I retain my bigotry towards humanity in general.   I'm a big supporter of "racial profiling" although in my case the definition must be expanded beyond ethnic categories.

 

Brian37 wrote:
I am quite sure if Noony would pull his head out of his as and look, he would find plenty of good people in Israel and even here in the states that are Jews. He is stuck on the "they stole my land" and "virtue of the oppressed", which is why he has his head up his ass.

He also refuses to see that while there certainly decent Muslims and Arabs in Palestine, THEY WOULD NOT set up a secular state.  And he wont accept that I am NOT for a Jewish state, just an Israeli state. And would be for a secular Palestinian state, but not a Muslim state.

It is NOT that  he attacks Jews claims, it is that he hates them for no good fucking reason, other than picking an arbitrary starting point in a conflict that has been going on for 1400 years.

 

 

  So reason it out with him.  Tone down the ANGER IN YOUR POSTS BECAUSE IT MAKES PEOPLE TUNE YOU OUT !!!!!!

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  So

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  So reason it out with him.  Tone down the ANGER IN YOUR POSTS BECAUSE IT MAKES PEOPLE TUNE YOU OUT !!!!!!

+1.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."