T1B

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:My faith is right and the other ones are wrong, it really is that simple.

Maybe it is. Doesn't feel right... because I grew up a Christian, in a dual faith household. Christians want to save people. It's not enough to have faith that's right. Everyone else has to be saved, too. No one really wants to see somebody else suffer in hellfire. So, there's that part of me that screams, 'you have to want to save everybody; they can be right, too, in their faith, but they can't be allowed to be wrong'. If that makes sense.

I'm not a Christian.

I have faith that I'm right. I also respect that people can believe whatever they feel is right and have equal faith that they are right.

Faith doesn't allow for examining/bettering one's place/relationship with god? (unless i misunderstood what you wrote about sussing it out with god in the afterlife.)

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:I could see a grouchy rabbi complain about a Nativity Scene, but..a tree? The Christmas tree is clearly a European pagan vestige that like many other aspects of the Christer Cult has been welded into the overall package of Redemption, et al.

The Rabbi didn't ask them to remove anything, he wanted a Menorah put up. His point was, if you're going to represent 1 faith, then you better represent them all. I think the whole thing is stupid.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:But Whistler, if you plainly regard the hokum of the Christers concerning their Perfect Sword-Bearing Lamb as being obviously ludicrous, well then how can you claim to have a firm belief in the same bizarre and really grotesque aspects of the Old Testament...ie, "your faith"?

I believe you're starting to get it.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:What, a rational person is supposed to accept the tale of Moses and the Egyptians in some sort of literal capacity? Or any of the other blood-soaked tales of vengence and betrayal that make up the ancient Hebrew religious history? Tell us again how firm you are with this "faith"--and why.

My faith is right and the other ones are wrong, it really is that simple. I have faith that I'm right. I also respect that people can believe whatever they feel is right and have equal faith that they are right.

So you're just as (irrationally) intolerant as any Christer Evangelical or Taliban education expert. And of course you, what...accept the Old Testament paradigm of an Hebraic centrality to the universe, as it were, with all of the seething vengeful "jealous God" religious design?

That's your "faith"?

Or, as you twist your words, "have faith that you're right."

You've neither, and moreover you know that you're faking it.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: You've neither, and moreover you know that you're faking it.

What is your own, if I may ask?

LTS TRN 2 wrote: What, a rational person is supposed to accept the tale of Moses and the Egyptians in some sort of literal capacity? Or any of the other blood-soaked tales of vengence and betrayal that make up the ancient Hebrew religious history? Tell us again how firm you are with this "faith"--and why.

I agree. But christians and muslims also believe the hebrew tales.

Jews believe what jews believe
Christians believe what jews believe and that Christ was the son of god
Muslims believe the other tales but believe Christ was a prophet not the son of god

Why these retards kill each other over this amazes me.

Ingse Bodil wrote:... because I grew up a Christian, ....



I'm not a Christian.

Believing and receiving Jesus Christ makes one a 'Christian.'

When that happens God (Spirit) lives inside of you.

Do you think God dies because you then decide you want to denounce Jesus Christ ... ?

No, once you take Him it's a done deal.
Your identity changes in an instant -- you are FOREVER God's child.
You have complete freedom from curse and destruction that all mankind faces.

IB, you either never were a Christian, or you ARE a Christian, despite now saying something to the contrary.

poptart wrote: You have complete freedom from curse and destruction that all mankind faces.

Utter nonsense.

In what do you have faith, Marty .... ?

LTS TRN 2 wrote:So you're just as (irrationally) intolerant as any Christer Evangelical or Taliban education expert.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: I also respect that people can believe whatever they feel is right and have equal faith that they are right.

^ Yup, I sound pretty intolerant there, don't I? As far as rationality goes, anyone who has a problem with "faith" is going to slap that label on. You really need to point that keen incite back at yourself and figure out who and what you are before you spew forth any more of that watered down venom.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And of course you, what...accept the Old Testament paradigm of an Hebraic centrality to the universe, as it were, with all of the seething vengeful "jealous God" religious design?

If all you get out of Judaism is "vengeful 'jealous God' religious design", then you not only missed the boat, but you never even showed up at the dock. You continually prove either ignorance or dishonesty every time you post that shit.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:That's your "faith"?

Or, as you twist your words, "have faith that you're right."

You've neither, and moreover you know that you're faking it.

You're a very unhappy person inside and out, aren't you? If you didn't come across as such an asshole, I might even feel sorry for you, but I don't.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: If all you get out of Judaism is "vengeful 'jealous God' religious design", then you not only missed the boat, but you never even showed up at the dock. You continually prove either ignorance or dishonesty every time you post that shit.

But isn't that all there is, when it comes to the god of the OT? god of the OT and god of the NT are two different beings. God isn't love in the OT. God is frightening, mercurial, vicious, hypocritical, hateful, and extremely passionate. But it is not a loving God.

Ingse Bodil wrote:

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: If all you get out of Judaism is "vengeful 'jealous God' religious design", then you not only missed the boat, but you never even showed up at the dock. You continually prove either ignorance or dishonesty every time you post that shit.

But isn't that all there is, when it comes to the god of the OT? god of the OT and god of the NT are two different beings. God isn't love in the OT. God is frightening, mercurial, vicious, hypocritical, hateful, and extremely passionate. But it is not a loving God.

How anyone can be so stupid and still use a computer is amazing. Try a little research and educate yourself on Judaism (hint it's more than just the OT) before you shit out another foolish post.

It's man who isn't loving.
And your take is so very man-like.
Point the finger at someone other than yourself.

Know where it came from, IB.

What was the very first thing Adam did when God asked him about breaking the covenant .... ?
He blamed it on "the woman, who YOU (God) gave me."

He pussed out.
Blamed his fug up on God.

Man's been doing it ever since.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:

Ingse Bodil wrote:

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: If all you get out of Judaism is "vengeful 'jealous God' religious design", then you not only missed the boat, but you never even showed up at the dock. You continually prove either ignorance or dishonesty every time you post that shit.

But isn't that all there is, when it comes to the god of the OT? god of the OT and god of the NT are two different beings. God isn't love in the OT. God is frightening, mercurial, vicious, hypocritical, hateful, and extremely passionate. But it is not a loving God.

How anyone can be so stupid and still use a computer is amazing. Try a little research and educate yourself on Judaism (hint it's more than just the OT) before you shit out another foolish post.

I've got a black paperback bible, TWIS, and a decade of Catholic indoctrination flavored with a strong dose of Southern Baptist passion. And I'm not a Christian (though I think everyone can benefit through Jesus the teacher). I don't have to be afraid of Judaism anymore.

I used to read the bible for fun, TWIS. It's a great library of thought, true or not. Just as I used to read various mythologies for fun (with the bible being different, in those readings, of course). God is indeed all the things I mentioned above, and that you take LTS to task for assuming is the totality of Judaism. That 'Angry God' preaching one of the Mathers' boys did back in the 17th century wasn't NT, it was straight OT. You don't fuck with the OT god.

OT god is not loving, OT god is indeed God the Father... and Dad is never to be flexed with. Sometimes he changes his mind. Sometimes he plays it all off as part of his plan when he does so. He can be gentle to a nation who sneers at him and abjectly cruel to a couple little kids who call out a prophet. You don't cross Yahweh. But Yahweh does love him some trickery (or, if the trickery is 'on our side', call it 'wit').

Is Judaism about that god; or about Moses, Moses '(and Aaron's, and Miriams?) law and the philosophy surrounding that set of law? or something else?

It can't be about always having a home to turn to no matter how much of a fuck up you are (God always loves his Chosen no matter how they turn from him, The Groom always takes back the Bride).

poptart wrote:It's man who isn't loving.
And your take is so very man-like.
Point the finger at someone other than yourself.

Know where it came from, IB.

What was the very first thing Adam did when God asked him about breaking the covenant .... ?
He blamed it on "the woman, who YOU (God) gave me."

He pussed out.
Blamed his fug up on God.

Man's been doing it ever since.

Yes, for every finger pointed, there are 3 more and a thumb pointing back at the self. We have free will.

Gods do not love, they just are. Even when they are Love itself. Man choses to hate or love. It is Man who loves (or hates). Christ asks all of us to choose Love.

Adam was afraid. And Adam was also correct -- but only because beneath the surface is the accusation that God wanted Adam to fail. Did he?

OT god is still a psycho wargod.

Ingse Bodil wrote:

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:

Ingse Bodil wrote: But isn't that all there is, when it comes to the god of the OT? god of the OT and god of the NT are two different beings. God isn't love in the OT. God is frightening, mercurial, vicious, hypocritical, hateful, and extremely passionate. But it is not a loving God.

How anyone can be so stupid and still use a computer is amazing. Try a little research and educate yourself on Judaism (hint it's more than just the OT) before you shit out another foolish post.

Blah blah blah blah blah ...

I'll help you one more time. Start here http://www.jewfaq.org/index.htm and get back to me after you learn something.

I killed 1/16th of Christmas. I haven't been a CHRIST-KILLER since 1998.

--youknowwho

Ingse Bodil wrote:.....because beneath the surface is the accusation that God wanted Adam to fail. Did he?

I can't answer for God.

It doesn't matter either way, IB.
First thing to come to grips with is that God is the creator and you are merely the creation.

poptart wrote:Believing and receiving Jesus Christ makes one a 'Christian.'

OK, I guess, but the operative word here is and. The mere act of having once "received" Christ does not a Christian make if the belief isn't there.

When that happens God (Spirit) lives inside of you.

If God (Spirit) lives inside the Christian believer, yet that individual behaves in what some might describe as an un-Christian way (e.g. buttfucking little boys), is it safe to assume that Satan (Spirit) also has taken up residence in the same body, making Jesus and the devil roommates?

Do you think God dies because you then decide you want to denounce Jesus Christ ... ?

I hope not. I don't wanna be held responsible for God's death.

No, once you take Him it's a done deal.

How convenient. It's like a lifetime immunization against eternal damnation!

Your identity changes in an instant -- you are FOREVER God's child.

According to you Christers, aren't we all God's children? Even the non-believers among us?

You have complete freedom from curse and destruction that all mankind faces.

Pretty strong selling point there. No wonder so many have been sold.

IB, you either never were a Christian, or you ARE a Christian, despite now saying something to the contrary.

So is there a blood test or somethin' to check if someone is JC-positive?

mvscal wrote:

Smackie Chan wrote:yet that individual behaves in what some might describe as an un-Christian way (e.g. buttfucking little boys),

When did buttfucking little boys become un-Christian behavior?

I guess right around the time that church leaders deemed it a sin. I didn't say I considered it un-Christian, but others might.

Smackie Chan wrote:

poptart wrote:Believing and receiving Jesus Christ makes one a 'Christian.'

OK, I guess, but the operative word here is and. The mere act of having once "received" Christ does not a Christian make if the belief isn't there.

If a person once receives Jesus with a belief that he is the Christ then he becomes a 'Christian.'

If God (Spirit) lives inside the Christian believer, yet that individual behaves in what some might describe as an un-Christian way (e.g. buttfucking little boys), is it safe to assume that Satan (Spirit) also has taken up residence in the same body, making Jesus and the devil roommates?

People who have received Christ continue to sin, sometimes engaging in horrible behavior.
We are born with a nature that is against God, so it's my 'take' that people sin and do horrible things (Christians as well as others) because changing one's nature is really hard to do.
Also, Satan is living and active.
He will continue to lie, deceive, and hurt people until the day he is put away.

According to you Christers, aren't we all God's children? Even the non-believers among us?

Those who receive Christ are God's children.
Unless that happens a person remains the child of their earth father.
All of our earthly fathers are decendants of Adam, and hence we are all born into curses and destruction.
That's why immediately after Adam broke the covenant and was separated from God, God promised that the Christ would come -- the one to destroy the works of Satan and bring man back to his correct state of being with God.

poptart wrote:

Ingse Bodil wrote:.....because beneath the surface is the accusation that God wanted Adam to fail. Did he?

I can't answer for God.

It doesn't matter either way, IB. First thing to come to grips with is that God is the creator and you are merely the creation.

Except that it does matter. Why would god set up anyone to fail? Why rig the game? Why set up eternal damnation/salvation in the first place? What's the point?

Maybe the mormons (to pull in Mike the Lab Rat's thread in the Theology forum), and the Lutherans? are right. Maybe it's all preset from the beginning, and it's not just a matter of not being able to earn 'grace' but 'grace' being a gift (as Roger put it a long time ago).......... at least with it being a gift there's some hope. But with pre-ordination there's no hope whatsoever. Why bother?

Smackie Chan wrote:

mvscal wrote:

Smackie Chan wrote:yet that individual behaves in what some might describe as an un-Christian way (e.g. buttfucking little boys),

When did buttfucking little boys become un-Christian behavior?

I guess right around the time that church leaders deemed it a sin. I didn't say I considered it un-Christian, but others might.

It's always been unChristian behavior. Christ doesn't hurt little kids or force people to do things. But human beings make up a lot of excuses, because humans put roadblocks in the way in the first place. The Church's problem is human authority figures trying to make themselves look good, not Christ or Christ' teachings.

Ingse Bodil wrote:Except that it does matter. Why would god set up anyone to fail? Why rig the game? Why set up eternal damnation/salvation in the first place? What's the point?

If you don't like the way God operates then you have three choices.

1. Reject him
2. Deny that He really exists
3. Make up in your own mind a God that you feel good about, and worship him/her/it

Which route have you chosen to go .... ?

The Church's problem is human authority figures trying to make themselves look good, not Christ or Christ' teachings.

I agree, rack.

I don't even know. I'm a foxhole theist. If good unexplainable things happen without having to also involve bad unexplainable things to someone else, then great. One has to be careful when one seeks to gain gods attentions, though. Christ is cool. Christ would probably blanch at being put on a pedastal as equal to God Itself. There is something to sainthood and the intercession of the saints; but I think it's fiendishly clever how transparent the Church is about how political sainthood and beatification is. All gods have power because they're all aspects of one unknown; but not all gods are equal or should be equally latched on upon.

I'm not a Christian because I'm not deserving of the title. I don't see where most self-proclaimed Christians are either, though. Being a Christian should be a calling, not just a lifeline to personal spiritual salvation.

The megachurch signals the end of true christianity. It's like being in an overcrowded high school -- somebody is going to get left out. Voices are going to get left out. I think the megachurches should be saved for summer and winter conventions... that's rejuvenating to be surrounded by that many people for a special occasion. I don't think it's the same when you do it every week. But I don't know. Maybe I'd feel different if I saw the megachurches attempting to be one tenth as community oriented with the money pouring in as little catholic parishes with hardly a dime to their name. You know what i mean?

Ingse Bodil wrote:Christ would probably blanch at being put on a pedastal as equal to God Itself.

Matthew 28:18: And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

I'm not a Christian because I'm not deserving of the title. I don't see where most self-proclaimed Christians are either, though. Being a Christian should be a calling, not just a lifeline to personal spiritual salvation.

Being a Christian is simply believing and receiving Jesus Christ.
You're not required to DO anything else, and you're not required to try to BE anything else.

Consider this exchange between Jesus Christ and his disciples


John 6:28: Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29: Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:So you're just as (irrationally) intolerant as any Christer Evangelical or Taliban education expert.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: I also respect that people can believe whatever they feel is right and have equal faith that they are right.

^ Yup, I sound pretty intolerant there, don't I? As far as rationality goes, anyone who has a problem with "faith" is going to slap that label on. You really need to point that keen incite back at yourself and figure out who and what you are before you spew forth any more of that watered down venom.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And of course you, what...accept the Old Testament paradigm of an Hebraic centrality to the universe, as it were, with all of the seething vengeful "jealous God" religious design?

If all you get out of Judaism is "vengeful 'jealous God' religious design", then you not only missed the boat, but you never even showed up at the dock. You continually prove either ignorance or dishonesty every time you post that shit.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:That's your "faith"?

Or, as you twist your words, "have faith that you're right."

You've neither, and moreover you know that you're faking it.

You're a very unhappy person inside and out, aren't you? If you didn't come across as such an asshole, I might even feel sorry for you, but I don't.

Look, Whistler, YOU are the one posting right up front that "You're faith is right, and theirs is wrong." Okay?...that's a pretty clear example of straight up intolerance--and yes, you are one and the same ESSENTIALLY (not personally) with other similar Judeo-based religious types. Got it?

I'm with the people who have been victimized by the Hebraic intolerance. And that's a lot. Face it, you cowering twit (who NEVER actually takes a stand, states an opinion, explains a position, or has ANY take to begin with), the Old Testament is a vile and utterly primitive record of a seething nomadic stone-age tribe...PERIOD. The few sections of philosophic proverbs, etc, are BORROWED. Like the Christer cult it bred, Judaism is a hodge-podge quilt of other older religions and cultures. As for the New Testament, this is a perverse and desperate cult effort of these very same Hebrews to somehow preserve their (70 ADE) crushed and scattered city...PERIOD.

Now it's time to rack Jimmy Carter for calling BULLSHIT on the thoroughly criminal and vicious Zionist race-state experiment. Read the N.Y. Times today? They slipped in a little piece, admitting all the news that's fit to read, that Carter is holding fast despite the pissy auto-smears coming from the Anti Defamation League.

And why are these rats in a tizzy? The "A" word.

Oh yeah, get ready.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Look, Whistler, YOU are the one posting right up front that "You're faith is right, and theirs is wrong." Okay?...that's a pretty clear example of straight up intolerance

That's not intolerance, you boob.

SOMEBODY's faith is right.
He's just expressing his own faith.

If he somehow said that you don't have a right to YOUR own faith then he'd be intolerant.

He's not doing that at ALL.

You're making this pretty easy Nick. Is it your way of saying Happy Hanukkah to me?

LTS TRN 2 wrote: Look, Whistler, YOU are the one posting right up front that "You're faith is right, and theirs is wrong." Okay?

OK so we've established my position on that. Like potart said, someone has to be right, I just like to think it's me. It would be kinda foolish to support something I think is wrong.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:I'm with the people who have been victimized by the Hebraic intolerance.

You can't possibly be serious about this. The victim card, you're going to the victim card? The same thing you accuse the Jews of up and down the internet? Holy shit you've got some big stones, to bad there in your head and not in your nutsack. I'll agree you're been a victim here for all these years, but that was a beating you brought on yourself. No restitution for you!

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
And that's a lot. Face it, you cowering twit (who NEVER actually takes a stand, states an opinion, explains a position, or has ANY take to begin with)

Now you have me confused, we established my position quite thoroughly. Could it be that you're so full of shit that you don't know what your talking about and have a need to lash out? Just because you don't like or agree with my stance/opinion/position doesn't mean I don't have one.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: the Old Testament is a vile and utterly primitive record of a seething nomadic stone-age tribe...PERIOD. The few sections of philosophic proverbs, etc, are BORROWED. Like the Christer cult it bred, Judaism is a hodge-podge quilt of other older religions and cultures. As for the New Testament, this is a perverse and desperate cult effort of these very same Hebrews to somehow preserve their (70 ADE) crushed and scattered city...PERIOD.

Like I told IB, if you believe that Judaism is all about the bullshit you stated above, then you're either ignorant or stupid or trolling (or a combination of all three).

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Now it's time to rack Jimmy Carter for calling BULLSHIT on the thoroughly criminal and vicious Zionist race-state experiment. Read the N.Y. Times today? They slipped in a little piece, admitting all the news that's fit to read, that Carter is holding fast despite the pissy auto-smears coming from the Anti Defamation League.

With all due respect to the former President, he should stick to Habitat for Humanity and leave the international relationship business to those with the capacity to understand it.

Whistler, your crawly evasions are tedious.

First, when we speak of the essential intolerance of Judaism, we refer to the basic defining characteristic of the religion itself. That is, "Our god is right, every other religion is wrong" IS what defines Judaism--and its offspring, Christer cult and Islam. Previously and concurrently, other religions large and small were tolerant of others being valid for those tribes or cultures who peacticed them. It was Judaism which first introduced the bitter intolerance expressed in such charming aspects as refusing to eat with non-Jews and killing any Jew who married out.

That you blithly sign on to this is your business. You're probably a "reformed" Jew to begin with, and have thus given up the basic toxic load of Judaism. But, you in fact continue to express support for the Zionist experiment. This is grossly hypocritical and will get you plungered in this corner every time. Typical of your spineless attiude, you never ackowledge or attempt to deal with the very real critical problems entailed in America's lock-step support of the apartheid state. You have never, despite your feigned indignation, offered any reasoned thought on the subject.

You claim that I've impugned Jews "up and down the internet"? Bullshit. My criticism is clearly aimed directly at Zionism, not Jews in general. Noam Chomsky is an author you don't DARE to read. You are a cowering little phony. Get it straight.

Jimmy Carter is not an expert in international diplomacy? Bullshit. Name anyone who's accomplished more. Who? Bibi Netenyahu? Henry Kissenger?

As Carter is bravely and nobly placing in the public consciousness, the utterly perverse and criminal actions of the "settler" contingent in Israel (a small but intesely radical minority of the Israeli public) cannot be permitted the free reign--and encouragement--they've enjoyed under the Chimp and his moronic Christer/Zionist nutjobs.

As Carter said of the wall being used to carve up and steal Palestinian land, "It is an abomination."

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote: the Old Testament is a vile and utterly primitive record of a seething nomadic stone-age tribe...PERIOD. The few sections of philosophic proverbs, etc, are BORROWED. Like the Christer cult it bred, Judaism is a hodge-podge quilt of other older religions and cultures. As for the New Testament, this is a perverse and desperate cult effort of these very same Hebrews to somehow preserve their (70 ADE) crushed and scattered city...PERIOD.

Like I told IB, if you believe that Judaism is all about the bullshit you stated above, then you're either ignorant or stupid or trolling (or a combination of all three).

Except all one needs is the bible itself. If people can read the book of Mormon and go 'what a load of horseshit!', isn't it also possible for people to read the OT and go 'this mother fucker is psycho!' as well? A person shouldn't have to go to your link (and thank you for it, by the way), in order not to get the impression both I and LTS get from the OT. And we're not the only ones.

Whatever else one may feel about what LTS writes, he is dead on about what is within the OT. I also think it's telling that so many people feel comfortable damning Christianity (or Islam) but will never be caught breathing one negative word about Judaism.

With all due respect to the former President, he should stick to Habitat for Humanity and leave the international relationship business to those with the capacity to understand it.

But it was Carter who was so instrumental in trying to establish peace between Israel and the Middle East (Egypt) in the first place. He does know of what he speaks. Something has gone terribly wrong in Israel. It is, indeed, a welfare church-state.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Whistler, your crawly evasions are tedious.

No Nick, what's tedious are your continued diatribes. Though you write with a certain flare and passion, it is full of bullshit and ignorance. It may win over people like IB, but most of us see it for the crap that it is.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:First, when we speak of the essential intolerance of Judaism, we refer to the basic defining characteristic of the religion itself. That is, "Our god is right, every other religion is wrong" IS what defines Judaism--and its offspring, Christer cult and Islam. Previously and concurrently, other religions large and small were tolerant of others being valid for those tribes or cultures who peacticed them. It was Judaism which first introduced the bitter intolerance expressed in such charming aspects as refusing to eat with non-Jews and killing any Jew who married out.

You obviously have no idea as to what "defines" Judaism or what it 's all about nor do you care to learn the truth about it as a modern day religion. Your continued blather about what you think about Judaism confirms your ignorance. Also, try and remember that it's 2006ad not 680bc, people and religions have changed. I don't know any Jew (from the most Orthodox to the most reform) who refuses to eat with a non-Jew, as for interfaith marriage, some may not like it, but please provide a link to modern day Judaism that supports killing Jews who marry out of the faith. Where do you come up this bullshit anyway?

LTS TRN 2 wrote:That you blithly sign on to this is your business. You're probably a "reformed" Jew to begin with, and have thus given up the basic toxic load of Judaism. But, you in fact continue to express support for the Zionist experiment. This is grossly hypocritical and will get you plungered in this corner every time. Typical of your spineless attiude, you never ackowledge or attempt to deal with the very real critical problems entailed in America's lock-step support of the apartheid state. You have never, despite your feigned indignation, offered any reasoned thought on the subject.

Wrong as usualm. Grew up ina Conservative (leaning towards Orthodox) home and Temple. How I practice my religion is of no concern to you. I support Israel, but you equate that with this Zionist conspiracy bullshit. You fail to recognize Jews who support Israel, but are critical of some of it's policies and actions. I have said it may times on these boards over the years, but you are to blind to see it. Most Jews that I know fall into this category. You choose to focus only on the exremists on both sides.

The rest of the shit you wrote is just that, shit and isn't worth my time addressing.

Ingse Bodil wrote: Except all one needs is the bible itself. If people can read the book of Mormon and go 'what a load of horseshit!', isn't it also possible for people to read the OT and go 'this mother fucker is psycho!' as well? A person shouldn't have to go to your link (and thank you for it, by the way), in order not to get the impression both I and LTS get from the OT. And we're not the only ones.

I provided you with a link that you could have used to educate yourself on Judaism, you've obviously chosen ignorance over intelligence. Props!

Whatever else one may feel about what LTS writes, he is dead on about what is within the OT. I also think it's telling that so many people feel comfortable damning Christianity (or Islam) but will never be caught breathing one negative word about Judaism.

Pure an utter bullshit, you may be the dumbest person I've had the displeasure of running across. Props again.

TWIS,

Why on earth you spend the energy to reply to IB, is beyond me.

Happy Hanukkah! bro.

420 wrote:TWIS,

Why on earth you spend the energy to reply to IB, is beyond me.

Happy Hanukkah! bro.

And to you. I realize she's a lost cause, but I'm just wasting a little time on a Monday morning. Us desk jockeys need to do that once in a while.

Whistler, try to keep it straight...my description of original Jewish doctrine of course refers to its ancient origins--you know, the stories and adnomitions which make up the Torah, etc.

As for your personal religion, I similarly agree that of course it's your personal business and no concern of mine. But your weasally support of Israel (as though talk of Zionism somehow connotes "conspiracy theories") is typically evasive and fake.

Jimmy Carter is one of the most effective diplomats in modern history, despite his gentle and understated bearing. And his moral sense of justice coupled with his long-term vision of geo-politics gives him a solid and valid platform to address the situation. And he's very clear. You, however, have never--despite your repeated insistance to the contrary--addressed ANY of the dire problems inherent in America's bizarre lock-step support. of Israel. Nor, as I suggested, can you begin to actually face an argument by someone like Noam Chomsky.

All you do is tersely call "bullshit" and then...what?...burn one and put on soome Dead tapes? You're faking it, and I'm not.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
Jimmy Carter is one of the most effective diplomats in modern history.

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!


That statement ranks as one of the top 10 most ludicrous things ever posted on this or any other board....your naivete/stupidity is expanding thresholds previously thought unattainable....

You know it's going badly for you when you have me, mvscal & the seer all in agreement.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Whistler, try to keep it straight...my description of original Jewish doctrine of course refers to its ancient origins--you know, the stories and adnomitions which make up the Torah, etc.

And my point is of your lack of understanding of modern day Judaism.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:As for your personal religion, I similarly agree that of course it's your personal business and no concern of mine. But your weasally support of Israel (as though talk of Zionism somehow connotes "conspiracy theories") is typically evasive and fake.

So why bring it up if you agree it's none of your business? My support of Israel is neither evasive nor fake (what point are you trying to make with that statement?) and what do I have to do to make you understand that I don't hold Israel completely blameless?

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Jimmy Carter is one of the most effective diplomats in modern history, despite his gentle and understated bearing. And his moral sense of justice coupled with his long-term vision of geo-politics gives him a solid and valid platform to address the situation. And he's very clear. You, however, have never--despite your repeated insistance to the contrary--addressed ANY of the dire problems inherent in America's bizarre lock-step support. of Israel. Nor, as I suggested, can you begin to actually face an argument by someone like Noam Chomsky.

You're delusional about Carter.

Chomsky is as hypocritical a person as can be found along with being proven wrong (and a lier) on many topics (see China, Cambodia and Sudan for instance) as he is wrong (and lying) about Israel.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:All you do is tersely call "bullshit" and then...what?...burn one and put on soome Dead tapes? You're faking it, and I'm not.

I call "Bullshit" when it is in fact, Bullshit and you must have a factory that produces it for you.

BTW, I don't "burn one" anymore (unless we're talking CD's) and rarely listen to my old bootleg tapes, I stick to CD's and live stuff from on-line. I've taken my knowledge of the past and moved along to the present with open eyes for the future, I suggest you try the same.

Whistler disses and runs,

"You're delusional about Carter.

Chomsky is as hypocritical a person as can be found along with being proven wrong (and a lier) on many topics (see China, Cambodia and Sudan for instance) as he is wrong (and lying) about Israel."

Oh really? And what lies would those be? Gee, as usual you say a terse little dissmissal and offer nothing whatever to back it up. That's called "bullshitting." If you really had any balls at all, you'd at least point out ONE specific argument of Chomsky as an example. But you don't dare.

As for "modern Judaism," I'm very familiar with Michael Lerner as well as the basic Unitarian sensibility, and I've attended approximately two-hundred Bar and Bat Mitzvahs. So what? As liberal (ie, modern and rational) a take one would choose to apply to Judaism, it still comes down to the Torah, with such charming chapters as Leviticus and Dueteronomy. I suggest you read Spinoza as well as Chomsky (whom--admit it--you've never read at all).

and I've attended approximately two-hundred Bar and Bat Mitzvahs.

rich jews aren't the same as real jews, though, right?

why were you at that many coming of age parties? :? if i may ask. are you also a jew?

as for spinoza, from what little i know, nobody understands him.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: Oh really? And what lies would those be? Gee, as usual you say a terse little dissmissal and offer nothing whatever to back it up. That's called "bullshitting." If you really had any balls at all, you'd at least point out ONE specific argument of Chomsky as an example. But you don't dare.

You make this so easy, luckily (for you) I don't have much time so I'll hit you with a quicky.

Pol Pot, Chomsky was a big fan of that great humanitarian and defended him even after the proof of his mass murders were revealed. Here's a couple quotes from Noam ...

Refugees are frightened and defenseless, at the mercy of alien forces. They naturally tend to report what they believe their interlocutors wish to hear. While these reports must be considered seriously, care and caution are necessary. Specifically, refugees questioned by Westerners or Thais have a vested interest in reporting atrocities on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries, an obvious fact that no serious reporter will fail to take into account.

the deaths in Cambodia were not the result of systematic slaughter and starvation organized by the state but rather attributable in large measure to peasant revenge, undisciplined military units out of government control, starvation and disease that are direct consequences of the US war, or other such factors.

He was a fucking apologist for Pol Pot you dipshit! He propped up authors who defended Pol Pot and panned others who's books disagreed with his opinion (even though he was wrong). He finally had to backpeddle in Manufacturing Consent that Pol Pot performed Genocide, but still defended his actions. The guy is a raving lunatic that is so self absorbed that he can't see the truth. Dershowitz often refers to "Planet Chomsky" as this guy is in his own world. I see why you love him so much.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:As for "modern Judaism," I'm very familiar with Michael Lerner as well as the basic Unitarian sensibility, and I've attended approximately two-hundred Bar and Bat Mitzvahs. So what? As liberal (ie, modern and rational) a take one would choose to apply to Judaism, it still comes down to the Torah, with such charming chapters as Leviticus and Dueteronomy. I suggest you read Spinoza as well as Chomsky (whom--admit it--you've never read at all).

Strawman, Red Herring, Incomprehensible Babble and Utter Non-sense, I see you’ve met Nick.

Ingse Bodil wrote: rich jews aren't the same as real jews, though, right?

Congratulations, you've just hit the end of the internet. Go home and don't come back, ever.