They Claim That They Are Not "Anti-Semites", Just "Anti-Zionists"
Boondock Saint
frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
wolf" over "anti-semitism".
I am not a liberal serving a minority because I feel guilt. I have no
guilt whatsoever in the situation. Unlike liberals who serve Blacks and
Hispanics, I am right there with them all. Why? Because I am a bastard,
an orphan. I have no obligation to any race, even if I am blonde haired
and blue eyed.
In fact, I had a discussion with a Muslim friend of mine. He could not
understand why I would argue for a race other then my own. He admitted
he would not do this. In essence, he strongly argued that he had a
demand to argue merely because he felt he was arguing "for his own
people". You have one billion of your own people. Why pick on the
smallest nation of all? He is no longer a friend.
But, I am not alone in arguing against these anti-zionists. Millions
apon millions of Americans see what they are doing. Eighty six percent
of America is Christian. Two percent of America is Jewish. Day and night
we are told by these racists that the "Jews control us". They are lying,
dirty lying. Anyone knows this.
Let me quickly get my bias out of the way. Unlike them, I am upfront
about this and readily speak it. Beyond the fact that I am aware of
international Jewish suffering, and their history, I am a Christian. We
believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews. We believe whoever
curses Israel is cursed by God. We believe whoever blesses Israel is
blessed by God. So, yes, we have religious beliefs behind this. But,
even those religious beliefs are backed by strong reasoning.
I firmly believe that anything I believe has empirical evidence and is
worthy of being reasoned with others. We come to our beliefs through the
court of free speech. We debate with each other. I have dropped beliefs
others have persuaded me are wrong. I have kept beliefs that I have been
persuaded are right.
First of all, one of the main things I see these people doing is:
They claim they are only "anti-zionist", not "anti-Jewish" -- then we
hear about how attacks against Jews are spurred on by their marches and
movements. We see synagogues get burned down. We see Jews killed.
In debating with them, I have seen some leftists claim these things...
then they go off and make coarse jokes against the Jews. They will sit
there and say it is "wrong to say we are anti-semites, you are just
crying wolf" -- then they go and do it. It is a slap in the face. They
condemn defense.
They condemn the Jews defending themselves.
I saw this in reading about the Holocaust. They would condemn Jews for
fighting back, then they would ask Jews why they don't fight back.
We all know well what Hamas says about the Jews, surely? Or is it true
that what the Hamas really believe still is not common knowledge? We
hear all about Jews knocking down the "poor Palestinians", why is it
these same media outlets do not tell us exactly what these Palestinian
terrorists believe? Why do they argue for their beliefs, as if they knew
them?
And, how could the world be so blind as to their beliefs when these
beliefs are core to Islam itself?
Is there any excuse whatsoever to this? Can anyone really say they are
unaware that Islam teaches that the Jews are liars and deceivers? Can
anyone really argue that Islam does not do these things when the whole
basis of Islam's legitimacy is on the lie that the Jews lied with the
Bible? Is everyone so ignorant of Islam that they have never heard of
the "Ishmael switch out story"?
Even worse, beyond the fact they admit their motivation is 'we hate
Jews', that they believe 'God has given us a divine sanction, order, to
kill the Jews'... we could look at their behavior.
Muslims, in Israel, are successful. They have more rights in Israel then
in any Muslim nation. They are elected officials.
Why on earth would they demand their own nation, especially when they
never demanded this while these lands were under the rule of other
Muslims? Do Muslims not have enough nations they can call their own? Do
they need another one? This shows Muslims are absolutely biased against
other nations and peoples -- but who is unaware of the fact that you,
not being a Muslim, are an "infidel"?
That many people would overlook all of these glaring facts, that they
would overlook the intentional purposes of Islamic terrorism... that
they would blame it all on the Jews is absolute proof of their own
hatred of the Jews.
Rodrigo
No User
news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
> wolf" over "anti-semitism".
You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of Christianity?
Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with Jews
and their laws.
I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse Christ.........
See ya in Hell, You anti-Christ piece of trash. This idiot has the nerve to
call it's-self a Christian, yet it praises the killers of Christ.
Plonk
Altharus
should consider setting up a web blog or site.
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
Ed
"No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> > As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> > frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> > am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
> > wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>
>
> You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
Christianity?
> Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with
Jews
> and their laws.
Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
>
> I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
> 'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
It's obvious you never read it.
>
> Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse
Christ.........
No, that would be the Devil, which is a Christian concept. In Judaism,
there is no devil, no hell.
>
> See ya in Hell, You anti-Christ piece of trash.
No thanks, I don't like your wife's cooking.
This idiot has the nerve to
> call it's-self a Christian, yet it praises the killers of Christ.
What is laughable is that you have the nerve to call yourself a human being.
>
> Plonk
backatcha.
>
>
Boondock Saint
> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
>
>>As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
>>frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
>>am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
>>wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>
>
>
> You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of Christianity?
> Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with Jews
> and their laws.
Jesus is a Jew, as are all of the Apostles.
>
> I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
> 'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
Which is what you are doing by embracing Islam.
>
> Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse Christ.........
An antichrist came out from us. Jews did not come out from us, but we
came out from them.
Had you kept this verse in context, from John, a Jew, who had ample
oppourtunity to claim all Jews are antichrist and did not, you would
have exposed your own lying slander:
18Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the
antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how
we know it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they did not
really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have
remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
>
> See ya in Hell, You anti-Christ piece of trash. This idiot has the nerve to
> call it's-self a Christian, yet it praises the killers of Christ.
Jesus said that slanderers are of the Devil. You slander me without
evidence.
John 8:44 speaks well of you:
John 8
44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your
father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to
the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his
native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
I have provided ample evidence for my statements against you, but here
now, I hold out yet another:
Romans 11:
17If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild
olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the
nourishing sap from the olive root, 18do not boast over those branches.
If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root
supports you. 19You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I
could be grafted in." 20Granted. But they were broken off because of
unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid.
21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you
either.
...
28As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account;
but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the
patriarchs, 29for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. 30Just as
you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a
result of their disobedience, 31so they too have now become disobedient
in order that they too may now[8] receive mercy as a result of God's
mercy to you. 32For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that
he may have mercy on them all.
But, this is not addressed to you, because of you show yourself a
natural with slander. It is addressed to true Christians, not devils
like yourself who do not believe Jesus.
Boondock Saint
> "No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
> news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
>>
>>>As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
>>>frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
>>>am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
>>>wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>>
>>
>>You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
>
> Christianity?
>
>>Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with
>
> Jews
>
>>and their laws.
>
>
> Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
> explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
>
>
>
>>I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
>>'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
>
>
> It's obvious you never read it.
>
>
>>Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse
>
> Christ.........
>
> No, that would be the Devil, which is a Christian concept. In Judaism,
> there is no devil, no hell.
I would disagree there, the Devil is in Job, quite plainly.
But, seriously, disagreeing over the role of the Devil is nothing
compared to my disagreement with this man... I really should not even
bring it up, in context of this.
>
>>See ya in Hell, You anti-Christ piece of trash.
>
>
> No thanks, I don't like your wife's cooking.
>
> This idiot has the nerve to
>
>>call it's-self a Christian, yet it praises the killers of Christ.
>
>
> What is laughable is that you have the nerve to call yourself a human being.
They embrace evils which animals could never dream of.
>
>
>
>
>>Plonk
>
>
> backatcha.
>
>>
>
>
Boondock Saint
> Nice post, as usual. You have a way with words and clear vision. You
> should consider setting up a web blog or site.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, I will take that advisement under
consideration.
No User
"Ed" <neso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:CKCdnVhmcoy...@comcast.com...
>
> "No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
> news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> > > As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> > > frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> > > am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who
cries
> > > wolf" over "anti-semitism".
> >
> >
> > You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
> Christianity?
> > Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with
> Jews
> > and their laws.
>
> Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
> explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
Last I heard Christians see Jesus as the son of God. NOT THE SON OF A JEW.
He was either the son of God or the son of a Jew. CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
> >
> > I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
> > 'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
>
> It's obvious you never read it.
Uh, yeah I have: You are of your father the devil.
> > Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse
> Christ.........
>
> No, that would be the Devil, which is a Christian concept. In Judaism,
> there is no devil, no hell.
So you think that when Jesus said: "No man may see the father unless he go
through the son he was a LIAR! Isn't that just like a Jew - Not only do you
murder him, you call his words lies. What else could one expect from the
ANTI-CHRIST.
When Jesus said you 'People' are of your father the devil..He was just
telling lies?
Ed
"No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
>
> "Ed" <neso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:CKCdnVhmcoy...@comcast.com...
> >
> > "No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
> > news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
> > > "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> > > > As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> > > > frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say.
I
> > > > am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who
> cries
> > > > wolf" over "anti-semitism".
> > >
> > >
> > > You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
> > Christianity?
> > > Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do
with
> > Jews
> > > and their laws.
> >
> > Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
> > explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
>
>
> Last I heard Christians see Jesus as the son of God. NOT THE SON OF A JEW.
> He was either the son of God or the son of a Jew. CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
How many Christians were there before Christ was born?
>
> > >
> > > I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE
BIBLE
> > > 'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
> >
> > It's obvious you never read it.
>
> Uh, yeah I have: You are of your father the devil.
Yeah, resort to name calling when you have no rational argument. Jerk.
>
> > > Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse
> > Christ.........
> >
> > No, that would be the Devil, which is a Christian concept. In Judaism,
> > there is no devil, no hell.
>
> So you think that when Jesus said: "No man may see the father unless he go
> through the son he was a LIAR! Isn't that just like a Jew - Not only do
you
> murder him, you call his words lies. What else could one expect from the
> ANTI-CHRIST.
>
> When Jesus said you 'People' are of your father the devil..He was just
> telling lies?
No........ the only one telling lies is YOU.
Boondock Saint
> "Ed" <neso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:CKCdnVhmcoy...@comcast.com...
>
>>"No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
>>news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
>>>
>>>>As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
>>>>frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
>>>>am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who
>>>
> cries
>
>>>>wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>>>
>>>
>>>You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
>>
>>Christianity?
>>
>>>Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with
>>
>>Jews
>>
>>>and their laws.
>>
>>Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
>>explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
>
>
>
> Last I heard Christians see Jesus as the son of God. NOT THE SON OF A JEW.
> He was either the son of God or the son of a Jew. CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
Matthew 27:11
Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him,
"Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied.
Matthew 1
1A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of
Abraham:
2Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah's wife,
7Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[1] and his brothers at
the time of the exile to Babylon.
12After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13Zerubbabel the father of Abiud,
Abiud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Eliud,
15Eliud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of
whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
17Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David,
fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile
to the Christ.[2]
There are many, many other such verses which show you a lying son of the
devil.
>
>
>>>I guess you've never read John-8-44....................I GUESS THE BIBLE
>>>'IS' TRUE---IN THE LAST DAYS MANY WILL BE DECEIVED BY THE ANT-CHRIST.
>>
>>It's obvious you never read it.
>
>
> Uh, yeah I have: You are of your father the devil.
>
>
>>>Who are the Anti-Christ? Uh, that would be those who refuse
>>
>>Christ.........
>>
>>No, that would be the Devil, which is a Christian concept. In Judaism,
>>there is no devil, no hell.
>
>
> So you think that when Jesus said: "No man may see the father unless he go
> through the son he was a LIAR! Isn't that just like a Jew - Not only do you
> murder him, you call his words lies. What else could one expect from the
> ANTI-CHRIST.
>
> When Jesus said you 'People' are of your father the devil..He was just
> telling lies?
Jesus did not say every Jew was a son of the devil, but men - apart from
their religion - who did as the sons of devils do. Such as you, who show
yourself to be a son of the devil for lying about what Jesus said, as I
proved above and in my other post.
In fact, everything about religion Jesus condemned against the Jews has
been well done over many, many more times by Gentiles... while the Jews
themselves have drawn back very far from these old beliefs.
John 8:
31To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my
teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth,
and the truth will set you free."
According to you, this is a "lie of Satan", because you are a liar.
Everyone knows all of the Apostles are Jews, as well as Jesus. Why do
you lie like this?
Could it be you wish to erase everything Jesus said, so you might teach
another Jesus, another "Good News"... which is not "good news" at all?
I think that the evidence points heavily in this direction.
Boondock Saint
Exactly, and this is entirely transparent. I corrected him using verse
and Scripture. I do not expect him to even try and reply back.
He hates what Jesus has to say, so he argues that Jesus didn't say it.
Count 1
> Altharus wrote:
> > Nice post, as usual. You have a way with words and clear vision. You
> > should consider setting up a web blog or site.
>
> Thanks for the vote of confidence, I will take that advisement under
> consideration.
I agree. Well written. Reflects mine own RL experiences as well to some
degree.
Thanks
No User
> No User wrote:
> > "Ed" <neso...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:CKCdnVhmcoy...@comcast.com...
> >
> >>"No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
> >>news:vqqqss...@corp.supernews.com...
> >>
> >>>"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> >>>
> >>>>As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> >>>>frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> >>>>am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who
> >>>
> > cries
> >
> >>>>wolf" over "anti-semitism".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>You call yourself a Christian? NOT! Uh, what was the basis of
> >>
> >>Christianity?
> >>
> >>>Uh, that would be the coming of Christ. Jesus wanted nothing to do with
> >>
> >>Jews
> >>
> >>>and their laws.
> >>
> >>Then how do you explain the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH??? How do you
> >>explain the Last Supper was a Passover Seder?
> >
> >
> >
> > Last I heard Christians see Jesus as the son of God. NOT THE SON OF A
JEW.
> > He was either the son of God or the son of a Jew. CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH
WAYS!
>
Answer my question: Was Jesus the SON OF GOD, or was he the son of a Jew?
(A) The Son Of God
(B) The Son Of a Jew
Well? Is it A or B? IT CAN'T BE BOTH!!
torresdD
http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/transcripts/2003/nov/031103.gradstein.ht
ml
BOB EDWARDS, host:
About 70,000 seminomadic Arab Bedouin live
in several dozen villages in the Negev Desert of
southern Israel.
Most of those villages are unrecognized by the state,
meaning they do not receive basic services such as
electricity and water.
A new government plan aims to resettle the Bedouin
in specially built towns that will give them access to
services and education, but many Bedouins say they
will refuse to leave their traditional homes.
NPR's Linda Gradstein reports.
LINDA GRADSTEIN reporting:
Just outside the village of Atir nestled in the
windswept sand dunes of the Negev Desert
about two dozen children dismount from a
rickety school bus and walk down a dirt
path kicking up clouds of dust as they go.
SOUNDBITE OF CHILDREN
GRADSTEIN:
Most of these children live in crowded
tin shanties without electricity.
They have no place to do homework
and there are no toys to be seen.
Forty-eight-year-old Atwa Abulgan(ph) who
functions as the village's unofficial mayor says
life in Atir is difficult.
Mr. ATWA ABULGAN: (Through Translator)
We have no road into the village.
Trucks of produce cannot come into our village.
We don't have electricity.
Electricity goes by our village but not into our village.
GRADSTEIN:
Most of the 500 residents here eke out a living either
as day laborers in nearby Jewish towns or as shepherds.
They live simply, eating mostly bread and vegetables.
Many of the children go barefoot.
In the winter, it's bitter cold,
and in the summer, unbearably hot.
There's no medical clinic in the village.
Abulgan says he wants the government to provide services
to Atir such as water and electricity, like all Israeli citizens receive.
Instead, he and others here are fighting Israeli
plans to move them from their traditional home.
Abulgan's nephew, 27-year-old Raed(ph),
a university student in urban planning,
says Israel has already forcibly moved
the Bedouin once.
RAED: (Through Translator) I was born here in 1976,
and my family was thrown off their lands and then put
in a Jewish settlement where we used to live.
They put their kids through hell over there.
And I will not move off this land.
I will not be pushed away the same way that
they pushed my grandfathers off their land.
GRADSTEIN:
Israeli officials say the Bedouin don't own the land they're living on,
and over the past decades, they have illegally taken over more
and more land.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who owns a large farm
in the Negev and has been an outspoken advocate
of more Jewish settlement here has crafted a plan to
move the Bedouin into seven new towns,
several of them already under construction.
Yaakov Katz,
the Israeli official in charge
of implementing the project,
says the Bedouin must obey the law.
Mr. YAAKOV KATZ:
They will leave. They will leave.
The first thing that settlers are supposed to do is to
obey law and to get his rights from the government.
All that means is they will not. It's the government's land.
The use of the land according to the
planning is not owned and they're not
supposed to stay there.
GRADSTEIN:
Katz says several of the new towns are being
planned with large agricultural spaces to help
the Bedouin preserve their traditional way of life,
but many of the Bedouin are skeptical.
They say that towns built for them in the
1970s and '80s failed to improve their lives.
In those towns now, unemployment is
high and crime is skyrocketing.
One of those towns is Rahad(ph), a few miles from Atir.
This town of 40,000 Bedouin is a bizarre mixture of
drab apartment complexes, tents and a few luxury homes.
Said Abu Siem(ph) who works for the Ministry of
Agriculture says talking about the problems of Rahad
would take weeks, but he says it all goes back to
decades of Jewish discrimination against the Bedouin.
Mr. SAID ABU SIEM (Ministry of Agriculture):
(Through Translator)
When it was planned, it was planned with a very
negative view of what the Bedouins need,
and so the roads were only a few roads
and little roads, and today, we're trying to
complete what was not done then.
For example, some of the neighborhoods
still don't have connection to sewage systems.
GRADSTEIN:
Abu Siem says schools in the town are sorely lacking,
and the dropout rate is one of the highest in the country.
He says many of the Bedouin youth are turning to crime.
Back in Atir, Atwa Abulgan says he and his
neighbors don't have much, but they're still better
off than the Bedouin in Rahad.
And he says if the government wants him to leave Atir,
it will have to drag him out. Linda Gradstein, NPR News.
EDWARDS: It's 11 minutes before the hour.
Boondock Saint
You couldn't answer any of mine, not even once, but since you will
continue to lie in the face of Scriptures I showed above... what new
thing will you do? Why on earth would Matthew list his geneaology, his
Jewish geneaology, if he is not a Jew?
And, Jesus is still alive, so He is still a Jew.
Yet, even so, in Christ, it is neither being a Christian nor a Jew.
Yet, you would have it be that being a Jew, by birth, is somehow
criminal. This is patently absurd, and I would like to see you counter
all of these verses I have already posted here.
I know you can not, so it does not surprise me you do not even try to.
If I have to take your interpretation over the Scripture, why should I
choose to follow you? I know you are not God.
>
> (A) The Son Of God
> (B) The Son Of a Jew
>
> Well? Is it A or B? IT CAN'T BE BOTH!!
That is an outright lie, and utter foolishness. You know that. Why do
you lie. You know how many people here have mixed heritage? I can not
even count how many Americans might say this. Indeed, we even have terms
for Americans... Irish Americans, Italian Americans, African Americans.
Yet, according to you... Jesus can not be both fully God and man.
Why do you say this?
Are you saying Jesus was not born from Mary? Are you entirely insane? I
don't think so. I think you are just lying, even in face of all of these
Scriptures I have poured out in all of these posts.
Are you saying the Apostles were not all Jews?
Just spit it out, stop squabbling around like a snake in my hand.
Galatians 4
3So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic
principles of the world. 4But when the time had fully come, God sent his
Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5to redeem those under law, that
we might receive the full rights of sons.
Tell us all how you also think the above verse is a lie. (Besides all of
these other verses I have poured out in all of these posts).
Boondock Saint
> http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/transcripts/2003/nov/031103.gradstein.ht
> ml
> BOB EDWARDS, host:
<snip>
If you can not think for yourself and answer in your own words and your
own thoughts, do not bother replying.
G.-man
At least they are not as stupid as the Americans are or want to eppear.
And let us look at dear dear kindly Israelis on land that is unoccupied,
just some nomads, stick em in ghettos, like Warsaw?
Oh poor old Zionists, only ones that ever had a problem, such lovely
democratic people the zionists.
Oh, you might have heard of the Samis - the Eurpean nomads.
http://www.eki.ee/books/redbook/kola_lapps.shtml
http://www.suri.ee/eup/samis.html
As far as I know nobody asked what they were anti to as nobody wanted them
climbing up there arse because otherwise they might dislike them because of
their disgusting and repugnant behavior..
As the second link shows there are still people in the world that are
willing to help less advantaged, poorly armed people rather than stick em in
ghettos and regularly shoot them.
"torresdD" <torr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bPfrb.26581$ej....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
Ed
"No User" <NoM...@NoUser.com> wrote in message
How about this then:
(C) To Christians, he was the son of God, and to everyone else, he was the
son of a Jew.
There you go. Everyone's happy.... except for you, I suppose, because my
answer isn't Jew-hating enough for you. Too bad for you.
Boondock Saint
> Of course they are not anti semites.
> At least they are not as stupid as the Americans are or want to eppear.
Stupid. Funny. You can't argue against anything I have said.
You can do a personal attack sideways, by utilizing personal bias
against someone's nation. And, that is it.
America has a GDP of roughly ten trillion dollars a year. Call us stupid
all you like.
It will win you a lot of arguments, for people inclined to agree with
you. It is a lot easier on you then having to think or read.
<snip>
Ed
Ah, there's the rub. It is rumored that TorresD is nothing more than a
mindless bot who posts anti-Israel rubbish randomly. A bot is incapable of
independent thought, so don't hold your breath waiting for his/her/its own
thoughts.
Boondock Saint
Heh. No, I have talked to her, so I know she is a human bot, at least.
Unless the bot operator decided to finally step in one time.
My perception was that she is a hispanic that hates Jews.
G.-man
the argument, stupidity, or pretense to stupidity on matters concerning
Israel and zionist control of america. And apparently would have us believe
they are ignorant of the fact that zionists have set themselves up as an
upper class royalty above criticism.
And the one thing america and we in Australia are proud of is our democracy.
Which does not include upper classes controlling our country.
And excuse me if we are not impressed with you GDP. We can equal and surpass
America in many fields, and if you require Ican point you to the various
studies to establish what America's wealth is based on.
But what we are discussing at this moment is the rather stupid, or as I
said, intentionally appearing stupid to support zionist influence in
America, and Israel as a whole.
Displayed by the lengths to which they could push America with
this attack on Iraq against the wishes of the UN and most of the European
union.
With no advantage to any nation as much as Israel. And simply reflects
Israel or zionist policy of selfcentredly going all out for thenselves.
Carefully monitoring all media to ensure that anti semitism is hosed down
if there is reaction to their latest distasteful and repugnant actions, and
apply the old hose downs of anti Semitism, terrible things of WW@ which
doesn't work as well with the Europeans because they lived WW@ too, and
know that they are continually dismissed or shown in a bad light to enhance
sympathy for Jews in the central position as victims.
Something the Europeans are very familiar with. Zionist bs.
So that unless you are a Zionist or a brain washed Zionist arse licker, the
onlt dispute between Christian and Muslim is now Palestine and Iraq.
http://zog.to/3/Sharon/Sharon07.htm
Ariel Sharon: "We Control America"
Our country right or wrong. Presidents, Prime and other ministers and
senators can be sacked.
Zionists wrong???
http://www.mediamonitors.net/jamesjdavid17.html
In the beginning
news:3f9fec45$0$6051$7566...@news.cambrium.nl..
Jews and Palestinians genetically similar.
http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FADACB9...@hotmail.com...
> G.-man wrote:
> > Of course they are not anti semites.
> > At least they are not as stupid as the Americans are or want to eppear.
>
> Stupid. Funny. You can't argue against anything I have said.
What have you said??? I'll chase you down to another post because you have
said nothing here in aus.politics
>
> You can do a personal attack sideways, by utilizing personal bias
> against someone's nation. And, that is it.
>
> America has a GDP of roughly ten trillion dollars a year. Call us stupid
> all you like.
As i said above we can match you and raise you in any field. Except for
size.
>
> It will win you a lot of arguments, for people inclined to agree with
> you. It is a lot easier on you then having to think or read.
>
> <snip>
Yeah we want them to think and read, but not just your bullshit.
>
G.-man
this post is doing anyway, do you know how ridiculous that is?
Well if you can actually talk without quoting somebody do so.
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAD927E...@hotmail.com...
Boondock Saint
> Of course you are right, you are going sideways to avoid the main thrust of
> the argument, stupidity, or pretense to stupidity on matters concerning
> Israel and zionist control of america. And apparently would have us believe
> they are ignorant of the fact that zionists have set themselves up as an
> upper class royalty above criticism.
We are not ashamed of admitting we control the US. Of course, we are the
majority, the 87% Christians that do this. There may be some Jewish
zionists, but there are plenty of Christian Zionists.
And, we are not ashamed of this. I would disagree with that. We may not
so often call ourselves "Zionists", but simply admit that we give Israel
a right to exist -- and we mean it.
Germany and France also claim to give Israel a right to exist -- but
they do not seem to really mean it.
If you want me to claim "stupid" to the theory that Jews rule the US, I
will not claim stupid to that. I will out right say that is absurd rubbish.
Zionists are completely open to criticism. But, let's hear it from
people who are looking at both sides of the issues. When you come to
them and talk about how it is all the Israelis fault, yeah, that is bias.
The problem is, the definition of Zionism is merely that you accept
their right to exist. You except their right to exist? You are a
zionist. You don't? Well, why not?
> And the one thing america and we in Australia are proud of is our democracy.
> Which does not include upper classes controlling our country.
> And excuse me if we are not impressed with you GDP. We can equal and surpass
> America in many fields, and if you require Ican point you to the various
> studies to establish what America's wealth is based on.
I am not trying to put down Australia.
I merely said, "America has a GDP of roughly ten trillion dollars a
year. Call us stupid all you like."
> But what we are discussing at this moment is the rather stupid, or as I
> said, intentionally appearing stupid to support zionist influence in
> America, and Israel as a whole.
>
That is your charge, but you fail to make a point.
> Displayed by the lengths to which they could push America with
> this attack on Iraq against the wishes of the UN and most of the European
> union.
You are claiming the Iraq is a Jewish war?
Just say it, "Iraq is a Jewish war", if that is what you believe.
Maybe you mean, "Iraq is a Zionist war" and you rightly see Zionism is
primarily pushed by Christians here, not Jews -- if only for the fact
that there are more Christians then Jews.
If you are saying Zionism is not purely Jewish, and it is controlling
America, then you would be the first to admit that of whom I have argued
with on this list.
The truth is, we went into Iraq for some very clear reasons, and we are
staying there for some clear reasons. Whether you agree with these
reasons or not, that is your business. But, you won't win any points by
saying these are not the real reasons.
I agree with those reasons. I do not agree that Iraq has anything to do
with Zionism.
That is absurd and pointless, and no one would agree with that who is
for the Iraq war. It is logical fallacy, to argue against something
which the other person is not even saying.
> With no advantage to any nation as much as Israel. And simply reflects
> Israel or zionist policy of selfcentredly going all out for thenselves.
Saddam Hussein paid for the families of Israeli terrorists. That is
their benefit.
We buy a lot of oil from the Middle East. We are sick of their exporting
terrorism to us. If you would argue that Islam is only against America
because of Israel, we would have to disagree there. I would merely point
to the countless times Islamism has attempted to invade Europe through
the centuries as evidence as this.
But, Saddam Hussein is a secularist, a Baathist. The Baath party was
started by a Syrian Christian.
>
>
> Carefully monitoring all media to ensure that anti semitism is hosed down
> if there is reaction to their latest distasteful and repugnant actions, and
> apply the old hose downs of anti Semitism, terrible things of WW@ which
> doesn't work as well with the Europeans because they lived WW@ too, and
> know that they are continually dismissed or shown in a bad light to enhance
> sympathy for Jews in the central position as victims.
I have little sympathy for this argument. Sure, Europeans lived through
WWII. So did the US. We lost a lot of people in that war, and in the
end, we saw Eastern Europe get gobbled up by the Soviets.
It has nothing to do with Iraq.
>
> Something the Europeans are very familiar with. Zionist bs.
>
Funny, even France and Germany acknowledge the right for Israel to
exist. Officially, that means they are zionist. Though, they may have
problems facing up to their own stated beliefs.
France, however, let Germany build up, despite the fact they were
supposed to be the ones to make sure Germany did not build up after the
signing of the Treaty of Versailles.
> So that unless you are a Zionist or a brain washed Zionist arse licker, the
> onlt dispute between Christian and Muslim is now Palestine and Iraq.
No, I have a lot of disputes with Muslims. Number one, the attacks on
Christian Europe. Number two, they stole Israel from us, after taking it
from Persia. Number three, they killed millions of Sudanese Christians.
Number four, they killed almost two million Orthodox Christian Armenians.
Not in any particuliar order.
So, you are a Muslim, I am a Christian, then? I will tell you right out
Muhommad was a false prophet and believing him will send you to eternal
Hell. Moses is a true prophet.
What else?
Oh yeah, let me guess, you believe Christians are polytheists and you
have a right to kill them?
You seem to even be afraid to admit your religious position.
Scared.
No wonder you can only answer with vile personal attacks.
Your enemy is not the Jew.
It is us.
The Jew is irrelevant.
Conquistador
> As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
> wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>
> I am not a liberal serving a minority because I feel guilt. I have no
> guilt whatsoever in the situation. Unlike liberals who serve Blacks and
> Hispanics, I am right there with them all. Why? Because I am a bastard,
> an orphan. I have no obligation to any race, even if I am blonde haired
> and blue eyed.
YOU ARE ALSO CRAZY
>
> In fact, I had a discussion with a Muslim friend of mine.
THAT IS A LAUGH
He could not
> understand why I would argue for a race other then my own. He admitted
> he would not do this. In essence, he strongly argued that he had a
> demand to argue merely because he felt he was arguing "for his own
> people". You have one billion of your own people. Why pick on the
> smallest nation of all? He is no longer a friend.
WHAT A LIAR MUSLIMS ARE PROBABLY THE MOST COSMOPOLITAN RELIGION IN THE
WORLD. THERE ARE AT LEAST ONE MILLION JEWISH CONVERTS AMONGST THE MUSLIMS!
>
> But, I am not alone in arguing against these anti-zionists. Millions
> apon millions of Americans see what they are doing. Eighty six percent
> of America is Christian. Two percent of America is Jewish. Day and night
> we are told by these racists that the "Jews control us". They are lying,
> dirty lying. Anyone knows this.
YOU NEED THE PROOF? TAKE A LOOK WHO IS RUNNING THE WHITE HOUSE!
>
> Let me quickly get my bias out of the way. Unlike them, I am upfront
> about this and readily speak it. Beyond the fact that I am aware of
> international Jewish suffering, and their history, I am a Christian. We
> believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews.
TO JEWS IS OK, HE DID NOT GIVE IT TO RUSSIAN BOLSHEVIKS!
We believe whoever
> curses Israel is cursed by God. We believe whoever blesses Israel is
> blessed by God. So, yes, we have religious beliefs behind this. But,
> even those religious beliefs are backed by strong reasoning.
JEWS HOPE TO CONVERT YOU TO JUDAISM AND YOU HOPE TO SEE THEM BURN IN THE
FIRES OF ARMAGEDDON, THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE IN COMMON!
> I firmly believe that anything I believe has empirical evidence and is
> worthy of being reasoned with others. We come to our beliefs through the
> court of free speech. We debate with each other. I have dropped beliefs
> others have persuaded me are wrong. I have kept beliefs that I have been
> persuaded are right.
THET IS GOOD, SURELY YOU THEM UNDERSTAND THAT PALESTINIANS HAVE A RIGHT TO
HAVE THEIR COUNTRY BACK!
>
> First of all, one of the main things I see these people doing is:
>
> They claim they are only "anti-zionist", not "anti-Jewish" -- then we
> hear about how attacks against Jews are spurred on by their marches and
> movements. We see synagogues get burned down. We see Jews killed.
I AM SURE GLAD THAT YOU NEVER SAW ANY MUSLIMS MURDERED BY JEWS
>
> In debating with them, I have seen some leftists claim these things...
> then they go off and make coarse jokes against the Jews. They will sit
> there and say it is "wrong to say we are anti-semites, you are just
> crying wolf" -- then they go and do it. It is a slap in the face. They
> condemn defense.
NOBODY HATES JEWS FOR WHO THEY ARE, THEY HATE SOME OF THEM FOR WHAT THEY
DO. IF YOU HAD CHILDREN SLAUGHTERED BY THE JEWS IN CAMP SABRA YOU WOULD NOT
BE TAKING YOUR PANTS DOWN FOR THEM!
>
> They condemn the Jews defending themselves.
>
> I saw this in reading about the Holocaust. They would condemn Jews for
> fighting back, then they would ask Jews why they don't fight back.
YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THAT AT ALL. JEWS HAD AFFINITY WITH GERMANS AND
150,000 OF THEM CHOSE TO SERVE IN WEHRMACHT KILLING THEIR OWN PEOPLE.
>
> We all know well what Hamas says about the Jews, surely? Or is it true
> that what the Hamas really believe still is not common knowledge? We
> hear all about Jews knocking down the "poor Palestinians", why is it
> these same media outlets do not tell us exactly what these Palestinian
> terrorists believe? Why do they argue for their beliefs, as if they knew
> them?
PALESTINIANS BELIEVE THEY SHOULD GET THEIR HOMES BACK FROM ISRAELIS!
>
> And, how could the world be so blind as to their beliefs when these
> beliefs are core to Islam itself?
ISLAM DOES NOT ADVOCATE SHOOTING INNOCENT PEOPLE AND DEMOLISHING THEIR
HOMES, DESTROYING THEIR FIELDS, AND STEALING THEIR CROPS!
>
> Is there any excuse whatsoever to this? Can anyone really say they are
> unaware that Islam teaches that the Jews are liars and deceivers? Can
> anyone really argue that Islam does not do these things when the whole
> basis of Islam's legitimacy is on the lie that the Jews lied with the
> Bible? Is everyone so ignorant of Islam that they have never heard of
> the "Ishmael switch out story"?
I AM SURE THAT YOU CAN DISPROVE IT! GO AHEAD, I AM ALL EARS!
>
> Even worse, beyond the fact they admit their motivation is 'we hate
> Jews', that they believe 'God has given us a divine sanction, order, to
> kill the Jews'... we could look at their behavior.
NO SUCH IDEOLOGY IS OFFERD BY ANY RELIGION, EXCEPT BY TALMUD!
>
> Muslims, in Israel, are successful. They have more rights in Israel then
> in any Muslim nation. They are elected officials.
DON'T LIE! MUSLIMS ARE CITIZENS OF ISRAEL, BUT NOT NATIONALS OF ISRAEL AND
THEIR RIGHTS ARE EQUIVALENT TO ANY OTHER PALESTINIAN. THE FOUR MEMBERS OF
KNESSET SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME IN JAIL OR OUTSIDE KNESSET
>
> Why on earth would they demand their own nation,
NOW YOU ARE RIGHT. ACTUALLY PALESTINIANS DO NOT WANT A SEPARATE NATION, THEY
JUST WANT A NATION IN WHICH ALL PEOPLE ARE EQUAL TO EACH OTHER BEFORE LAW!
TWO NATION PPROPOSAL IS SHARON'S AND BUSH'S. PRINCE ABDULLAH GUARRANTEED THE
BORDERS OF ISRAEL IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WANTED, AND THEY STILL REFUSED.
especially when they
> never demanded this while these lands were under the rule of other
> Muslims? Do Muslims not have enough nations they can call their own? Do
> they need another one? This shows Muslims are absolutely biased against
> other nations and peoples -- but who is unaware of the fact that you,
> not being a Muslim, are an "infidel"?
GOT NEWS FOR YOU, NOT ALL PALESTINIANS ARE MUSLIMS, ABOUT 15% ARE
CHRISTIANS, AND 5% ARE DRUZE, SOME ARE CATHOLICS!
>
> That many people would overlook all of these glaring facts, that they
> would overlook the intentional purposes of Islamic terrorism... that
> they would blame it all on the Jews is absolute proof of their own
> hatred of the Jews.
IF YOU CAN OVERLOOK THE ISRAELI TERRORISM THERE IS NO USE TALKING TO YOU!
G.-man
quite q few with your deceit.
Most countries believed that we were dealing with a country not heavily
biased and unable to take a stand against zionist views. Yes I am also aware
that zionists have received heavy backing by christians, to the point that
Palestinians are not even allowed to put their side to australians, so I
presume also Americans.
But now that we are aware that zionist are completely and wholely dedicated
to zionist and Israel aims, whether detrimental to christians and fellow
citizens or not.
Yes we promised backing to Israel, when they had a government that was not
treating Palestinians ( i am calling them that I dont give a fuck what you
and your mates ca;ll them) in exactly the same manner as thr nazis treated
jews. And that , as far as I am aware is the reason we gave our support,
because of a huge injustice.
Noww, and I think a lot of others who commited themselves to the existence
of Israel, expected the Israelis to look for a fair and equitable settlrment
as most other troubled countries are doing.
We expected that the jews as they are always claimimg simply wanted a safe
place to live with their neighbours.
And there are activists putting the christian view to Israel.
But we have since found out they do not give a shit for neighbours when it
comes to a matter of living as equals.
Which more or less gibes with the way they live in America and Australia.
Nobody give a shit about that till we look across and see them funneling
money into Israel like that is their home country.
The control most of the media through no fault of their own, nobody give a
shit about that.
Till we find them using the media to advance their own aims to the detriment
and and complete disregard of their fellow citizens interests and
objections.
I think every citizen, and that includes Jewish and others, not all Jewish
want to send all to Israel, are finding that it is no longer a matter of the
existence of Israel.
It is now the grossly unfair assistance to Israel to run a grossly unfair
government..
And that is not what we signed on for. To use our commitment to achieve a
fair and just settlement with their neighbours is all we guarranteed.
I do not know about your christian supporters, but we never set out to
gusrrantee a single religion so called democracy where by the very laws and
required views of the citizens of Israel, if you were not up there arse
where they seem to keep their heads at the moment, you could not possibly
live there comfortably and not find yourself afoul of the law like the
Corrie's and Hurndalls to mention a couple.
http://www.thenausea.com/elements/thenotforgotten/rachel/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/16/rafah.death/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1066817,00.html
http://www.distanceeddesign.com/rachel/ism/israelis_fire_on_hurndalls.htm
I am also disgusted by your attitude to American servucemen viv a vis
Israeli servicemen. We couldnt have enough of courage and encouragement for
Israel servicemen.
You cannot evn pay American a proper pay. Set them up in a proper hospital.
Yet no doubt as a zionist supporter you are sending more millions for Israel
and war in Iraq.
And if that is what America meant when they reiterate that they control
events in Israel, overlooking anything and everything, no matter how
repugnant and disgusting the behavior was. Till we culminated in this nazi
like behavior by Sharon?
Then you had better check just how mwny christians support these actions,
especially as your president is breaking down your democracy, and sacrificng
lives, not to mention limbs and peckers, for these unrepentantly royalist
aims of the Israelis.
http://www.antiwar.com/barganier/ba091503.html
At a daily rate of $8.10, hospitalized troops, including those wounded in
Iraq and Afghanistan, are being charged for their meals.
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0345/mondo2.php
news:3ySqb.5530$ws.5...@news02.tsnz.net...
http://veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=1200
600 Sick and Wounded US Troops Held in Squalor at Fort Stewart, Georgia
Mark Benjamin - 10/17/2003
http://veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=1201
CNN Confirms Wounded Soldiers Living in Squalor at Fort Stewart
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FADC4A1...@hotmail.com...
> G.-man wrote:
> > Of course you are right, you are going sideways to avoid the main thrust
of
> > the argument, stupidity, or pretense to stupidity on matters concerning
> > Israel and zionist control of america. And apparently would have us
believe
> > they are ignorant of the fact that zionists have set themselves up as an
> > upper class royalty above criticism.
>
> We are not ashamed of admitting we control the US. Of course, we are the
> majority, the 87% Christians that do this. There may be some Jewish
> zionists, but there are plenty of Christian Zionists.
Actually it does appear you control the USA with christians you control for
other reasons of employment etc.
Old Henry was to independent and had to be brought down
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/intern_jew.htm#Foreword
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/intern_jew.htm
The point of henry is if you object to jewish or Zionist contrlo of your
country, you are parceled in with nazis and red neck racists.
Otherwise you have to join what you claim is the norm - christians who
support zionism, like you, or perhaps christians who have no choice but to
support zionism for reasons given elsewhere.
As above the christian not zionists by the way, because zionist names a
fanatical group who support Israel no matter what, the christians were
expexting a different response from Israel. The thought was they abhorred
nazis. and as above wanted a fair and just agreement with their neighbours.
>
> And, we are not ashamed of this. I would disagree with that. We may not
> so often call ourselves "Zionists", but simply admit that we give Israel
> a right to exist -- and we mean it.
Nobody is against the right to exist, but not being a fanatical zionist or
zionist supporter, I find Israel is not toeing the line of what I would
support.
And not being a fanatic I can change my mind.
As I said above again, but excuse me if I question your credentials, so far
all the Smiths and Jones i have actually reached the stage of ID have turned
out to be Jewish.
And unfortunately wiyth all the lying done by zionist interests on these
posts and on the internet, I am not even sure you represent christians. And
if you do what your connection with the zionists are, monetary, fanily?
Which would not make yours an unbiased opinion
>
> Germany and France also claim to give Israel a right to exist -- but
> they do not seem to really mean it.
And you claim you are not a fanatical jewish zionist, wa can withdraw our
support if you do not meet certain criteria. and there is nothing you are
doing at the moment that would require any support to keep supporting
Israel.
>
> If you want me to claim "stupid" to the theory that Jews rule the US, I
> will not claim stupid to that. I will out right say that is absurd
rubbish.
>
Yes assuned stupidity and pretensce at the obvious not being true.
> Zionists are completely open to criticism. But, let's hear it from
> people who are looking at both sides of the issues. When you come to
> them and talk about how it is all the Israelis fault, yeah, that is bias.
Tis post is, all you claim is support no matter what. And all zionist crap
is completely one sided.
>
> The problem is, the definition of Zionism is merely that you accept
> their right to exist. You except their right to exist? You are a
> zionist. You don't? Well, why not?
>
What crap, zionists are fanatical supporters that support Israel no matter
what Israel chooses to do.
You do not hacve the same luxury with christians and others, we expect
certain behavior, or we expect our country to withdraw support.
We have no reason to be involved there except for Israel. Those kids have no
reason to die and be crippled in Iraq, except for Israel, and in your case
as a christian, your oil shares, or shares in Halliburton, whatever but dear
christian you aint there up to any good for the rest of America.
>
> > And the one thing america and we in Australia are proud of is our
democracy.
> > Which does not include upper classes controlling our country.
> > And excuse me if we are not impressed with you GDP. We can equal and
surpass
> > America in many fields, and if you require Ican point you to the various
> > studies to establish what America's wealth is based on.
>
> I am not trying to put down Australia.
>
> I merely said, "America has a GDP of roughly ten trillion dollars a
> year. Call us stupid all you like."
>
You are rich, why one wonders why you attack a small country ?
Not because it advantages Israel
> >
>
> That is your charge, but you fail to make a point.
>
> > Displayed by the lengths to which they could push America with
> > this attack on Iraq against the wishes of the UN and most of the
European
> > union.
>
> You are claiming the Iraq is a Jewish war? I thought I did, yes it has
nothing to do with Anerica, or does your government usually lie to achieve
some christian/zionoistuc aim that they know christians wont approve?
>
> Just say it, "Iraq is a Jewish war", if that is what you believe.
>
> Maybe you mean, "Iraq is a Zionist war" and you rightly see Zionism is
> primarily pushed by Christians here, not Jews -- if only for the fact
> that there are more Christians then Jews.
>
It is a jewish war, christian zionist supporters , if they do exist in
sufficient numbers to make a difference were lied to.
> If you are saying Zionism is not purely Jewish, and it is controlling
> America, then you would be the first to admit that of whom I have argued
> with on this list.
Reasons above, if you can and wish to follow them. But may i add you jewish
zionisn is showing.
>
> The truth is, we went into Iraq for some very clear reasons, and we are
> staying there for some clear reasons.
There were no reasons clearly enunciated, just reasons that were complete
lies, you know, made up for the occassion, made up to sell the idea to the
christian population.
snip------------->
>
> > With no advantage to any nation as much as Israel. And simply reflects
> > Israel or zionist policy of selfcentredly going all out for thenselves.
>
> Saddam Hussein paid for the families of Israeli terrorists. That is
> their benefit.
>
Along with the WMD and the world beating army. And the only reason that 9/11
occurred was because you are hiding behind your American, Australian and
English friends. But you do not of course want them ever realising that your
inhuman behavior is the real recruiter of suicide bombers.
> We buy a lot of oil from the Middle East. We are sick of their exporting
> terrorism to us. If you would argue that Islam is only against America
> because of Israel, we would have to disagree there. I would merely point
> to the countless times Islamism has attempted to invade Europe through
> the centuries as evidence as this.
Oh crap with the history, yeah we all know our history, and everybody has
tried to invade everybody, and if we treated countries we ever had a war
with as pariahs, we would have nobody associating. to the countries
>
> But, Saddam Hussein is a secularist, a Baathist. The Baath party was
> started by a Syrian Christian.
>
Yeah, i am well aware that the people you sre illtreating in Palestine are
also christian, which puts jews against all religions anywhere, it does seem
that their only equals are jews and jewish sucks like yourself if you are
not jewish.
> >
> >
> > Carefully monitoring all media to ensure that anti semitism is hosed
down
> > if there is reaction to their latest distasteful and repugnant actions,
and
> > apply the old hose downs of anti Semitism, terrible things of WW@ which
> > doesn't work as well with the Europeans because they lived WW@ too, and
> > know that they are continually dismissed or shown in a bad light to
enhance
> > sympathy for Jews in the central position as victims.
>
> I have little sympathy for this argument. Sure, Europeans lived through
> WWII. So did the US. We lost a lot of people in that war, and in the
> end, we saw Eastern Europe get gobbled up by the Soviets.
>
> It has nothing to do with Iraq.
>
> >
> > Something the Europeans are very familiar with. Zionist bs. And the sob
story is played for fullest effect in the US. i am sure every one in the US
has heard of Anne Franke, but tell me, is there a movie about the brave
Dutch family that risked life and freedom for Anne Franke's family?
> >
>
> Funny, even France and Germany acknowledge the right for Israel to
> exist. Officially, that means they are zionist. Though, they may have
> problems facing up to their own stated beliefs.
>
> France, however, let Germany build up, despite the fact they were
> supposed to be the ones to make sure Germany did not build up after the
> signing of the Treaty of Versailles.
>
>
>
> > So that unless you are a Zionist or a brain washed Zionist arse licker,
the
> > onlt dispute between Christian and Muslim is now Palestine and Iraq.
>
>
> No, I have a lot of disputes with Muslims. Number one, the attacks on
> Christian Europe. Number two, they stole Israel from us, after taking it
> from Persia. Number three, they killed millions of Sudanese Christians.
> Number four, they killed almost two million Orthodox Christian Armenians.
>
> Not in any particuliar order.
Yeah, but all that should not impress Americans more than Israeli murder of
Rachel Corrie.
Boondock Saint
> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
>
>>As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
>>frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
>>am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
>>wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>>
>>I am not a liberal serving a minority because I feel guilt. I have no
>>guilt whatsoever in the situation. Unlike liberals who serve Blacks and
>>Hispanics, I am right there with them all. Why? Because I am a bastard,
>>an orphan. I have no obligation to any race, even if I am blonde haired
>>and blue eyed.
>
>
> YOU ARE ALSO CRAZY
>
>>In fact, I had a discussion with a Muslim friend of mine.
>
> THAT IS A LAUGH
Slander one, accusations without evidence. Slander two, accusations
without evidence. That is as far as I am going here, Mr Slanderer.
You call me crazy, you call me a liar, back it up with evidence.
Islam is evil, proof of that is your nation's lack of success. If you
need more then go read "Islam Revealed" and learn something.
Boondock Saint
> Well all you have said is just not what your words advise, and everybody on
> this post is doing anyway, do you know how ridiculous that is?
>
> Well if you can actually talk without quoting somebody do so.
More slander, more false accusations. You do not even attempt to give
evidence. Below are clearly my own words. The post was in my own words.
All of my replies were in my own words. I believe I quoted some
scripture, some statistics, that is it. That is called evidence. I put
the evidence in my own words, I found the evidence, I laid it out... now
what do you do? Lie, before my face. With God looking down on you, you
are lying and slandering.
You love evil, don't you?
Muhommad poisoned you with demonic doctrines.
Boondock Saint
> If you are not ashamed, then you have not made it very obvious and taken in
> quite q few with your deceit.
That is lie number one and two. I don't have more time to read your
long, rambling post full of lies.
Next time, do your lies near the end of the post, let me read the rest
of it, then I will reply and cut you off only at the end.
... reading... nevermind, I see you lie all through your post.
Clue: Islam has failed against America and Israel because you sin
against God. Islamic nations have lived in a state of destitution
because you have poisoned your souls with doctines of demons.
We warn you and warn you and warn you, but you never listen.
<snip>
G.-man
Simple fact, no blamk cheque for Israel and zionists to continue with cruel
and unusual practices.
God! Did not say you would own the promised land. and as far as is known,
you're doing the same thing as when Moses came down the mount.
Anyway you cannot and do not even want to live as equals with your
neighbours.
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAE0571...@hotmail.com...
Jan Pieter Verhey
Yes he WAS a Jew. But "still alive"? What does it mean? Is this for you
fact or belief?
Conquistador
> G.-man wrote:
> > Of course you are right, you are going sideways to avoid the main thrust
of
> > the argument, stupidity, or pretense to stupidity on matters concerning
> > Israel and zionist control of america. And apparently would have us
believe
> > they are ignorant of the fact that zionists have set themselves up as an
> > upper class royalty above criticism.
>
> We are not ashamed of admitting we control the US. Of course, we are the
> majority, the 87% Christians that do this. There may be some Jewish
> zionists, but there are plenty of Christian Zionists.
THAT IS GOOD FOR A LAUGH!
Conquistador
> G.-man wrote:
> > If you are not ashamed, then you have not made it very obvious and taken
in
> > quite q few with your deceit.
>
> That is lie number one and two. I don't have more time to read your
> long, rambling post full of lies.
>
> Next time, do your lies near the end of the post, let me read the rest
> of it, then I will reply and cut you off only at the end.
>
> ... reading... nevermind, I see you lie all through your post.
>
> Clue: Islam has failed against America and Israel because you sin
> against God. Islamic nations have lived in a state of destitution
> because you have poisoned your souls with doctines of demons.
I UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE MUSLIMS ARE MAKING THE JEW BOOZE INDUSTRY GO BROKE!
Conquistador
I READ IT, IT IS A SHAMEFIL SLANT ON THE WORLD'S GREATEST RELIGION!
Michael Ejercito
WITH THAT, CANQUASORE?
Michael
Dan
The Muslim woman's in veil focus is her home, the "nest" where her
children are born and reared. She is the "home" maker, the taproot
that sustains the spiritual life of the family, nurturing and training
her children,providing refuge and support to her husband.
In contrast, the bikinied Western Christians/Jew sluts practically
naked in front of millions, she belongs to herself. In
practice,paradoxically,she is public property. She belongs to no one
and everyone. She shops her body to the highest bidder. She is
auctioning herself all of the time.In western Christian/Jew sluts culture,
the cultural measure of a woman's value is her sex appeal
Ed
And what is he accusing you of lying about? About having a discussion with
your Muslim friend? I guess his next lie is that he is all-seeing,
all-knowing, therefore he knows who you do and do not have discussions with?
Actually, this character is doing quite a service to Israel, to Judaism.
With every amazingly incoherent rant, he throws support squarely into the
pro-Israeli, anti-anti-Semitic camp. What person in his or her right mind
would want to associate a group with members like Seredin et al in it?
He should keep it up. All the rational people will end up being
pro-Israeli. The rest can just drop dead.
>
Conquistador
Conquistador
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com...
> As a non-Jew, Christian who is an avowed pro-Zionist... I post quite
> frequently on these lists. I read the lies these people have to say. I
> am shocked when they try to accuse the Jews of being "the boy who cries
> wolf" over "anti-semitism".
>
> I am not a liberal serving a minority because I feel guilt. I have no
> guilt whatsoever in the situation. Unlike liberals who serve Blacks and
> Hispanics, I am right there with them all. Why? Because I am a bastard,
>
Boondock Saint
Belief or fact? Why would someone believe something for which they had
no evidence on? Why should it be assumed that belief and fact are two
entirely different things? Why should belief and fact be at odds with
each other when everyday we must confront that which we believe to be a
fact? And, where does belief end and knowing begin? With the walls of
our rooms? With the sky? Are not all impressions but temporary and
fleeting as we learn to understand more of reality?
We may observe God's creation, as if it were our own. But, may we also
so observe God, who observes us? Evidence of the resurrection of Jesus
Christ is a matter of grace, in the Christian belief, it is evidence
which might not be called down for... nor might it be found through
wisdom... but it might be disclosed only by the grace of God.
I am sorry that so many "defenders" of "belief" may think that belief
and facts are at odds. But, even if they had the most eloquent of
tongues, they would be unable to say anything useful -- if that door is
closed.
Boondock Saint
> you're right all your ravings are a crock.
I backed up everything I said with facts. You back up everything you say
with nothing. That is the difference between truth and lies.
> Simple fact, no blamk cheque for Israel and zionists to continue with cruel
> and unusual practices.
>
Like suicide bombings? End them. Shut up. End them. Simple. You
disagree? Then the war continues.
> God! Did not say you would own the promised land. and as far as is known,
> you're doing the same thing as when Moses came down the mount.
>
You use the Lord's name in vain. Does Islam not even teach you the Ten
Commandments.
I know you disbelieve Moses.
> Anyway you cannot and do not even want to live as equals with your
> neighbours.
In America, we give Muslims equal living. In Muslim nations they ban
Christianity. So, fix all 66 some odd numbers of your nations, then you
may speak without being an atrocious hypocrite.
Boondock Saint
I do not disagree there. He constantly reconfirms my belief in the
freedom of speech.
Unfortunately, I am also sadly aware that many of his stances are shared
with millions more. I only wish more of them would speak up, revealing
who and what they are.
Too often we get these reports from the heart of Saudi Arabia or
Northern Pakistan about these people. Or, should I say, "too rarely".
Boondock Saint
Then tell me what is wrong with it? What, you don't want to counter it?
I find it very hard to believe you could counter very much of that.
amigocabal
> G.-man wrote:
> > you're right all your ravings are a crock.
>
> I backed up everything I said with facts. You back up everything you say
> with nothing. That is the difference between truth and lies.
>
> > Simple fact, no blamk cheque for Israel and zionists to continue with
cruel
> > and unusual practices.
> >
>
> Like suicide bombings? End them. Shut up. End them. Simple. You
> disagree? Then the war continues.
Nothing wrong with fighting the occupation by any means at
That is how people fought in WWII, also. Palestinians are heroes, suicide
bombings or no suicide bombings!
--
Fundamentalist Zionists love
Fundamentalist Christians, because
they hope to convert them, and
Fundamentalist Christians love
Fundamentalist Zionists because
they hope to see them burn in the
fires of Armagedon!
amigocabal
amigocabal
> >>>>In fact, I had a discussion with a Muslim friend of mine.
> >>>
> >>>THAT IS A LAUGH
> >>
> >>Slander one, accusations without evidence. Slander two, accusations
> >>without evidence. That is as far as I am going here, Mr Slanderer.
> >>
> >>You call me crazy, you call me a liar, back it up with evidence.
> >>
> >>Islam is evil, proof of that is your nation's lack of success. If you
> >>need more then go read "Islam Revealed" and learn something.
> >
> >
> > I READ IT, IT IS A SHAMEFIL SLANT ON THE WORLD'S GREATEST RELIGION!
> >
> >
>
> Then tell me what is wrong with it? What, you don't want to counter it?
>
> I find it very hard to believe you could counter very much of that.
1. Islam started no wars
2. islam had no Holocaust aginst anyone
3. Islam had no Crusades against Christians
4, Islam respects Christians and Jews inside Islamic countries
What are you blubbering about? Christian wars and Crusades have killed at
least half a billion people of all races and religions and you are
blubbering about muslims. You are an idiot!
Sheldon Liberman
amigocabal wrote:
> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FAF2EA2...@hotmail.com...
>
>>G.-man wrote:
>>
>>>you're right all your ravings are a crock.
>>
>>I backed up everything I said with facts. You back up everything you say
>>with nothing. That is the difference between truth and lies.
>>
>>
>>>Simple fact, no blamk cheque for Israel and zionists to continue with
>>
> cruel
>
>>>and unusual practices.
>>>
>>
>>Like suicide bombings? End them. Shut up. End them. Simple. You
>>disagree? Then the war continues.
>
>
> Nothing wrong with fighting the occupation by any means at
> That is how people fought in WWII, also. Palestinians are heroes, suicide
> bombings or no suicide bombings!
>
The correct term is "homocide bombing". Why not join them? (practice
once at home first).
Jan Pieter Verhey
> Jan Pieter Verhey wrote:
...
> >>You couldn't answer any of mine, not even once, but since you will
> >>continue to lie in the face of Scriptures I showed above... what new
> >>thing will you do? Why on earth would Matthew list his geneaology, his
> >>Jewish geneaology, if he is not a Jew?
> >>
> >>And, Jesus is still alive, so He is still a Jew.
> >
> >
> > Yes he WAS a Jew. But "still alive"? What does it mean? Is this for you
> > fact or belief?
>
> Belief or fact? Why would someone believe something for which they had
> no evidence on? Why should it be assumed that belief and fact are two
> entirely different things? Why should belief and fact be at odds with
> each other when everyday we must confront that which we believe to be a
> fact?
I think you're right they don't need to be at odds. Beliefs are like
expectancies. When confirmed over and over again... they get to the status
of fact. That is learning, finding out, the growing of knowledge - sensory
and conceptual. Fact=(re-)confirmed expectancy. It cycles on and
on...expectancy-confirmation-expectancy-confirmation... Expectancies that
don't become (re)confirmed... usually die away. They were "wrong" ideas. Or
they are kept alive, but then only in their status of expectancy aqa belief.
I think its important to understand the difference, or rather relationship
between the two.
The confirmation of a belief can/may be expected to take some more time. The
"dream" of world peace for instance, as in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is
a (hoped for?) belief/expectancy not-yet-confirmed. Its is paramount however
to know *what* to expect... otherwise you're not able to identify the
confirmation...when it comes. Y'd have missed "the Messiah". Do you think
religious people, from all different denominations, know what-to-expect?
You'll find a mess, full of contradictory and often mutually exclusive
dogma.
>And, where does belief end and knowing begin? With the walls of
> our rooms? With the sky? Are not all impressions but temporary and
> fleeting as we learn to understand more of reality?
>
> We may observe God's creation, as if it were our own. But, may we also
> so observe God, who observes us?
As above, as below.
>Evidence of the resurrection of Jesus
> Christ is a matter of grace, in the Christian belief, it is evidence
> which might not be called down for... nor might it be found through
> wisdom... but it might be disclosed only by the grace of God.
Can you tell about that grace, am not too familiar with the concept.
>
> I am sorry that so many "defenders" of "belief" may think that belief
> and facts are at odds. But, even if they had the most eloquent of
> tongues, they would be unable to say anything useful -- if that door is
> closed.
Maybe because they found your door also already closed?
Boondock Saint
I never see belief as complete, as I never see my knowledge compelete.
If there is any right way for me to go it is to find out where my
knowledge is at its' limits so that I might be open to learn more.
So, yes, it is vitally important to understand the relationship between
the two... and it is an ongoing, existential quest for all of us.
>
> The confirmation of a belief can/may be expected to take some more time. The
> "dream" of world peace for instance, as in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is
> a (hoped for?) belief/expectancy not-yet-confirmed. Its is paramount however
> to know *what* to expect... otherwise you're not able to identify the
> confirmation...when it comes. Y'd have missed "the Messiah". Do you think
> religious people, from all different denominations, know what-to-expect?
> You'll find a mess, full of contradictory and often mutually exclusive
> dogma.
Okay, this is getting into more pragmatic eschatology for me. I have a
pretty cut and dried rule which I keep for myself. Because I am very not
cut and dried. I want to know. There are things which I have been made
to want to know. Puzzles, placed before me. Mystery. But, what do I need
to know? And, what must I know?
Moses intoned that there were "other things which God did not tell us",
and there is a Psalm which points to "things too marvelous for me to
know". I try and put myself into that place, where I humble myself, when
I try and understand the prophecies.
Because I have found that it is very easy for me to get conceited... to
look into things and think I know things, which, in fact, I do not know.
And, what does this do for me? It is criminal, it is not true, and it
wastes my time and energy.
So, I carefully research the old writings... I try and find everything I
can about what people have said who search for such things... and, I try
and put the pieces of the puzzle together. When, I find I can, in good
conscience, then I continue to test those things -- but, I also hold on
to them.
When I find that some interpretations of prophecy are not something I
can accept in good conscience, I leave the answer open ended and answer
to myself - and to anyone who asks - "I do not know".
Needless to say, there are a great many things I do not know.
This lack of assurance may be difficult to carry, at times, but at the
end of the day it is the easiest to carry.
I should note, however, that I do take very literal promises that allude
to the ability of God to speak. Very literal. Because maybe God has
something to say which can help me in my overall "quest".
But, what is most important, I believe, is that I must first have a
quest. In fact, this statement itself is ludicrous, because I could
never know that is "most important" unless I first had a "quest". And,
what quest could that be, but charity, love. Seeing the object one loves
being in peril, that is the fuel of my quest, and indeed, of my life.
For without the love and the beloved, I am nothing but a solitary point
of consciousness, alone and without purpose.
>
>
>
>>And, where does belief end and knowing begin? With the walls of
>>our rooms? With the sky? Are not all impressions but temporary and
>>fleeting as we learn to understand more of reality?
>>
>>We may observe God's creation, as if it were our own. But, may we also
>>so observe God, who observes us?
>
>
> As above, as below.
>
>
>>Evidence of the resurrection of Jesus
>>Christ is a matter of grace, in the Christian belief, it is evidence
>>which might not be called down for... nor might it be found through
>>wisdom... but it might be disclosed only by the grace of God.
>
>
> Can you tell about that grace, am not too familiar with the concept.
Grace.
This is a very difficult subject, though it appears not to be on the
surface. It is difficult because it runs directly contrary to the
natural way of thinking about righteousness, and it always will.
Grace is actually extremely central to the Christian doctrine and it
required multiple books to expound apon to really get a good
understanding of it -- I found.
This is because the concept runs contrary to the natural world,
absolutely contrary.
In short, grace means, in this context, that righteousness is by grace,
not by works. I find it is well understood in an extistential framework
of Solomon, that is, 'all is useless, all is vanity'.
What "work" we might do to become "right", is nullified, if grace is the
only way to righteousness.
An artist who works all of his life wishes to obtain "righteousness", in
the since that he wishes to improve apon his or her course of "what is
right". In the field of art, for instance, one would want to be known as
being "right" amongst one's peers. The same might be said in business or
science... we seek a "reputation" among our peers which might be called
a "righteousness".
The problem is, of course, should an artist strive for what is "right"
amongst his peers... or should one attempt to find a more permanent
judge of "righteousness" in art, that judge being God?
This can be very deceptive, as we may see with artists who strive to
obtain a righteousness in their art... yet fail to obtain this with
their current peers. Later generations then discover this artist, and
this artist knew well that they would. But, was that artist relying on a
more permanent judge of valuations... on the existance of virtues apart
from men... or was that artist merely leaning on greater virtues which
are temporary - but less fleeting then what his or her contemporaries
may have currently understood?
That, perhaps, is the long of it.
The short of it, of course, is that grace is grace is grace. If one
seeks righteousness, where can one find it, if one can not find God?
And, how might one find God, Him being in the Heavens, and we being but
mortals so prone to the very conceit which keeps us from Him?
We end up seeking that which is illusionary, because we are bound to
understand only the valuations which society espouses... and we can not
get over the wall which seperates the spiritual from the physical
because it is an impossible boundary for man to cross.
>
>
>>I am sorry that so many "defenders" of "belief" may think that belief
>>and facts are at odds. But, even if they had the most eloquent of
>>tongues, they would be unable to say anything useful -- if that door is
>>closed.
>
>
> Maybe because they found your door also already closed?
If the unbelievable were required to believe, how might I communicate it?
Telling it would be unbelievable.
What shall we say? Shall we say, "Look, friend, this is my experience,
this is what I have seen with my own eyes"... when what we have seen is
completely unbelievable?
And, if that which we have had given to us is unbelievable, but also
sacred, shall we have it open to being mocked?
Look... there are many things which one might see or hear of or have
experienced... which is unbelievable. Which is not even supernatural.
Our lives may be full of strange coincidences or remarkable
achievements. How is it to express these things? If you have ever been
in the place where the odds are a million to one, how do you explain
this to people who have never been in this place so that they would
believe you?
At times, we may have physical evidence. I could, for instance, reveal
to someone speaking of the lottery that I once won 300 million dollars
in the lottery. How could they possibly believe that unless I pulled out
physical evidence, say a newspaper clipping or my bank account balance?
But, in the Way, we presuppose such coincidences as everyday occurences
and we also are ever seeing of the sheer probability against us... as
the walk of grace is ever lined with such things.
In this Way, we seek to find the place where humility rises, because in
walking in this humility we find that everything we might "do" is
useless and worse, vain. We seek, therefore, to know, and in knowing, to
reflect; in seeing, being.
We strive not for perfection through our own hands, but we strive to see
He who is Perfection, and in seeing such glimpses, we are enlightened as
a empty piece of glass is given life through the introduction of light.
And, look now, all of this is that which is too marvelous, it is that
which is too sublime, but the heart of it is it complicated. No, it is
simple... as simple as walking a straight line across a rope straining
over an impossible gorge.
Flourish it, and fail... and all of our being seeks to flourish it, to
add our own essence to that which can not be added to... in so doing, we
corrupt it all completely. We fail. Grace alone picks us up again.
Boondock Saint
>
>
> amigocabal wrote:
>
>> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:3FAF2EA2...@hotmail.com...
>>
>>> G.-man wrote:
>>>
<snip>
>> --
>> Fundamentalist Zionists love
>> Fundamentalist Christians, because
>> they hope to convert them, and
>> Fundamentalist Christians love
>> Fundamentalist Zionists because
>> they hope to see them burn in the
>> fires of Armagedon!
I am aware of no Christian which believes fundamentalist Zionists will
burn in "the fires of Armageddon". You may be aware of a cult or sect
which takes a very unscriptural twist on Armageddon -- which is
mentioned once in the Christian Scripture. It is anything but
unflattering to Zionists since Armageddon poses all of the nations
against Israel.
You can read into that whatever you wish, however there is patently
nothing there which need to be read into.
Indeed, this term "fires of Armageddon" is even entirely absent from
Scripture. Armageddon is simply a war - a symbolic war, yes - which
happens after a great many very horrible plagues have already happened.
Plagues and miracles which have already wiped out a very large portion
of the entire populace.
Sheldon Liberman
You left in my byline but nothing I wrote.
>
>
Baard Ove Kopperud
> Let me quickly get my bias out of the way. Unlike them, I am upfront
> about this and readily speak it. Beyond the fact that I am aware of
> international Jewish suffering, and their history, I am a Christian. We
> believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews. We believe whoever
> curses Israel is cursed by God. We believe whoever blesses Israel is
> blessed by God. So, yes, we have religious beliefs behind this. But,
> even those religious beliefs are backed by strong reasoning.
As a Christian you should the know about the Jews
purpose in Israel and their ultimate fate... but
let me remind you...
The Israel written about in the the Bible which
Chritians (like you) wait for, is filled with
*Christians*. Most Jews have been killed, and the
few that remained have discovered the error of
their mistake, and converted to Christianity.
Currently though, the majority of Chritians in
Israel are of Arabic decent -- not of Jewish.
These Arabs are treated as bad as all the
other Arabs in Israel -- after all, you can't
tell a Christian Arab apart from a Muslim one...
besides for a Jew, Jesus is just one more false
Messiah who failed the Jewish people.
Who are you to question the will of God? Maybe
the suicide-bombers are just Gods way to start
uprooting some Jews -- as promised. It would
after all not be the first time He let some
great calamity befall *His* people.
Personally, I think Israel and it's army and
Hamas and it's sucide-bombers are *both* doing
the Devil's work rather than Gods, but who am
I to tell or question? I think though that
the Palestines have more reason for their
actions than Israel does though.
> I firmly believe that anything I believe has empirical evidence and is
> worthy of being reasoned with others. We come to our beliefs through the
> court of free speech. We debate with each other. I have dropped beliefs
> others have persuaded me are wrong. I have kept beliefs that I have been
> persuaded are right.
>
> First of all, one of the main things I see these people doing is:
>
> They claim they are only "anti-zionist", not "anti-Jewish" -- then we
> hear about how attacks against Jews are spurred on by their marches and
> movements. We see synagogues get burned down. We see Jews killed.
>
> In debating with them, I have seen some leftists claim these things...
> then they go off and make coarse jokes against the Jews. They will sit
> there and say it is "wrong to say we are anti-semites, you are just
> crying wolf" -- then they go and do it. It is a slap in the face. They
> condemn defense.
>
> They condemn the Jews defending themselves.
If you invade someone -- or someone you "help", "liberate"
or "guide" percive what you do as an invation -- then
you must expect reprecaution. Maybe you have a right to
protect yourself from those reprecaution, but if you
haven't invaded in the first place, then you wouldn't
have had to face those reprecautions at all.
To take my own country as an example...
When Hitler's Germany invaded us, a resistance movement
was formed which started attacking Germans, German interests
and colaborators. Hitler-Germany responded by calling
the resistance-movemnet "terrorists" and had many jailed
or executed for their attacks against German interests.
It was only natural that the German occupiers responed
to attacks against them, but if they *hadn't* inavded
us in the first place, we would neither have formed a
resistance nor attacked German interests -- and certainly
not *in* Germany.
> I saw this in reading about the Holocaust. They would condemn Jews for
> fighting back, then they would ask Jews why they don't fight back.
>
> We all know well what Hamas says about the Jews, surely? Or is it true
> that what the Hamas really believe still is not common knowledge? We
> hear all about Jews knocking down the "poor Palestinians", why is it
> these same media outlets do not tell us exactly what these Palestinian
> terrorists believe? Why do they argue for their beliefs, as if they knew
> them?
>
> And, how could the world be so blind as to their beliefs when these
> beliefs are core to Islam itself?
And you are an expert on Islam are you?
Did you know that Islam regards Jesus as a great prophet
and hold great reverence of his (Jesus') followers, while
the Jews concider Jesus as yet another person claiming
to be Messiah?
In a competition in which book -- the Bible or the Koran --
which are most repressing towards women or have the cruelest
punishments for the most harmless crimes, there would
certainly be a draw.
If you ask *why* these things happens, the answer is simple...
Some Muslims are just like some Christians -- They read some
parts of their Holly-books while ignoring others. Then
they "interpert" what they've read. Or they claim that
while this is what it's written, *this* is what is actually
meant. Or they just invent something, and claims that this
is in their Holly-books.
The Koran doesn't mention "virgins in Heaven for suicide-bombers"
or "honor-killing" (although a man is allowed to *diciplinate*
a wife). Forced-marrigies are not allowed according to the
Koran, since both bride and groom must enter into marrige
volenterely (although the *Bible* allows a man to sell his
daughter into slavery).
Unfortunately, it's mostly men who reads these books, in
male dominated societies, in a male-dominated world.
I think suicide-bombers has very little to do with religion...
it's no more strange than why the Confederacy fought the
Union, or why my country resisted Hitler's occupiers...
"They're on (what we concider) our land, and we didn't
invite them."... and that is a good enough excuse for *anyone*
to start fighting back -- even if you *don't* have anything
to fight with... like the Palestinians.
> Is there any excuse whatsoever to this? Can anyone really say they are
> unaware that Islam teaches that the Jews are liars and deceivers? Can
> anyone really argue that Islam does not do these things when the whole
> basis of Islam's legitimacy is on the lie that the Jews lied with the
> Bible? Is everyone so ignorant of Islam that they have never heard of
> the "Ishmael switch out story"?
Well, Israel *did* "lie and decieve" as they've violated
numerous UN-resolutions for the past 40 years...
> Even worse, beyond the fact they admit their motivation is 'we hate
> Jews', that they believe 'God has given us a divine sanction, order, to
> kill the Jews'... we could look at their behavior.
>
> Muslims, in Israel, are successful. They have more rights in Israel then
> in any Muslim nation. They are elected officials.
If they had *the same rights* as Jews in Israel -- which
must be the yardstick and not what they have or don't
have in other Arab-countries -- Israel would be an Arab-
nation _as the majority of the people *has been and continue
to be* Arabs_. One could claim that the blacks in
South-Africa during Aparthaid were better of than many other
Africans, but didn't make it right.
> Why on earth would they demand their own nation, especially when they
> never demanded this while these lands were under the rule of other
> Muslims? Do Muslims not have enough nations they can call their own? Do
> they need another one? This shows Muslims are absolutely biased against
> other nations and peoples -- but who is unaware of the fact that you,
> not being a Muslim, are an "infidel"?
Why did the Jews demand a nation of their own? They
had one, and left it in search of a better life, why
should they suddenly want to return more than 1000
years later?
Why did Europeans go to America and steal the land of
the natives? Surely there were enough of countries
in Europe?
OK, I'll bite... It *is* more exceptable to be ruled
and/or occupied by someone who shares your religion/
culture.
Sure you could find somewhere with a more suitable
religion or political system, or somewhere with
better economy... but more importantly is the land.
The land you were born on... the land you grew up on...
The land where your parents and grand-parents lived...
The land where your family have lived for generations...
The land your forfathers cleared and made green.
Or maybe the house your grand-father build... or the
company your father started.
For this, you can certainly overlook being ruled by
someone who don't share your beliefs or allows you
to raise your voice...
However, when people *claiming* to be the decendants
from people who lived in the area more than 1000 years
ago, suddenly takes power and order you off the land
you and you're family have had for centuries, or tells
you to leave the building your grandfather build
because it's in a "Jewish" area, you don't ignore
that so easely.
Finally, why do you think that rich Muslim-countries
should/would treat refugees any better than rich
Christian countries? Why have USA closed off it's
borders towards Mexico? Why do many US-citizens
look down on Latinos?
> That many people would overlook all of these glaring facts, that they
> would overlook the intentional purposes of Islamic terrorism... that
> they would blame it all on the Jews is absolute proof of their own
> hatred of the Jews.
Well, Israel should perhaps not talk to loadly
about terroism and countries buildt on the fruit
of terrorism... especially not with their current
PM.
-Koppe
Susan Cohen
"Baard Ove Kopperud" <baard.k...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:ae685d1b.03111...@posting.google.com...
>
> Currently though, the majority of Chritians in
> Israel are of Arabic decent -- not of Jewish.
> These Arabs are treated as bad as all the
> other Arabs in Israel
i.e., better than Arabs in other countries and as well as anyone else who is
a citizen.
-- after all, you can't
> tell a Christian Arab apart from a Muslim one...
> besides for a Jew, Jesus is just one more false
> Messiah who failed the Jewish people.
>
> Who are you to question the will of God? Maybe
> the suicide-bombers are just Gods way to start
> uprooting some Jews -- as promised. It would
> after all not be the first time He let some
> great calamity befall *His* people.
>
> Personally, I think Israel and it's army and
> Hamas and it's sucide-bombers are *both* doing
> the Devil's work rather than Gods, but who am
> I to tell or question? I think though that
> the Palestines have more reason for their
> actions than Israel does though.
You would.
Big deal.
Youalso fit the title of the thread, so it's not unexpected.
Susan
Jan Pieter Verhey
The scientific method very much works along these lines. Always one leg
standing on the solid sedimented grounds of established fact / truth, and
the other searching for more where theories, possibilities, assumptions...
beliefs... expectancies.. float around suspended in the "unknown".. yet to
be confirmed... or perhaps rejected as false.
In my thinking, to only value sedimented fact and ignoring (or even
rejecting) the existence of the unknown.. is a mistake. It makes the world
dull, mechanical, without poetry and very pretentious. Equally, to be blind
to facts, ignoring them, wishing them away and only dream off into the
realms of belief, religious dogma, speculation et-al... can create insanity
and disconnectedness from reality. The known and the unknown are both
aspects of the nature of our mysterious reality. To embrace them both, with
two eyes wide open instead of only one, prevents you getting trapped in
either of these 2-dimensional worlds. As Albert Einstein observed: "Religion
without science is blind, science without religion is lame."
Maybe knowledge / understanding can make you conceited.. but only if you
compare yourself with others. I'd say to seek knowledge, want to understand
more and more, be doubtfull and coutious at the same time.. is very good. To
look down on, or wanting to be better than others.. one finds in all ranks
of society, in many different ways. But to "humbly" acknowledge that this
drive exists, we all have it, already took the "poison" out of it. A little
bit of competition never hurts ?
>
> So, I carefully research the old writings... I try and find everything I
> can about what people have said who search for such things... and, I try
> and put the pieces of the puzzle together. When, I find I can, in good
> conscience, then I continue to test those things -- but, I also hold on
> to them.
>
> When I find that some interpretations of prophecy are not something I
> can accept in good conscience, I leave the answer open ended and answer
> to myself - and to anyone who asks - "I do not know".
>
> Needless to say, there are a great many things I do not know.
>
> This lack of assurance may be difficult to carry, at times, but at the
> end of the day it is the easiest to carry.
Especially because others CAN be (partially) wrong, even prophets, as well.
:)
>
> I should note, however, that I do take very literal promises that allude
> to the ability of God to speak. Very literal. Because maybe God has
> something to say which can help me in my overall "quest".
>
> But, what is most important, I believe, is that I must first have a
> quest. In fact, this statement itself is ludicrous, because I could
> never know that is "most important" unless I first had a "quest". And,
> what quest could that be, but charity, love. Seeing the object one loves
> being in peril, that is the fuel of my quest, and indeed, of my life.
> For without the love and the beloved, I am nothing but a solitary point
> of consciousness, alone and without purpose.
Any (personal) quest doesn't need to be at odds with love, charity. Nor are
they truly dependent on each other, I'd say.
I looked the word "grace" up in a dictonary, just to add some more meaning:
"Seemingly effortless beauty or charm of movement, form, or proportion."
So it has these qualities: "for free", "without effort", "beauty", "good",
"rightuous".
But why is that, as you say, "contrary to the natural world, absolutely
contrary."?
>
> An artist who works all of his life wishes to obtain "righteousness", in
> the since that he wishes to improve apon his or her course of "what is
> right". In the field of art, for instance, one would want to be known as
> being "right" amongst one's peers. The same might be said in business or
> science... we seek a "reputation" among our peers which might be called
> a "righteousness".
>
> The problem is, of course, should an artist strive for what is "right"
> amongst his peers... or should one attempt to find a more permanent
> judge of "righteousness" in art, that judge being God?
>
> This can be very deceptive, as we may see with artists who strive to
> obtain a righteousness in their art... yet fail to obtain this with
> their current peers. Later generations then discover this artist, and
> this artist knew well that they would. But, was that artist relying on a
> more permanent judge of valuations... on the existance of virtues apart
> from men... or was that artist merely leaning on greater virtues which
> are temporary - but less fleeting then what his or her contemporaries
> may have currently understood?
>
> That, perhaps, is the long of it.
The only constant in reality.. is change?
I'd say that artists that produce high-level art are in a "grace-mode"?
>
> The short of it, of course, is that grace is grace is grace. If one
> seeks righteousness, where can one find it, if one can not find God?
> And, how might one find God, Him being in the Heavens, and we being but
> mortals so prone to the very conceit which keeps us from Him?
Why you think G-d is not thinking your "mortal" thoughts? How can He be
seperate of anything? I found that "looking for G-d" means walking away from
him. You honestly believe that G-d is not looking through "your" eyes at
every moment?
>
> We end up seeking that which is illusionary, because we are bound to
> understand only the valuations which society espouses... and we can not
> get over the wall which seperates the spiritual from the physical
> because it is an impossible boundary for man to cross.
The "spiritual" -vs-"physical" boundary is an optical sort of delusion, me
thinks. I will be there, as long as you believe it is there and try to jump
over it.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>I am sorry that so many "defenders" of "belief" may think that belief
> >>and facts are at odds. But, even if they had the most eloquent of
> >>tongues, they would be unable to say anything useful -- if that door is
> >>closed.
> >
> >
> > Maybe because they found your door also already closed?
>
> If the unbelievable were required to believe, how might I communicate it?
>
> Telling it would be unbelievable.
>
> What shall we say? Shall we say, "Look, friend, this is my experience,
> this is what I have seen with my own eyes"... when what we have seen is
> completely unbelievable?
When you truly feel that something almost unbelievable has become confirmed
to you as fact or otherwiese self-evident... why would it be a real bother
to you if others see that same fact or not? And, maybe for you personally
that internally confirmed fact is very important, but not to others?
>
> And, if that which we have had given to us is unbelievable, but also
> sacred, shall we have it open to being mocked?
No need to throw pearls in front of the swines. But is there is anything
sacred that is not open? How can something be of real value if it could be
locked away in a safe with secret code?
>
> Look... there are many things which one might see or hear of or have
> experienced... which is unbelievable. Which is not even supernatural.
> Our lives may be full of strange coincidences or remarkable
> achievements. How is it to express these things? If you have ever been
> in the place where the odds are a million to one, how do you explain
> this to people who have never been in this place so that they would
> believe you?
>
> At times, we may have physical evidence. I could, for instance, reveal
> to someone speaking of the lottery that I once won 300 million dollars
> in the lottery. How could they possibly believe that unless I pulled out
> physical evidence, say a newspaper clipping or my bank account balance?
Sounds like a reasonable demand-of-proof. :)
>
> But, in the Way, we presuppose such coincidences as everyday occurences
> and we also are ever seeing of the sheer probability against us... as
> the walk of grace is ever lined with such things.
>
> In this Way, we seek to find the place where humility rises, because in
> walking in this humility we find that everything we might "do" is
> useless and worse, vain. We seek, therefore, to know, and in knowing, to
> reflect; in seeing, being.
>
> We strive not for perfection through our own hands, but we strive to see
> He who is Perfection, and in seeing such glimpses, we are enlightened as
> a empty piece of glass is given life through the introduction of light.
>
> And, look now, all of this is that which is too marvelous, it is that
> which is too sublime, but the heart of it is it complicated. No, it is
> simple... as simple as walking a straight line across a rope straining
> over an impossible gorge.
>
> Flourish it, and fail... and all of our being seeks to flourish it, to
> add our own essence to that which can not be added to... in so doing, we
> corrupt it all completely. We fail. Grace alone picks us up again.
I can relate to this in the sense that *effort* is not the way to "get"
certain things. Effort is required only in technical matters. Via grace, or
a letting-it-happen, or having your mind in the inquisitive, hungry,
passionate quest(ioning)-mode, certain qualities come into play, such as the
artist when he is in full-gear during his creative process. Maybe this has
to do with resisting vs letting-happen. Maybe certain "mystic"/highly
creative modes have something to do with super-conductivity in the brain and
spooky non-local quantum-correlations in our indivisible whole reality. But
that makes it all sound a bit robotical, mechanical and boring. But I
wouldn't get too romantic about such things either. :)
Deborah Sharavi
"torresdD" <torr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<bPfrb.26581$ej....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip OT nonsense]
Deborah
conquistador
AND NOBODY HATES ARABS EXCEPT MOSHE!
Boondock Saint
Yes.
>
> In my thinking, to only value sedimented fact and ignoring (or even
> rejecting) the existence of the unknown.. is a mistake. It makes the world
> dull, mechanical, without poetry and very pretentious. Equally, to be blind
> to facts, ignoring them, wishing them away and only dream off into the
> realms of belief, religious dogma, speculation et-al... can create insanity
> and disconnectedness from reality. The known and the unknown are both
> aspects of the nature of our mysterious reality. To embrace them both, with
> two eyes wide open instead of only one, prevents you getting trapped in
> either of these 2-dimensional worlds. As Albert Einstein observed: "Religion
> without science is blind, science without religion is lame."
Sure.
I felt compelled to understand what I could do... when I was young, and
I first assumed that my path would have to take the more empirical
sciences... as I grew older I changed into the direction more of the
theoritical sciences... and finally got into the sciences of man,
sociology, psychology, anthropology, et al.
Of course, I was only searching, though, because I had reasons to
search. Puzzles placed before me, if you will, mysteries. Why do we like
mysteries so... some compelling hidden thing just partially revealed to
us...
I am highly competitive in my field, and religiously... Yes, I am highly
competitive.
Well said, it does take the poison out of it, this is logical.
Of course, when one actually sees humility as a virtue, then one is
bound to be competitive. Instead of thinking, "well, one hour is enough
for me because I am so good already", you think, "the other guy is doing
this six hours, I better do twelve, no thirty six, no forty eight".
And, of course, humility is a very tricky virtue. One must seek it, one
must seek to understand and define it as one grows older. If one says,
"I have gained humility", perhaps one has grown conceited, especially if
they see it as a truly prized virtue.
One can choose to work in the mud... but, is that humble? Perhaps one
has chosen to work in the mud to humble one's self, or perhaps one
believes one's self superior to his or her peers because one works in
the mud?
I am also a very big believer in cynicism. This may seem astounding from
someone that claims to believe in things unseen. But, I do not believe
in that which I have no evidence for. Our teachings say very plainly,
"If you seek, if you seek in such and such way, your door will open, you
will get the answers". I think that is just very hard to believe, so
people traditionally do not seek in the ways proscribed for them to seek.
I could lie and say that my previous studies in the sciences helped at
this juncture... but I realize the truth was that all along I was
motivated... motivated.
>
>
>>So, I carefully research the old writings... I try and find everything I
>>can about what people have said who search for such things... and, I try
>>and put the pieces of the puzzle together. When, I find I can, in good
>>conscience, then I continue to test those things -- but, I also hold on
>>to them.
>>
>>When I find that some interpretations of prophecy are not something I
>>can accept in good conscience, I leave the answer open ended and answer
>>to myself - and to anyone who asks - "I do not know".
>>
>>Needless to say, there are a great many things I do not know.
>>
>>This lack of assurance may be difficult to carry, at times, but at the
>>end of the day it is the easiest to carry.
>
>
> Especially because others CAN be (partially) wrong, even prophets, as well.
> :)
I do not believe a real prophet can be wrong. But, this does not mean
one can understand what they are saying. I do believe trying to find
people who claim to speaking from God is like looking for a single voice
among millions.
I believe nothing easily. Believe it or not.
>
>
>>I should note, however, that I do take very literal promises that allude
>>to the ability of God to speak. Very literal. Because maybe God has
>>something to say which can help me in my overall "quest".
>>
>>But, what is most important, I believe, is that I must first have a
>>quest. In fact, this statement itself is ludicrous, because I could
>>never know that is "most important" unless I first had a "quest". And,
>>what quest could that be, but charity, love. Seeing the object one loves
>>being in peril, that is the fuel of my quest, and indeed, of my life.
>>For without the love and the beloved, I am nothing but a solitary point
>>of consciousness, alone and without purpose.
>
>
> Any (personal) quest doesn't need to be at odds with love, charity. Nor are
> they truly dependent on each other, I'd say.
Not at all. I think it depends. I felt I had to serve others because I
had others in mind... and would focus on them, still do. This led me to
trying to better myself, to overcome my own problems.
And, there are mysteries we have questions about. When searching out
these mysteries we may be unaware of our own motivations in doing this.
Because the mysteries are motivating us and we see the motivators but as
if they were obscured in shadows.
How much in this world is for free?
But, I would hazard a guess that you are pointing out my statement of
absolutes. After all, good grace may be improbable for the wretched
masses of unfortune, but it is not "absolutely" out of reach.
The natural way of thinking about obtaining righteousness is through
works, not through grace. It is assumed that one should not find the
forgiveness of sins for free. It is easy to say that one might find the
forgiveness of sin - and therefore righteousness, perfection - through
grace... but it is far more difficult to believe.
We want to do something to obtain righteousness. We want to fast. We
want to pray. We want to give alms. We want to serve causes. We want to
study, endlessly. We want to mortify our flesh with these things, be in
Church the most, say the right thing the most, hold the right opinion...
but, if righteousness is by grace then none of these works can earn one
grace at all.
Instead, grace gives faith, the eyes to the unseen promises of God, and
from faith comes works.
Our natural body, our flesh, wants to do it the other way around.
The short of it is that God gives faith, through grace, and it is by
faith we are saved, we believe. We believe that we trust in the
righteousness of Jesus Christ crucified, therefore, instead of our own
righteousness. Therefore, to try and live by our own righteousness,
would be an insult to that single act of God.
The argument of this, would then to depend not on ourselves for
righteousness, but to depend on God. So, in this there is absolutely no
boasting. We can not say, "because of my great efforts I was saved", nor
"because of my great wisdom, I was saved". Obviously, this is difficult,
even very difficult to understand... so you see many people claiming, "I
saved myself" or "I saved these people". This is grossly wrong and shows
they do not understand these things.
There is absolutely no free will in this model. There is the ample
illusion of free will. There is freedom, true freedom, in finding this
path. But, that freedom is found in doing what man is truly meant to do
and be like -- to be godly.
Free will, really, is the illusion here.
>
>
>
>
>>An artist who works all of his life wishes to obtain "righteousness", in
>>the since that he wishes to improve apon his or her course of "what is
>>right". In the field of art, for instance, one would want to be known as
>>being "right" amongst one's peers. The same might be said in business or
>>science... we seek a "reputation" among our peers which might be called
>>a "righteousness".
>>
>>The problem is, of course, should an artist strive for what is "right"
>>amongst his peers... or should one attempt to find a more permanent
>>judge of "righteousness" in art, that judge being God?
>>
>>This can be very deceptive, as we may see with artists who strive to
>>obtain a righteousness in their art... yet fail to obtain this with
>>their current peers. Later generations then discover this artist, and
>>this artist knew well that they would. But, was that artist relying on a
>>more permanent judge of valuations... on the existance of virtues apart
>>from men... or was that artist merely leaning on greater virtues which
>>are temporary - but less fleeting then what his or her contemporaries
>>may have currently understood?
>>
>>That, perhaps, is the long of it.
>
>
> The only constant in reality.. is change?
I would not say that, at all. I would say we tend to see a great deal of
cycles in reality, but reality is also criss crossed by a great deal of
forces... forces which build up, but primarily forces which degrade.
>
> I'd say that artists that produce high-level art are in a "grace-mode"?
Not really, because art can often be a subjective matter. But, if there
is objective truth, then there can be objective art, no?
So, to search for objective truth in one's art, if one finds it, this is
a huge pay out.
But, yes, in the sense I was speaking of... anyone talented or rich or
blessed could be say to be "graced". But, I would not compare the grace
of this world with the grace of the spiritual world except as shadows
might compare to the reality.
>
>
>>The short of it, of course, is that grace is grace is grace. If one
>>seeks righteousness, where can one find it, if one can not find God?
>>And, how might one find God, Him being in the Heavens, and we being but
>>mortals so prone to the very conceit which keeps us from Him?
>
>
> Why you think G-d is not thinking your "mortal" thoughts? How can He be
> seperate of anything? I found that "looking for G-d" means walking away from
> him. You honestly believe that G-d is not looking through "your" eyes at
> every moment?
>
No, I agree with that, of course, everyone knows that "everything is
made by God and in God".
Paul even argues this to the Greeks.
I am an "I Am", but not THE "I Am". We are made in the Image of God, but
we are not the Ultimate Consciousness. Look, as kittens play with toy
mice, pretending and learning to catch them... our children play with
toy humans, toy houses, toy lives... pretending to control them...
pretending to have God like control over them.
[I do not believe God takes offense to saying the meaning of His Name,
btw, if the conversation is directed towards His Glory in good faith.]
But, the furthest from what I could mean would direct people somewhere
else to "find God". This is not what I am saying. On the contrary, I am
saying, "God gives grace to whom He wishes to give grace"... and, "God
reveals Himself as He will, and He discloses Himself as He will".
I am saying man is helpless to break that boundary if God does not so
choose.
But, if you believe you can do this, really believe it, you will. But,
this is because God gave you that faith to do this. Not understanding
this would mean one would boast that one did this by themself. And, why
should one boast of this when God is the One to receive praise for this,
not ourselves?
This means, I could say until my face is blue, "Do not go here nor there
to find God, but God is in your heart"... but this makes no difference
if one can not believe God is in one's heart... if one will refuse to
abide by one's conscience in all things and to do what one very well
knows is right.
Indeed, how do I or you know what is right? By this that we might call
"the conscience". I would say that this is the spirit of the Law written
on all humanity's heart by the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good
and Evil.
But we all know how hard it is to listen and to obey the conscience.
Even though the conscience always has something to say and we have so
many choices everyday.
Indeed, my religion is bound up around following my conscience, trying
to find my conscience, and in trying to watch what I condemn and what I
approve of. Hypocrisy, to me, is where I know and listen to that which
is unconsciousable... for if I condemn something in others, I know well
not to do it for myself.
When I say "my religion", I am not speaking of anyone but myself, though
I do believe this is directly in line with the Law and Prophets. I am
just speaking personally here. One can not speak for anyone else on such
a level.
>
>>We end up seeking that which is illusionary, because we are bound to
>>understand only the valuations which society espouses... and we can not
>>get over the wall which seperates the spiritual from the physical
>>because it is an impossible boundary for man to cross.
>
>
> The "spiritual" -vs-"physical" boundary is an optical sort of delusion, me
> thinks. I will be there, as long as you believe it is there and try to jump
> over it.
I would argue they exist in parallel, and that there are connections,
indeed I view the physical world as entirely dependant on the spiritual
world.
I agree that faith can take one "across" in varying degrees. Otherwise,
why should we try and pray or seek out any great wisdom?
The faith I follow believes that there are two different types of
bodies, though... there is the angelic type of body for the spiritual
world, and then there is the physical type of body for the physical
world. We believe that anyone who "believes" in God, truly, has been
born into a new body which is unseen but within.
This body is "angelic" type and is eternal and is described, for
instance, in our "transfiguration", and elsewhere.
So, it is a very real world, a very seperate world, eternal, where this
one is temporary.
I would not argue that this is something which everyone understands, nor
would I argue that this something which requires some special human
approved "membership" to belong to. I would argue that this is very
specific information which is very poorly discussed and rarely, if ever.
(I recall no such discussions in all of my readings, neither in old
Judaic writings which I pored over, nor in old Christian writings).
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>I am sorry that so many "defenders" of "belief" may think that belief
>>>>and facts are at odds. But, even if they had the most eloquent of
>>>>tongues, they would be unable to say anything useful -- if that door is
>>>>closed.
>>>
>>>
>>>Maybe because they found your door also already closed?
>>
>>If the unbelievable were required to believe, how might I communicate it?
>>
>>Telling it would be unbelievable.
>>
>>What shall we say? Shall we say, "Look, friend, this is my experience,
>>this is what I have seen with my own eyes"... when what we have seen is
>>completely unbelievable?
>
>
> When you truly feel that something almost unbelievable has become confirmed
> to you as fact or otherwiese self-evident... why would it be a real bother
> to you if others see that same fact or not?
You have put a lot of thought into this, very impressive.
Ben Franklin had a good quote, "Three can keep a secret if two are
dead". Why is this? Why can people not keep secrets?
What if you worked for, say, the Pentagon. And, you knew that the US was
planning on starting an unexpected war in say, three months. You knew
that a city was going to be decimated. Would you feel the urge crawling
through your bones to run out around the city and tell everyone?
People can keep secrets, of course. But, Franklin was not talking about
those kinds of secrets. Personal secrets that really are of no interest
to anybody. No, we all understand what he meant. He meant secrets of the
kind which are extremely interesting to anybody and everybody.
The reverse of my Pentagon scenario is also true. We see this all the
time. Some guy met President Hoover decades ago and when you first meet
him he wants to show you the picture.
Or, what would it be like to be the inventor of something everyone uses
all the time, but for them to not know you did it? Like, say you
invented the television. Now, imagine this was kept a secret, that you
knew you invented this but could tell no one.
In my life, I have been a success in my field. I have been in the media
many times. I find myself telling the doctors this when my baby is born
because they were talking about my field. It screams at you. You want to
say, "Hey, you know when you used this? That was me."
Also, in my life, I have known famous people through my family. You end
up telling people these things.
All of these things are ways of talking about these feelings, but they
only scratch the surface. They show the way, but not the reality.
Discussing shadows.
In reality, one does want to go in the streets and tell everyone. And,
one does. One does stop speaking about anything else, anything dealing
with the physical world at all. And one does. One finds oneself burning
with suspense, with the desire for others to know, and one finds that
nothing releases this burning but if someone else believes. The problem
is no one does, and one is confronted with the absolute horror of being
mocked as being a "liar" or "insane". The sheer hatred which can come
from such grace was hereto absolutely unknown and unexpected.
The horrible irony is that if only someone would listen, they could get
everything you have. Everything.
> And, maybe for you personally
> that internally confirmed fact is very important, but not to others?
>
Most people deeply hate you for it. They do not believe you and they
resent you for it. Some really don't believe you, and they don't even
hate you -- they just quietly think you are insane. But, if you find
good people with an open mind who have a very capable ability to believe
the impossible - by grace - then they will believe... and this is an
incredible relief.
It depends about what one is talking about. The most wonderous of things
one wishes to tell everyone on the planet. But, after awhile, one may
realize that it was private, or for another reason, or that the time was
not right. This does not mean one ever can return to a "normal life".
In such an instance, one would first go through a period of being
"stunned". Like post-traumatic stress disorder. One's world, no matter
how "in line" one thought it was, explodes. Every little thing one "let
go" becomes inexcusable. One has memories, one has old thought patterns,
as these come up, they are changed to come in line with the new
evidence. This is a long process.
One becomes socially dysfunctional during this time.
Once one goes through this period, once one has accepted the reality of
this... then such things are not required. One is ready to accept new
things without having to reorganize everything in one's perceptions.
We make an amazing amount of judgments, we have an amazing array of
choices everyday, we have made many small and large beliefs... we have
our own worlds. We interpret everything through these worlds. We have
many open ended statements, questions, events, actions... in such a
situation, these things all become confronted as they are recalled...
until one can once again relate what new reality one sees with the
outside reality, and one learns to discuss and deal with this outside
reality so as to avoid... difficulties.
For me, from my situation, the events which I have gone through, I would
say, that "now is not the time, later, but not now"... rather then,
"this information is not useful to anyone". For me, it is in waiting, in
horrible waiting.
But, there was also explicit training involved there. So, there are not
too many surprises.
>
>>And, if that which we have had given to us is unbelievable, but also
>>sacred, shall we have it open to being mocked?
>
>
> No need to throw pearls in front of the swines. But is there is anything
> sacred that is not open? How can something be of real value if it could be
> locked away in a safe with secret code?
You ask very good questions.
I am very surprised.
You are absolutely correct. There is nothing secret meant to be kept
that way. But, some secrets last for a good many of years, decades. And,
it really wears on you.
Everybody is different. Different creatures for different purposes. In
this, where we see ourselves fulfilled, we see not perfection, but
perfection in what was alloted to us... perfection in what we were meant
to be, in what we were made to be. Some see some side of the overall
Glory, some see other sides.
There have been very, very poweful people in this... but, they have
different talents, different perspectives. (I would argue their
perspective becomes their talent).
We could generalize. One sees the sadness. One sees the liberation. One
sees the damnation. One sees the happiness. These are gross
generalizations though and they can not hope to express such talents
that fall under "what we are". For one is able to do as one becomes and
one becomes as one sees of the Glory.
Why would anything remain "buried", though, for decades? What would be
the purpose of this?
God knows the truth. He keeps it. He watches while the wicked go about
their way. He has a very big secret for them. He watches while they do
their evil which He hates. He tolerates it, He is slow to anger, but He
has that anger, that judgment. He does not deny it.
That is a perspective. It is a perspective which requires time to have
it bear fruit. It learns of the suffering, the secrets, it learns to
hold back its' hand. It learns to accept and to walk at the slow pace
God walks by.
But, no such thing is ever given for the benefit of any single soul.
Such things are always given for the benefit of others. The eventuality,
the suspense, is awesome.
Lastly, there is another component, though I have already hinted at it.
If one is collecting secrets, that is, if one is being shown a larger
mystery, this may take a long period of time for everything to come out.
This would mean one would be able to seemingly answer "any and every
question", though one simply learned all of the answers and the
questions before they were asked.
>
>
>>Look... there are many things which one might see or hear of or have
>>experienced... which is unbelievable. Which is not even supernatural.
>>Our lives may be full of strange coincidences or remarkable
>>achievements. How is it to express these things? If you have ever been
>>in the place where the odds are a million to one, how do you explain
>>this to people who have never been in this place so that they would
>>believe you?
>>
>>At times, we may have physical evidence. I could, for instance, reveal
>>to someone speaking of the lottery that I once won 300 million dollars
>>in the lottery. How could they possibly believe that unless I pulled out
>>physical evidence, say a newspaper clipping or my bank account balance?
>
>
> Sounds like a reasonable demand-of-proof. :)
Yes, absolutely.
I would not get too romantic about this either.
Let me totally honest. I am in it for the power.
Money, fame, all of that, that does not do it for me.
I want the power. I want to know. I want the truth. I want to live.
I don't want an ordinary life. I can not stand an ordinary life. But, I
live one, because I must for this to happen. "Ordinary"... "common", I
want something more. I want it all.
I think self-called mystics are in it for the fame and the glory from
men. No one is reading this thread but you. A lot of what I say may
sound like I am trying to be "mystical", no, I am just trying to
describe something vaguely. Because I do not want to go into depth on
it, but I am willing to answer questions from my perspective.
Boondock Saint
I was only responding to your byline. If it is nothing to you, then of
course, ignore my comments.
Boondock Saint
man's views represent the views of many Europeans and leftist (far
leftist) Americans.
Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
> Boondock Saint <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FAD5A0B...@hotmail.com>...
>
>
>>Let me quickly get my bias out of the way. Unlike them, I am upfront
>>about this and readily speak it. Beyond the fact that I am aware of
>>international Jewish suffering, and their history, I am a Christian. We
>>believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews. We believe whoever
>>curses Israel is cursed by God. We believe whoever blesses Israel is
>>blessed by God. So, yes, we have religious beliefs behind this. But,
>>even those religious beliefs are backed by strong reasoning.
>
>
> As a Christian you should the know about the Jews
> purpose in Israel and their ultimate fate... but
> let me remind you...
>
> The Israel written about in the the Bible which
> Chritians (like you) wait for, is filled with
> *Christians*. Most Jews have been killed, and the
> few that remained have discovered the error of
> their mistake, and converted to Christianity.
>
This is incorrect. There is nothing that says "most
Jews would have been killed".
> Currently though, the majority of Chritians in
> Israel are of Arabic decent -- not of Jewish.
True, I do not doubt.
> These Arabs are treated as bad as all the
> other Arabs in Israel -- after all, you can't
> tell a Christian Arab apart from a Muslim one...
This is not true. It is true that Christian Arabs are
suffering because of the wars caused by the Islamic ones.
And, it is true that some of these Arabs are actually
aligned with these Muslims because they have been deceived.
When I see these polls come out of Palestine saying, "70% of
Palestinians support suicide bombing" (or whatever the figure is),
I know where that other 30% is.
When we saw Palestinians burning candles in memorial for 9/11,
we saw these were the Christians. When we saw Palestinians dancing
and shouting in the streets, we knew these were the Muslims.
Yet, I do not wish to see any group suffer. But, they started
this whole thing, they have not even tried to work together with
Israel.
> besides for a Jew, Jesus is just one more false
> Messiah who failed the Jewish people.
We believe in salvation by grace, so we do not believe
we are in a position to judge.
What we can say, however, is that we also believe the promises
to the Jews are irrevocable and that they deserve further respect
because they are the roots of this tree. And, we respect them
because of the Patriarchs.
>
> Who are you to question the will of God? Maybe
> the suicide-bombers are just Gods way to start
> uprooting some Jews -- as promised.
So, you are saying that God spoke to each of these men
and told them to do this, audibly?
I do not think so.
If God wants to kill someone He can do it as He normally
does it for every person on the planet... and if He wants
to make a statement about it, well, you have read Exodus, have
you not?
But, the Word says that the Jews would be dispersed, the Word
also says that the Jews would only return when they have returned
to good favor with God. And, likewise, all of these things have
been plainly prophesied thousands apon thousands of years ago.
> It would
> after all not be the first time He let some
> great calamity befall *His* people.
They are His people. He made the nation of Israel. They are His
witnesses, just as He said so. This does not change.
>
> Personally, I think Israel and it's army and
> Hamas and it's sucide-bombers are *both* doing
> the Devil's work rather than Gods, but who am
> I to tell or question?
Such decisions should be made by God's word. If you do not believe God's
word, then make study it and see if it is true or not.
I think it is blatantly obvious that the Hamas are doing the Devil's
work. I think it may appear that Israel is doing this as well, but it
would appear like this if David himself were leading the army from
someone outside of the issues.
> I think though that
> the Palestines have more reason for their
> actions than Israel does though.
Really. Because they took their land back which the "Palestinians" took
by force, or because the Israeli's should not resist those who wish to
kill them?
Have you read the Hamas charter? Do you know why these people are even
saying they are doing these acts of terrorism?
>
>
>>I firmly believe that anything I believe has empirical evidence and is
>>worthy of being reasoned with others. We come to our beliefs through the
>>court of free speech. We debate with each other. I have dropped beliefs
>>others have persuaded me are wrong. I have kept beliefs that I have been
>>persuaded are right.
>>
>>First of all, one of the main things I see these people doing is:
>>
>>They claim they are only "anti-zionist", not "anti-Jewish" -- then we
>>hear about how attacks against Jews are spurred on by their marches and
>>movements. We see synagogues get burned down. We see Jews killed.
>>
>>In debating with them, I have seen some leftists claim these things...
>>then they go off and make coarse jokes against the Jews. They will sit
>>there and say it is "wrong to say we are anti-semites, you are just
>>crying wolf" -- then they go and do it. It is a slap in the face. They
>>condemn defense.
>>
>>They condemn the Jews defending themselves.
>
>
> If you invade someone -- or someone you "help", "liberate"
> or "guide" percive what you do as an invation -- then
> you must expect reprecaution. Maybe you have a right to
> protect yourself from those reprecaution, but if you
> haven't invaded in the first place, then you wouldn't
> have had to face those reprecautions at all.
So, the Christians owned Israel through Rome. They had it taken
from them through the Persians. The Persians had it taken from
them from the Muslims. Then, "Christian" Rome saw this and said, "Hey,
we want this back". So, we have the Crusades.
Now, what if the Crusades won, for good?
Now, the Jews come along, and they want to have this land. They
are being persecuted everywhere and have no hope unless they have
their own country like every other nation has. And, they take this
from the Christians.
Would you side with the Crusaders there, or with the Jews?
>
> To take my own country as an example...
> When Hitler's Germany invaded us, a resistance movement
> was formed which started attacking Germans, German interests
> and colaborators. Hitler-Germany responded by calling
> the resistance-movemnet "terrorists" and had many jailed
> or executed for their attacks against German interests.
That is not comparable. Islam was based on the Jewish religion
and took over not only that religion but also their Holy Land.
Had your people been expelled from your country by Hitler and
the Allies retook it and started to settle it, then you returned some
decades later... and the Allies started to prevent you from returning,
that would be more comparable. But, it would not include the rape
of your religion and ancestors, a component Islam added to this.
>
> It was only natural that the German occupiers responed
> to attacks against them, but if they *hadn't* inavded
> us in the first place, we would neither have formed a
> resistance nor attacked German interests -- and certainly
> not *in* Germany.
I only wish I lived during that time so I could have participated in
such a thing.
But it is not comparable, they are apples and oranges.
>
>
>>I saw this in reading about the Holocaust. They would condemn Jews for
>>fighting back, then they would ask Jews why they don't fight back.
>>
>>We all know well what Hamas says about the Jews, surely? Or is it true
>>that what the Hamas really believe still is not common knowledge? We
>>hear all about Jews knocking down the "poor Palestinians", why is it
>>these same media outlets do not tell us exactly what these Palestinian
>>terrorists believe? Why do they argue for their beliefs, as if they knew
>>them?
>>
>>And, how could the world be so blind as to their beliefs when these
>>beliefs are core to Islam itself?
>
>
> And you are an expert on Islam are you?
I am not an "expert", but I am well read in it.
>
> Did you know that Islam regards Jesus as a great prophet
> and hold great reverence of his (Jesus') followers, while
> the Jews concider Jesus as yet another person claiming
> to be Messiah?
That is a misperception of Islam, one which could be said if
you were unaware that in Sudan Muslims killed millions of Christians, in
Armenia, they slaughtered almost two million, in Nigeria, in Algeria,
etc, etc, etc.
And that is not a fringe movement.
In reality, Christians are considered "belligerant polytheists", they
are not considered to be related to the "real" Christians who are
said to be protected. At least, this is the major strain of Islam,
Wahhabism and variants, which has been behind many of these mass
slaughters.
Judaism has not such teaching, no such past.
In fact, their hands are entirely clean.
Okay? And, I won't even go into how almost all Islamic majority nations
have severe state sponsered restrictions or outright banning of
Christianity. Okay? Seriously. Come on.
>
> In a competition in which book -- the Bible or the Koran --
> which are most repressing towards women or have the cruelest
> punishments for the most harmless crimes, there would
> certainly be a draw.
That is also poorly informed. Especially because the Koran actually
tells people to beat their wives. To wear scarves. To not leave
the house without a man, that a curse will be apon their heads
if they do.
Really.
Come on, what is this? Comparing women's rights in Islamic world to the
West? Can anybody be this out of it?
>
> If you ask *why* these things happens, the answer is simple...
>
> Some Muslims are just like some Christians -- They read some
> parts of their Holly-books while ignoring others. Then
> they "interpert" what they've read. Or they claim that
> while this is what it's written, *this* is what is actually
> meant. Or they just invent something, and claims that this
> is in their Holly-books.
Some, sure. But, the Wahhabist extremists have the Koran and the
Hadith on their side.
That is the problem.
They are merely doing what Muhommad did.
>
> The Koran doesn't mention "virgins in Heaven for suicide-bombers"
That is from the Hadith. It is authoritative.
> or "honor-killing" (although a man is allowed to *diciplinate*
> a wife).
To beat her. Amongst other things. Like to force her to stay inside, to
have other wives.
> Forced-marrigies are not allowed according to the
> Koran, since both bride and groom must enter into marrige
> volenterely (although the *Bible* allows a man to sell his
> daughter into slavery).
I do not recall if that is true, it seems unlikely since Muhommad had
forced marriages.
Slavery is strongly condoned in the Bible.
I do not think the Bible is allowing a man to sell his daughter
into slavery, in the same sense of the term:
Exodus 21
7 "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as
menservants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her
for himself, [1] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell
her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects
her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he
marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food,
clothing and marital rights.
This paragraph is rather confusing, as out of context:
If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in
the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he
comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes,
she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears
him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her
master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and
children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him
before the judges. [1] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and
pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.
The concept of slavery here is quite different from the concept of
slavery in Islam, which is the world concept of slavery. Six years, then
freedom.
With the woman, the appearance in context, appears to be more of an
arranged marriage then "slavery", as she is to be treated "as a
daughter", etc.
With Islam, slavery is actually encouraged and irrevokable. This is why
we have seen statements from Imams to this effect, and why we see a lot
of slavery in islamic nations even to this day. (Saudi Arabia only let
their slaves go free in the sixties, Sudan has thousands apon thousands
of slaves taken as war booty today).
>
> Unfortunately, it's mostly men who reads these books, in
> male dominated societies, in a male-dominated world.
You seem to have fun comparing Islamic society treatment of women to
modern Western, Judeo-Christian treatment of women. This is very unjust.
You might argue that "Judeo-Christian society" does not exist. However,
that is the definition of the West, secularism is completely in line
with this tradition. I can not use the Bible to condemn free speech, to
condone wife beating, to condemn freedom of religion, none of this.
You seem to be comparing the leading Imams with far right Christians
that like to get their faces on the television. This is not a fair
comparison. Those loud mouthed "Christians" are mockable theologians,
they have no standing with, say, the 86% Christians in the US.
The Imams, however, are equivalent to our best theologians.
You have good surface knowledge, but are lacking depth... my impression
is you memorized the contents of some websites, but have not read any
books on these subjects.
>
> I think suicide-bombers has very little to do with religion...
That is very poorly informed.
Read the Hamas charter. Go read about these people. Read a book about
them. Find out. Don't just say that kind of thing, that is foolish. They
are very religious people.
Suicide bombing is very rarely condemned, and often supported by the top
imams.
> it's no more strange than why the Confederacy fought the
> Union, or why my country resisted Hitler's occupiers...
Oh please.
I am going to tell you the confederate war was fought over slaves, and
you are going to tell me how "that wasn't really the case". You read an
internet site that explained to you how things "really happened".
In the South, you were the Confederate flag on a tshirt, go into a black
neighborhood, and tell them "I am not supporting slavery" while they
kick your ass.
That is the reality.
Or, hey, post about how "it is a lie, the US Civil war was not really
about slavery" on a black power newsgroup. Seriously, get both sides of
an issue.
This whole issue started with Neo-Nazis. Then, the liberals picked it
up and made it into a "revolutionary" store. Then you picked it up. On
the internet.
And, yes, I have heard both sides. But, I am not interested in such
a foolish debate.
> "They're on (what we concider) our land, and we didn't
> invite them."... and that is a good enough excuse for *anyone*
> to start fighting back -- even if you *don't* have anything
> to fight with... like the Palestinians.
Yes, some Southerners, a lot, did get into this just because the
Union was attacking them. Obviously, they did not own slaves. But, they
felt they had a right to. Hence, we have the sixties civil rights
movement in the South some hundred years later, the Ku Klux Klan,
men like John Hardin and his cousins who killed a lot of black men
post-civil war because "they deserved it".
Jesse James... poor preacher man's son. Lived on the wrong side
of the line. Union soldiers mistreated his parents. Horrible. Then
the guy joins Bloody Bill (or whatever his name was) and goes
attacking civilians in the North in horrible ramapages. Then, he
becomes a "hero" because he can't stand black men walking the street
and fights against the "horrible" feds. Problem is, the man was
really just a thief. He wasn't a Billy the Kid that was fighting
for something honorable. He was a product of his times.
Now, had you invaded Germany as they were breaking the Treaty of
Versailes and while they were building up against this treaty, had
you listened to Churchill and attacked Germany when they were doing
this and doing all of the repression that they were doing... then the
Germans would have fought back, too. That is more comparable. How dare
you invade them for their Nazism and breaking of the Treaty of
Versailles, they would have said!
>
>
>>Is there any excuse whatsoever to this? Can anyone really say they are
>>unaware that Islam teaches that the Jews are liars and deceivers? Can
>>anyone really argue that Islam does not do these things when the whole
>>basis of Islam's legitimacy is on the lie that the Jews lied with the
>>Bible? Is everyone so ignorant of Islam that they have never heard of
>>the "Ishmael switch out story"?
>
>
> Well, Israel *did* "lie and decieve" as they've violated
> numerous UN-resolutions for the past 40 years...
They did not lie, they did not deceive. They even attempted to go along
with everything. They were attacked, again and again. And no resolution
ever would have been made had the Arabs not gone against the UN in the
first place and attacked Israel with seven nations.
The UN is great for bias and politics. They have been as ineffective as
the League of Nations in actually doing anything effective.
>
>
>>Even worse, beyond the fact they admit their motivation is 'we hate
>>Jews', that they believe 'God has given us a divine sanction, order, to
>>kill the Jews'... we could look at their behavior.
>>
>>Muslims, in Israel, are successful. They have more rights in Israel then
>>in any Muslim nation. They are elected officials.
>
>
> If they had *the same rights* as Jews in Israel -- which
> must be the yardstick and not what they have or don't
> have in other Arab-countries -- Israel would be an Arab-
> nation _as the majority of the people *has been and continue
> to be* Arabs_. One could claim that the blacks in
> South-Africa during Aparthaid were better of than many other
> Africans, but didn't make it right.
That is, again, showing how you like to simplify things by munging all
of the facts together. I mean, you even compare the pro-slave
confederate war with your own country's resistance to Hitler. Naively.
Nevermind you will probably never bother to take my suggestion and ask
blacks what they think of your conclusion. Nevermind you probably won't
even bother to search on google for "the other side of the coin" on the
argument.
Arabs have the right to vote. They have the right to serve in public
office. They are treated with dignity and respect. This is nothing like
how South Africa was. Sure, Israel is not going to start having sharia
as law just because Muslims believe a State must have sharia as their law.
>
>
>>Why on earth would they demand their own nation, especially when they
>>never demanded this while these lands were under the rule of other
>>Muslims? Do Muslims not have enough nations they can call their own? Do
>>they need another one? This shows Muslims are absolutely biased against
>>other nations and peoples -- but who is unaware of the fact that you,
>>not being a Muslim, are an "infidel"?
>
>
> Why did the Jews demand a nation of their own? They
> had one, and left it in search of a better life, why
> should they suddenly want to return more than 1000
> years later?
Why ask this question of the Jews and not the "Palestinians"? Has it
never occured to you that Palestine never existed until Yasser Arafat
made it up? That it never actually existed in the real world until
Israel said, "Okay".
And, they said "okay" to stop the terrorism. The terrorism worsened, it
did not stop.
Or, why not ask yourself, "What would I do in their position"? What
would you do if you were ousted from your nation with everyone else?
What would you do? You would suffer in everyone else's nation as an
unprotected minority - without national defense, without military of
your own, without police - the Gypsies have been in the same boat as the
Jews and have suffered the same persecution for the same reasons.
Further, why was it okay for all of the Arabs to be ruled by Muslims,
but once they were to be ruled by Jews, they had to have their own
State? And, under Jews they could take over, actually, had they trusted
in democracy and numbers. But, they did not. Instead, they attack with
seven nations, in 1948, and many were expelled. They continue to trust
in jihad to get their way, not democracy.
>
> Why did Europeans go to America and steal the land of
> the natives? Surely there were enough of countries
> in Europe?
They were all filled up, was the problem. This land was essentially
barren. I know, you saw books with this Incan and Aztec cities full of
millions of people and thought these cities were all over the place.
The problem is, they weren't. There were scattered, mostly nomadic tribes.
I am not saying outrages did not happen. They did. But, by and large,
this land was literally void of people. It still is, most of it. If you
ever visited, you would see this.
But, man conquers man, and these things happen. Your people conquered.
My people were. This is how we all came to be. You can cry about the
morality of it, but you do not escape innocence.
>
> OK, I'll bite... It *is* more exceptable to be ruled
> and/or occupied by someone who shares your religion/
> culture.
I, like many other Christians, would have no problem in Israel. I would
not even think of blowing myself up there. And, if you recall, there are
Christians there that have been there since before the dispersion.
Islam is not a tolerant, religion, though. While Jews and Christians may
believe there is "one right way", we also believe in the right to
choice. Islam does not believe in the right to choice. (Dhimmitude, at
best... but the Ottoman years, the other "golden" periods of Islam were
also non-religious periods, ones out of line with the religion.)
It is not just Islam which is the leading force of Islam today, however,
it is a strain of Islam which comes from a strain called Wahhabism. It
has taken much of the Islamic world by force and it probably will
continue to.
Tell me what it is like when you are working under Sharia in your country.
>
> Sure you could find somewhere with a more suitable
> religion or political system, or somewhere with
> better economy... but more importantly is the land.
Can I have your ancestoral lands and make them my own? That is what the
Muslims did. Can I have the faith of your ancestors and make them my
own? That is what they did. Can I make you out to be the devil in this
new religion? That is what they did.
>
> The land you were born on... the land you grew up on...
> The land where your parents and grand-parents lived...
> The land where your family have lived for generations...
> The land your forfathers cleared and made green.
> Or maybe the house your grand-father build... or the
> company your father started.
Many Jews bought their land where they are.
The history of the land is very precious to Muslims because they believe
that they have the promise of the Jews. The problem is that Islam would
not exist had it not been for the Jewish religion.
>
> For this, you can certainly overlook being ruled by
> someone who don't share your beliefs or allows you
> to raise your voice...
Judaism obviously is acceptable with free speech. Islam, as obviously,
is not.
I do not expect to share my faith with everyone else I live, and I do
not. This is a diverse land, though 87% claim to be Christian of one
kind or another.
>
> However, when people *claiming* to be the decendants
> from people who lived in the area more than 1000 years
> ago, suddenly takes power and order you off the land
> you and you're family have had for centuries, or tells
> you to leave the building your grandfather build
> because it's in a "Jewish" area, you don't ignore
> that so easely.
That is very hypocritical when the Muslims claimed these very same
people lost favor with their own God, the Jewish God, mind you, and that
further they plagarized the Jewish religion. They were not, "Hey, wait,
who are these guys, oh no, help me".
Please.
As for "claiming", the Jews never stopped writing, neither did the
Russians nor Europeans where they lived... I mean, come on. Who is
saying these are not the same people? This is absurd.
>
> Finally, why do you think that rich Muslim-countries
> should/would treat refugees any better than rich
> Christian countries? Why have USA closed off it's
> borders towards Mexico? Why do many US-citizens
> look down on Latinos?
No idea what you are even trying to get at with that. We take in
refugees all the time and I have known many successful, happy refugees
from Vietnam, China, Cuba, Eastern Europe. All the time. One out of
eleven living Americans is a first generation immigrant.
One out of eleven.
>
>
>>That many people would overlook all of these glaring facts, that they
>>would overlook the intentional purposes of Islamic terrorism... that
>>they would blame it all on the Jews is absolute proof of their own
>>hatred of the Jews.
>
>
> Well, Israel should perhaps not talk to loadly
> about terroism and countries buildt on the fruit
> of terrorism... especially not with their current
> PM.
Yet more hypocrisy.
Explain that in the Phillipines, or Pakistan, or Nigeria, or Sudan, or
the Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia, or... the list just goes on and on where
you might justify jihad for "reactionary reasons". They bomb churches,
they bomb synagogues, they bomb Christians, they bomb Hindus, they even
bomb other Muslims. It is all "defensive", according to you.
Jihad does not really exist, according to you. Those poor extremist
Muslims. They do not even know that they are wrong because the liberal
and moderate Muslims don't practice jihad like they are supposed to.
>
> -Koppe
Look, you appear to have read maybe some conspiracy theory level books,
a very few, have some education in another field then history or
politics and surely are quite ignorant about Israel or the US... every
single one of your ideas are nearly verbatim from various internet
sites... and I see these things spread around quite a bit by my, yes,
younger, less read, liberal friends that will eventually mature out of
it (or, in some cases, they will never get it, sadly... there are some
bleeding heart liberals over the age of thirty that were able to remain
in their cave).
Most of your statements really were not worthy to even comment on, but I
did so anyway, just because they are so representative of many poorly
read (but not always poorly educated nor stupid) Europeans and very far
left Americans. Very far left. Not center left.
And, by European, I mean very, very few Eastern Europeans, because too
many of them had to read and understand the politics sorrounding them.
Look, I have had sound opponents. You are not one of them. You never
said anything I had not heard before. You had not easy clip which in
anyway caught me off guard. You are no inspiration which even required
me to pull out a book and print a quote. Nothing. It was the "history of
the world according to slashdot trolls".
Seriously. And, worse, I know you. I don't just know what you are
saying, I know where you got it, and I can say with absolute certainity
you got most of this from the internet. From websites that do not even
bother to provide references like book require, generally. I will guess
you may have read a conspiracy book or two. That is very likely it. I
don't even think you read six conspiracy books. (Tex Marrs, "the truth
about who shot JFK", etc, etc).
I can also guess, with some range of lack of doubt, that you probably
are not even really interested in the subject. Not enough to buy a bunch
of books from both sides of the story and actually read them. I would be
surprised if you even read one book on the subject at all. I would be.
Not a respected book. I would have a hard time believing that.
Baard Ove Kopperud
> "Baard Ove Kopperud" <baard.k...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:ae685d1b.03111...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > Currently though, the majority of Chritians in
> > Israel are of Arabic decent -- not of Jewish.
> > These Arabs are treated as bad as all the
> > other Arabs in Israel
>
> i.e., better than Arabs in other countries and as well as anyone else who is
> a citizen.
So what!?!
They were *born* in Israel, and are therefor entitled
to the same treatment and rights as any other person
born in Israel -- know matter how "other Arabs are
treated elsewhere".
Do you think that the slavery in the South-states were
alright because there were slaves *elsewhere* that
were worse off? Do you think Aparthaid was alright
because other Africans had it even worse?
When a country start making a group of *their rightful
citizens* into a class of sub-humans, it doesn't matter
if there are people of the same race or religion worse
off elsewhere...
If you think it's alright to treat *Israelis* of Arab
decent differently than those of Jewish decent, then
why was the treatment of the Slaves in the South bad?
Why was the treatment of the black majority under
Aparthaid bad? Why was Hitlers treatment of the Jews
in Germany bad?
And don't say "because else Arabs would take over
Israel". That is true, but the same applied in South-Africa
and to some degree in the Sothern states... that doesn't
make it right.
Because these are exactly the same... People born in
a country who for some reasons gets less rights than
others born in the same country... and that *isn't*
right. It wasn't right in Virginia, it wasn't right
in Germany, it wasn't right in South Africa... and
it *isn't* right in _Israel_.
-Koppe
Jan Pieter Verhey
"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FB1BAD3...@hotmail.com...
> Jan Pieter Verhey wrote:
....
Like a woman's ankle.. o)
....
> > Maybe knowledge / understanding can make you conceited.. but only if you
> > compare yourself with others. I'd say to seek knowledge, want to
understand
> > more and more, be doubtfull and coutious at the same time.. is very
good. To
> > look down on, or wanting to be better than others.. one finds in all
ranks
> > of society, in many different ways. But to "humbly" acknowledge that
this
> > drive exists, we all have it, already took the "poison" out of it. A
little
> > bit of competition never hurts ?
> >
>
> I am highly competitive in my field, and religiously... Yes, I am highly
> competitive.
>
> Well said, it does take the poison out of it, this is logical.
>
> Of course, when one actually sees humility as a virtue, then one is
> bound to be competitive. Instead of thinking, "well, one hour is enough
> for me because I am so good already", you think, "the other guy is doing
> this six hours, I better do twelve, no thirty six, no forty eight".
>
> And, of course, humility is a very tricky virtue. One must seek it, one
> must seek to understand and define it as one grows older. If one says,
> "I have gained humility", perhaps one has grown conceited, especially if
> they see it as a truly prized virtue.
Quite true. Though, there can be a "humbleness" in not trying or pretending
to be less arrogant, violent, or any of the considered lesser virtues, if
that is what we are sometimes.
>
> One can choose to work in the mud... but, is that humble? Perhaps one
> has chosen to work in the mud to humble one's self, or perhaps one
> believes one's self superior to his or her peers because one works in
> the mud?
I see your point. Yes, the "look at me how humble I am" thing. It's all
competition. Or there can be a pleasure in "doing what you're told", humbly
having faith in the "parent" that knows whats good for me. I tend to see the
human spiritual evolution along similar lines as the
baby-toddler-kid-adolescent-adult evolution.
>
> I am also a very big believer in cynicism. This may seem astounding from
> someone that claims to believe in things unseen. But, I do not believe
> in that which I have no evidence for. Our teachings say very plainly,
> "If you seek, if you seek in such and such way, your door will open, you
> will get the answers".
I was raised secular, though my parents did send me in the early years to a
reformed protestant sunday school for educational purposes. Already then I
found it a weird show of some sort.. in any case I could never relate to it
really. My friends and I were more interested in the porn shop on the way
walking home.
Later being an adolescent I did have my "quest" period and sniffed around,
hounted by the existential questions that can suddenly grab you. An
intellectual hunger as well, to understand things. At age 13 I discovered
and swallowed all books from Erich Fromm, I got interested in psychic
phenomena, tried out an evangelical community, did bible study but felt
there like an alien so I left, tried some Buddhism, Eastern thought,
quantum-physics, read some of the great thinkers like David Bohm.. I also
was, and still am, very motivated. But the devil is not at my heals any
more, so to speak. The "answers" I found.. I can't really call them answers,
just perhaps a sharper and deeper sense of smell for things, and people.
>I think that is just very hard to believe, so
> people traditionally do not seek in the ways proscribed for them to seek.
>
> I could lie and say that my previous studies in the sciences helped at
> this juncture... but I realize the truth was that all along I was
> motivated... motivated.
>
> >
> >
> >>So, I carefully research the old writings... I try and find everything I
> >>can about what people have said who search for such things... and, I try
> >>and put the pieces of the puzzle together. When, I find I can, in good
> >>conscience, then I continue to test those things -- but, I also hold on
> >>to them.
> >>
> >>When I find that some interpretations of prophecy are not something I
> >>can accept in good conscience, I leave the answer open ended and answer
> >>to myself - and to anyone who asks - "I do not know".
> >>
> >>Needless to say, there are a great many things I do not know.
> >>
> >>This lack of assurance may be difficult to carry, at times, but at the
> >>end of the day it is the easiest to carry.
> >
> >
> > Especially because others CAN be (partially) wrong, even prophets, as
well.
> > :)
>
> I do not believe a real prophet can be wrong. But, this does not mean
> one can understand what they are saying. I do believe trying to find
> people who claim to speaking from God is like looking for a single voice
> among millions.
>
> I believe nothing easily. Believe it or not.
As you say, these things can be very personal.. hard to communicate. Perhaps
because I never felt that there are human beings that can truly be spokesmen
of the Almighty (it necessitates that one has prior knowledge of the
Almighty and his thoughts in order to test-positive a prophet), and thinking
that IF such people exist.. it is still ME that has to decide and judge if
they are.. and at the same time sensing the danger to believe solely on the
basis of their authority in the eyes of others.. I am basically alone in the
jungle.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>I should note, however, that I do take very literal promises that allude
> >>to the ability of God to speak. Very literal. Because maybe God has
> >>something to say which can help me in my overall "quest".
> >>
> >>But, what is most important, I believe, is that I must first have a
> >>quest. In fact, this statement itself is ludicrous, because I could
> >>never know that is "most important" unless I first had a "quest". And,
> >>what quest could that be, but charity, love. Seeing the object one loves
> >>being in peril, that is the fuel of my quest, and indeed, of my life.
> >>For without the love and the beloved, I am nothing but a solitary point
> >>of consciousness, alone and without purpose.
> >
> >
> > Any (personal) quest doesn't need to be at odds with love, charity. Nor
are
> > they truly dependent on each other, I'd say.
>
>
> Not at all. I think it depends. I felt I had to serve others because I
> had others in mind... and would focus on them, still do. This led me to
> trying to better myself, to overcome my own problems.
>
> And, there are mysteries we have questions about. When searching out
> these mysteries we may be unaware of our own motivations in doing this.
> Because the mysteries are motivating us and we see the motivators but as
> if they were obscured in shadows.
I came to think that my own motivations to quest the mystery of life, come
from an experience I had at age two. Beauty, bliss, love the "I am"
consciousness first and wordless experienced with an overwhelming power,
looking into the dark vibrant starred heavens. Just shadowy adult words..but
I think you know what I mean. There is a "child's paradise lost", many
people will recognise it me thinks. I like to believe, that this is what I
smell in the ol' Judeo-Christian "dream" of world-peace.."messiah" if you
like. It is inevitable that this thing ("kingdom of G-d") is born, through
labor pains.. growing up hurts. So yes, I have faith! But especially in the
sense of TRUST, as the out come... is inevitable, or even "natural". In my
thinking, the old prophets intuited this.
I would say... all that has quality. Of course we all need certain minimal
commodities, housing, food, sense of emotional security.. to have a chance
for happiness. And to organise that, requires work, action, effort. You can
organise and facilitate the necessary conditions.. but the graceful livery
of everthing we value as most important are given/built in the quality of
the living life.
>
> But, I would hazard a guess that you are pointing out my statement of
> absolutes. After all, good grace may be improbable for the wretched
> masses of unfortune, but it is not "absolutely" out of reach.
>
> The natural way of thinking about obtaining righteousness is through
> works, not through grace.
It is obvious that work is needed in order for grace to reveal itself. To do
nothing is the collapse of society and we all die in the mud.
>t is assumed that one should not find the
> forgiveness of sins for free. It is easy to say that one might find the
> forgiveness of sin - and therefore righteousness, perfection - through
> grace... but it is far more difficult to believe.
>
> We want to do something to obtain righteousness. We want to fast. We
> want to pray. We want to give alms. We want to serve causes. We want to
> study, endlessly. We want to mortify our flesh with these things, be in
> Church the most, say the right thing the most, hold the right opinion...
> but, if righteousness is by grace then none of these works can earn one
> grace at all.
>
> Instead, grace gives faith, the eyes to the unseen promises of God, and
> from faith comes works.
To me this translates as: all the good-stuff is available, or even already
there. The good future will be, has to be. If you don't see it yourself...
have faith in the promise. If you are able to see things.. look there it
comes. In any case, have trust. Feel safe. Don't be afraid. Grace is the
absense of redundant fear.
I have to stop here.. time is up. Next half later.
cheers
Boondock Saint
> Good talking to you.
>
>>> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FB1BAD3...@hotmail.com...
>
>Jan Pieter Verhey wrote:
>
>>I am also a very big believer in cynicism. This may seem astounding from
>>someone that claims to believe in things unseen. But, I do not believe
>>in that which I have no evidence for. Our teachings say very plainly,
>>"If you seek, if you seek in such and such way, your door will open, you
>>will get the answers".
>
>
> I was raised secular, though my parents did send me in the early years to a
> reformed protestant sunday school for educational purposes. Already then I
> found it a weird show of some sort.. in any case I could never relate to it
> really. My friends and I were more interested in the porn shop on the way
> walking home.
>
I was raised secular as well.
> Later being an adolescent I did have my "quest" period and sniffed around,
> hounted by the existential questions that can suddenly grab you. An
> intellectual hunger as well, to understand things. At age 13 I discovered
> and swallowed all books from Erich Fromm, I got interested in psychic
> phenomena, tried out an evangelical community, did bible study but felt
> there like an alien so I left, tried some Buddhism, Eastern thought,
> quantum-physics, read some of the great thinkers like David Bohm.. I also
> was, and still am, very motivated. But the devil is not at my heals any
> more, so to speak. The "answers" I found.. I can't really call them answers,
> just perhaps a sharper and deeper sense of smell for things, and people.
Camus was a big influence on me at that period, as well as Carlos
Castanada, from there I branched out into a multitude on influences and
would study psychology books noting the similarities between insanity
and religious experience, etc. I got a lot into cult and mob psychology,
into William James. Read Freud, but he was not a huge influence. Read
most of the "must read" books... Marx, Darwin, etc, etc. Eventually got
into AP Physics, started towards Theoritical Physics (around age 13,
very early)... read Feynman and Einstein a lot, a ton of books on
quantum physics... realized that would consume my life and got out. (Had
gotten out of computers at around 12 after learning a bunch of languages
and stuff... )
I had very disturbing things which had been happening to me since I was
very young, so, I was trying to figure out some things. I did not really
get anywhere until my early twenties. Had some serious troubles while
trying to figure out what was going on with these "experiences". Went
the opposite direction to which they were pulling me.
I finally read the Bible around then, early twenties, straight through.
I started to realize I was living my life wrong. I had had read
everything by then already. The Koran, Buddhism, Hinduism, tons, tons
more. Anything but the Bible. It was as if I knew the party would be
over when I did that. But, I was wrong. There was no "party", just chaos.
I spent about two years researching old Christian and Judaic works after
that. Went to about three churches. I confronted them where I saw
errors, as I learned from people in the past whose books I read. I got
into helping out the homeless a great deal, giving away great a bit,
fasting, praying and such.
My faith was internal. Going to Churches was more of a chore because of
all of the wrong things being taught there, though I made some good
friends and learned from it all.
I don't know. I believe Moses and the Prophets. I have a lot of reasons
for that. I could just say, they make sense to me. But, there is a lot
more to it then that, of course.
I did scour a lot of books looking for other true messages. It is very
hard. I followed some wrong paths. Basically, I learned that if someone
is teaching something which Scripture does not - in the spirit of the
letter - support, then I should condemn that and consider that a broken
road.
In the end, we are always alone. It is just us and God. That is where
everything happens. Could you believe God if He spoke to you? That is
not a proper question. Why? Because you would hear Him, if He spoke to
you. But, could you believe God would ever speak to you? That is a
question.
A great number of people do not want to ask that question. Maybe they do
not need to. Maybe they don't really need anything from God. As for me,
I had read too many books about the Holocaust and Christian martyrs... I
was obsessed, for a very, very long time. I still think often on these
things, very vividly. I try and force myself into that painful mode of
thought very often because I really believe I must.
Yes, I was pushed into this direction from a young age, I had some very
unusual and very vivid "dreams"... later, I was saved from drowning
under strange circumstances, and this made me very motivated to try and
do something to change things. I recall the blissfulness of childhood
very clearly as well, the great wonderment.
I wanted more, I always wanted more.
God provides food, shelter, surely anyone can be content, but of course,
I just mean to point out the meanness of this system of things.
>
>
>>But, I would hazard a guess that you are pointing out my statement of
>>absolutes. After all, good grace may be improbable for the wretched
>>masses of unfortune, but it is not "absolutely" out of reach.
>>
>>The natural way of thinking about obtaining righteousness is through
>>works, not through grace.
>
>
> It is obvious that work is needed in order for grace to reveal itself. To do
> nothing is the collapse of society and we all die in the mud.
I understand why you say that and exhort people to do something, but I
also understand that essentially I was always motivated by supernatural
events.
I can't speak for anyone else, because I don't know. I talk to people,
of course, about these things... my impression is that most are led on
the Way through "supernatural" events or circumstances or whatever you
would call it, but very few actually have had really overt experiences
of this kind. And, this is what I was looking for. I did not understand
that this was not normal. I never did, not when I was younger. And, it
took me awhile to understand this as I was older.
It stated out with some unusual things in my childhood. Extremely
profound "events", I will say. Then, there was what they call a lot of
periods of "dryness". Nothing. I was spinning my wheels. There were more
pieces when I was a teenager. This really, really motivated me. But, I
still did not get it. I was very hungry for this and was finding it
nowhere I was looking.
It eventually got be very extreme. I could not go long without reciting
the list of events, and everytime I did something else would happen.
Then, there would be dryness. I was left reciting these things in my
mind over and over again, saying to myself, "What was that, what did
that mean? How do these pieces fit together?"
Then, I read the Bible, got my life together and really repented of
everything. I had completely seperated myself from my old life, from
everyone, from all of my belongings, all of my future. All of my past.
All of my family, everything. The words, "You must hate your mother,
your father, your own life to follow Me" were very, very strong to me. I
understood. I understood, "you must first seek the Kingdom of God", and
I did.
My actions were severe. I took the homeless into my own home. I gave
away my money. I prayed, I fasted, I went without radio or television. I
did vigils. I ate the same food everyday, simple food, oatmeal, bread.
Water.
I did all of this alone. I told no one. I understood my temptation to
tell people, to ruin this. I understood I had to lock myself in my
apartment, no phone, nothing, and do this -- to the end. And, I did that.
And, it worked.
But, I was forced to do this. I was compelled by forces beyond me to do
all of this.
Jan Pieter Verhey
>
> Our natural body, our flesh, wants to do it the other way around.
>
> The short of it is that God gives faith, through grace, and it is by
> faith we are saved, we believe. We believe that we trust in the
> righteousness of Jesus Christ crucified, therefore, instead of our own
> righteousness. Therefore, to try and live by our own righteousness,
> would be an insult to that single act of God.
>
> The argument of this, would then to depend not on ourselves for
> righteousness, but to depend on God. So, in this there is absolutely no
> boasting. We can not say, "because of my great efforts I was saved", nor
> "because of my great wisdom, I was saved". Obviously, this is difficult,
> even very difficult to understand... so you see many people claiming, "I
> saved myself" or "I saved these people". This is grossly wrong and shows
> they do not understand these things.
But people seem to be doing BOTH things at the same time? There is the
boasting of "I did it", as well as the humble acknowledgement that "It was
made possible and done for me". I see many winning athletes thanking G-d for
their victories, or thanking all the other people in the team that helped
make it possible.
You seem to be going one step further in the case of grace, that before one
even is able to say "I do [act]", a unilateral act of grace by G-d is
performed which opens the path-of-freedom on which one acts-in-faith, that
becomes doing the free-will of G-d ?
>
> There is absolutely no free will in this model. There is the ample
> illusion of free will. There is freedom, true freedom, in finding this
> path. But, that freedom is found in doing what man is truly meant to do
> and be like -- to be godly.
>
> Free will, really, is the illusion here.
I understand and see what you say conceptually, as abstraction. I don't
know.. it appears to me that what you point at is said in other ways, in
different religious or mystic languages as well.. "It" even exists *without*
being mentioned at all... without being conceptually abstracted. The
miracle, in my view, is that DESPITE all our conceptual machinations and
abstractions where the name of Mozes, Jesus Christ, Buddha or any other
prophet or saga is mentioned and taken as singular point of reference.."It",
that grace is at work. All the time we create smart manuals that tell us how
to get there..or how to get it, by effort or for free. But "It" (I use
quotation marks, not to devaluate what the word tries to points to, just to
emphasise that "It" is just a word) is here-now and will never be anywhere
else, ever.
If the objective all-inclusive reality is a living peace of graceful art,
how can the subjective-cage not be objectively true?
>
> So, to search for objective truth in one's art, if one finds it, this is
> a huge pay out.
But what is there to find? The objective truth is a living, dynamic thing, a
flame that leaves no ashes.
>
> But, yes, in the sense I was speaking of... anyone talented or rich or
> blessed could be say to be "graced". But, I would not compare the grace
> of this world with the grace of the spiritual world except as shadows
> might compare to the reality.
Look.. "the world" <-> "spiritual world". How real can this distinction be?
>
> >
> >
> >>The short of it, of course, is that grace is grace is grace. If one
> >>seeks righteousness, where can one find it, if one can not find God?
> >>And, how might one find God, Him being in the Heavens, and we being but
> >>mortals so prone to the very conceit which keeps us from Him?
> >
> >
> > Why you think G-d is not thinking your "mortal" thoughts? How can He be
> > seperate of anything? I found that "looking for G-d" means walking away
from
> > him. You honestly believe that G-d is not looking through "your" eyes at
> > every moment?
> >
>
> No, I agree with that, of course, everyone knows that "everything is
> made by God and in God".
Exactly! So again, where are "the world" and "the spiritual world", other
than as an abstraction (for may practical purposes no doubt)?
A little side-track: I tend to see the birth of mono-theism as the
awakening to the concept of our reality as one, indivisible whole. The ol'
Judaic bards understood that one therefor cannot contain it, capture it in
images, visual nor conceptual, not even in the best and most impressive
ab-stracted mathematical equations of a "Theory of Everything". This was a
horrifying discovery, in a way! Too much for our coconut-brains to
comprehend. Shock-and-Awe :)
>
> Paul even argues this to the Greeks.
>
> I am an "I Am", but not THE "I Am". We are made in the Image of God, but
> we are not the Ultimate Consciousness. Look, as kittens play with toy
> mice, pretending and learning to catch them... our children play with
> toy humans, toy houses, toy lives... pretending to control them...
> pretending to have God like control over them.
>
> [I do not believe God takes offense to saying the meaning of His Name,
> btw, if the conversation is directed towards His Glory in good faith.]
>
> But, the furthest from what I could mean would direct people somewhere
> else to "find God". This is not what I am saying. On the contrary, I am
> saying, "God gives grace to whom He wishes to give grace"... and, "God
> reveals Himself as He will, and He discloses Himself as He will".
>
> I am saying man is helpless to break that boundary if God does not so
> choose.
>
> But, if you believe you can do this, really believe it, you will. But,
> this is because God gave you that faith to do this. Not understanding
> this would mean one would boast that one did this by themself. And, why
> should one boast of this when God is the One to receive praise for this,
> not ourselves?
>
> This means, I could say until my face is blue, "Do not go here nor there
> to find God, but God is in your heart"... but this makes no difference
> if one can not believe God is in one's heart... if one will refuse to
> abide by one's conscience in all things and to do what one very well
> knows is right.
Perhaps you're right in this. Maybe it is necessary / aqa natural, at a
certain stage and age, to have the illusory (but educational) need of "going
elsewhere to find something better, even G-d". Just picking one's nose in
idle waiting is not very fruitful. But then again.... it is also one of the
most dangerous things to do, an enormous responsability to send people away
on some virtual-path, just in order to make them realize they never left and
that G-d has been there with(-in) them all the time. It might even result in
sending kids to blow themselves up in the streets of Jerusalem killing
dozens. I'm not joking. This is really a tricky business! And easily a very
sad one.
> Indeed, how do I or you know what is right? By this that we might call
> "the conscience". I would say that this is the spirit of the Law written
> on all humanity's heart by the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good
> and Evil.
>
> But we all know how hard it is to listen and to obey the conscience.
> Even though the conscience always has something to say and we have so
> many choices everyday.
>
> Indeed, my religion is bound up around following my conscience, trying
> to find my conscience, and in trying to watch what I condemn and what I
> approve of. Hypocrisy, to me, is where I know and listen to that which
> is unconsciousable... for if I condemn something in others, I know well
> not to do it for myself.
>
> When I say "my religion", I am not speaking of anyone but myself, though
> I do believe this is directly in line with the Law and Prophets. I am
> just speaking personally here. One can not speak for anyone else on such
> a level.
Yes..
>
> >
> >>We end up seeking that which is illusionary, because we are bound to
> >>understand only the valuations which society espouses... and we can not
> >>get over the wall which seperates the spiritual from the physical
> >>because it is an impossible boundary for man to cross.
> >
> >
> > The "spiritual" -vs-"physical" boundary is an optical sort of delusion,
me
> > thinks. I will be there, as long as you believe it is there and try to
jump
> > over it.
>
> I would argue they exist in parallel, and that there are connections,
> indeed I view the physical world as entirely dependant on the spiritual
> world.
For me, what I found as-true, is that that which is paralel as you say, is
actually nothing more than conceptual thought. Like the sub-titles of a
movie. But in our human-case, a movie often with subtitles that if you read
them (just follow your own thoughts) , they often times appear to be
sub-titling a totally different movie!
When they are paralel to the actual here-now movie and fully synchronised
with the imagery, thats ok. But the problem arises when the subtitles start
to move forward or backward in time and become dissychronised, or even
totally unrelated to the present here-now.
Such sub-titles can grow to disproprtionately grotesque and totally
disconnected day-dreamings. The result is confusion and chaos. Look at the
state of Islam. (I'm not suggesting Islam is the only example, just a very
good one) The violence such disconneted day-dreamers are capable of...is
beyond and above anything!
The background of it is, I believe, that our system is simply not really
able to "process" two disjointed realities/movies displayed at the same
time. True and false become interchangeable entities. So we invent heaven
and hell but then MUST become MORE violent, in thought-and/or-sward,
inwardly or outwardly, to break down again that wall.. that disconnection,
that dissynhronised paralellism. That is an extended-response of the
intelligence of our body-organism that is used to heal itself from physical
wounds. But when these organic self-healing impulses enter the mental
scenery where grotesque and dissychronised subt-titled programs are
running.. as a consequence e.g. the Al-Qaeda terrorist day-dreamers MUST
destroy "the West", "Israel", "the Jews".. in order to "heal" themselves.
That is basically exactly what you hear them saying. ("restoring the Arab/
Islamic digntity") They don't understand (yet.. maybe one day) they are
just self-destructing, surviving on a sincking ship that failed to catch-up
with modernity, they don't see it. They are day-dreaming. But they are
instinctively sensing their demise.. so they become even more violent..
untill its all over. They will take unfortunately many more people down to
the bottom of the ocean with them. But life will prevail, as usual.
So far for the moment again..
cheers.
Norma
"Jan Pieter Verhey" <pete...@12move.nl> wrote in message
news:bp2nvq$1jqtmb$1...@ID-211556.news.uni-berlin.de...
Nice response, Jan. It is awfully hard to believe that life prevails at the
time of a violent episode, but it really will. It will also be good and
fulfilling. Norma
Jan Pieter Verhey
"Norma" <norm...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vr9tmgm...@corp.supernews.com...
...
> physical
> > wounds. But when these organic self-healing impulses enter the mental
> > scenery where grotesque and dissychronised subt-titled programs are
> > running.. as a consequence e.g. the Al-Qaeda terrorist day-dreamers MUST
> > destroy "the West", "Israel", "the Jews".. in order to "heal"
themselves.
> > That is basically exactly what you hear them saying. ("restoring the
Arab/
> > Islamic digntity") They don't understand (yet.. maybe one day) they are
> > just self-destructing, surviving on a sincking ship that failed to
> catch-up
> > with modernity, they don't see it. They are day-dreaming. But they are
> > instinctively sensing their demise.. so they become even more violent..
> > untill its all over. They will take unfortunately many more people down
to
> > the bottom of the ocean with them. But life will prevail, as usual.
> >
> > So far for the moment again..
>
> Nice response, Jan. It is awfully hard to believe that life prevails at
the
> time of a violent episode, but it really will. It will also be good and
> fulfilling. Norma
Thanks, Norma. This post pretty much expressed my credo, for what its worth.
Yes, there are many reasons to be hopeful and faithful, and also today enjoy
fulfilling lives.
(btw.. you think I punished TK enough already? ;)
Norma
I am the last one to ask. She punishes me so often that I get sick of it.
I hardly read her stuff most days. I am not Jewish enough for her
apparently. She also seem to think she can judge those things. I don't
agree at all. Norma
PS Are you going to Israel by train (or did I read into things too much?)
What fun that would be. I should fly to Amersterdam some time and do that.
This Spring we had crew problems our of there, so it would seem a fitting
thing to do.
Jan Pieter Verhey
I realised I used a Dutch expression "missing the train" which is just
figuratively speaking. The English version is maybe "missing the boat"? I
just tried to say that who-/when-/how-ever that messianic world order is to
come about, I can't imagine there will be many bitches walking around once
it is there.
So for the moment flying is the only way to get there. (although..
actually.. a boat as the means of transporation should be possible as well!
hehe)
Norma
After a few cruises, I may like to do that. The distaste of this Spring
really drove home the regulations of Airlines and all that. Imagine
stopping in Cyprus and then making the 15" trip. Norma
>
>
Boondock Saint
> "Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3FB1BAD3...@hotmail.com...
>
>>Jan Pieter Verhey wrote:
>>
>>>"Boondock Saint" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
> .....
>
>>Our natural body, our flesh, wants to do it the other way around.
>>
>>The short of it is that God gives faith, through grace, and it is by
>>faith we are saved, we believe. We believe that we trust in the
>>righteousness of Jesus Christ crucified, therefore, instead of our own
>>righteousness. Therefore, to try and live by our own righteousness,
>>would be an insult to that single act of God.
>>
>>The argument of this, would then to depend not on ourselves for
>>righteousness, but to depend on God. So, in this there is absolutely no
>>boasting. We can not say, "because of my great efforts I was saved", nor
>>"because of my great wisdom, I was saved". Obviously, this is difficult,
>>even very difficult to understand... so you see many people claiming, "I
>>saved myself" or "I saved these people". This is grossly wrong and shows
>>they do not understand these things.
>
>
> But people seem to be doing BOTH things at the same time? There is the
> boasting of "I did it", as well as the humble acknowledgement that "It was
> made possible and done for me". I see many winning athletes thanking G-d for
> their victories, or thanking all the other people in the team that helped
> make it possible.
18 Because he was very thirsty, he cried out to the LORD , "You have
given your servant this great victory. Must I now die of thirst and fall
into the hands of the uncircumcised?"
Samson said this after knocking down a thousand Philistines. There are
many such verses, of course. You could consider any miracle in the Bible
in this light.
But, they were on a "mission from God", that is for sure. A runner
really is not, though in odd cases a runner could be. For the most
part, a runner could thank God for his or her positive outlook on life,
for whatever charity He gave them, etc. Indeed, a "mission from God",
is not required in the sense that good acts are godly acts, as God
is only good, therefore good acts can only come from God.
We may not consider a sudden act of kindness for the poor "mission
from God" type of acts, but they may be entirely inspired by God.
In general, if you run or lose a race... I won't say God doesn't care,
but often it may be better for a person or for who knows whom, if
someone does not win a race at all.
>
> You seem to be going one step further in the case of grace, that before one
> even is able to say "I do [act]", a unilateral act of grace by G-d is
> performed which opens the path-of-freedom on which one acts-in-faith, that
> becomes doing the free-will of G-d ?
God performed parting of the Red Sea. Moses obeyed God and went to
Pharaoh and told him what God told him to tell Him. Moses believed God,
in telling Pharaoh, and Moses believed God when God told him to "be
still" as God parted the Sea.
The component of faith is there in any act by any prophet. That is
undeniable. This even includes good acts performed in non-prophet
seeming actions, such as David stoning Goliath with a sling.
The "thesis" is rather simple. Only God is good. There are no caveats
to this.
It is impossible for man to do good of his own.
This adds another "thesis". Which is that man's heart is hopelessly
deceitful.
>
>
>>There is absolutely no free will in this model. There is the ample
>>illusion of free will. There is freedom, true freedom, in finding this
>>path. But, that freedom is found in doing what man is truly meant to do
>>and be like -- to be godly.
>>
>>Free will, really, is the illusion here.
>
>
> I understand and see what you say conceptually, as abstraction. I don't
> know.. it appears to me that what you point at is said in other ways, in
> different religious or mystic languages as well.. "It" even exists *without*
> being mentioned at all... without being conceptually abstracted.
It absolutely exists. I am merely observing what I have seen.
I am sure it has not been kept from people outside of the
Judeo-Christian world.
I only break it down, because the principles are useful for
purification, and purification is useful for power.
> The
> miracle, in my view, is that DESPITE all our conceptual machinations and
> abstractions where the name of Mozes, Jesus Christ, Buddha or any other
> prophet or saga is mentioned and taken as singular point of reference.. "It",
> that grace is at work. All the time we create smart manuals that tell us how
> to get there..or how to get it, by effort or for free. But "It" (I use
> quotation marks, not to devaluate what the word tries to points to, just to
> emphasise that "It" is just a word) is here-now and will never be anywhere
> else, ever.
I don't consider God to be a formless God, I consider God to be a
person, the ultimate person. That is not my opinion, but I believe
the testimony of the Prophets. I consider us humans to be made in His
Image.
This is a difficult message to believe... that one must believe the
Prophets, for the Prophets have a difficult message to believe. But,
it really is as simple as that. And, I am further saying this faith
is not from "below", but from "above". We could dicker about the fact
that everything is "of God", which could then mean "we are all Gods,
even the animals and the stones" -- but I find that to be a foolish
endeavour. I think you would agree.
As for "smart manuals" to tell us "how to get there", I am not writing
such a manual, nor have I written one, really. In fact, you asked me
some questions about my own private beliefs, and I told you. Anybody
who reads any of my posts sees quite plainly I stick pretty straight to
the subject of Israel and my support of it.
My statements, therefore, are not me reworking something, but rather
me describing something after the fact. I did not understand how I
got "where" I got at first, not very well. I just got there.
In my reply to your other post,which I afterwards cancelled because
I felt it revealed too much personal information about myself, I
forget what it was you said, but I recall I did reply - which I
cancelled - that I got to my faith entirely by explicit "supernatural"
events.
I did not get there through anything else. It was complete grace. I
can not not understand anyone coming to the faith apart from grace,
as our hearts are essentially evil and the Spirit of God is absent
from them. We may wish to try to believe God, but we have absolutely
no capability in doing this.
You can believe me or not. As most people don't even have so much
as a dream, a vivid dream, which ever comes true -- I generally expect
people to scoff at me, and they do.
What infuriated me during this time that I was finally getting closer
to making sense of everything by reading the Bible was that there was
no one around who could help me. So, I have been sure, in good
conscience, to answer any questions put to me, in good faith.
In fact, what I found, for instance, in a charismatic Church, was
a lot of kids that pretended to want such "higher things", but that
was all it was. They never once considered seriously to "seek first
the kingdom of God", or to 'pray, fast, and give alms in secret'...
to forsake everything and look.
(I should note that the adults there did offer good advice, and
they were humble and wise enough to say, "I don't know". Three crucial
words. Three words I cling by.)
The "subjective-cage" is objectively true from the subjective
vantage point, but as you note, it is a "cage". Man produces gray
buildings, God produces sunsets.
Man pretends to truth, God is truth.
The pretension to truth is a lie, while the truth that comes from
God is trustworthy eternally.
But, you know all this, or you would not have noted it is a "cage".
>
>
>>So, to search for objective truth in one's art, if one finds it, this is
>>a huge pay out.
>
>
> But what is there to find? The objective truth is a living, dynamic thing, a
> flame that leaves no ashes.
I don't know. The Face of God, maybe?
Maybe you have nothing to find out. I don't have very much to
find out anymore. I just sit around and wait and enjoy life.
Oh, there are some things I want to find out very badly. Like
justice for Israel. Like justice for Israel. I want to find out
the wrong people being shown up as being wrong. I want to find
the accusers confronted with undeniable evidence.
Things like that.
Justice... I always like to seek out. And, I see no greater
injustice then that which has wrapped its' fangs around Israel
for so many years. Indeed, all of the evil of the earth seems
attracted to it, to try and destroy it.
>
>
>>But, yes, in the sense I was speaking of... anyone talented or rich or
>>blessed could be say to be "graced". But, I would not compare the grace
>>of this world with the grace of the spiritual world except as shadows
>>might compare to the reality.
>
>
> Look.. "the world" <-> "spiritual world". How real can this distinction be?
How real can it be? Could we be but clay figures modelled loosely
after the Image of God? Could it be our true nature is not to die,
but to live eternally, in power? Could it be that there is a world,
where everything lasts eternally, even that made to be destroyed?
Could there be a realm higher then this one, where the light in
the eyes is opened into fire as the white light of the sunset moves
to red?
Everything in this world is degraded by sin. Our flesh deconstructs,
our buildings corrode, generations rise, generations fall. We have
imperfections and our clothes are made but from the planets around
us.
>
>
>>>
>>>>The short of it, of course, is that grace is grace is grace. If one
>>>>seeks righteousness, where can one find it, if one can not find God?
>>>>And, how might one find God, Him being in the Heavens, and we being but
>>>>mortals so prone to the very conceit which keeps us from Him?
>>>
>>>
>>>Why you think G-d is not thinking your "mortal" thoughts? How can He be
>>>seperate of anything? I found that "looking for G-d" means walking away
>>
> from
>
>>>him. You honestly believe that G-d is not looking through "your" eyes at
>>>every moment?
>>>
>>
>>No, I agree with that, of course, everyone knows that "everything is
>>made by God and in God".
>
>
> Exactly! So again, where are "the world" and "the spiritual world", other
> than as an abstraction (for may practical purposes no doubt)?
>
I consider the differences to be two entirely different realities,
one construct designed entirely different from another... as God
designed the landscape of Mars different from earth...
I think there are connections between the two. But, I would not
equate my latrine with my bed. We make divisions. God makes divisions.
There is that which is Holy, that which is common, that which is
despicable. There are valuations. Diamonds are rare and hard to
come by, but they are also beautiful and brilliant to behold.
My flesh tends towards evil, my spiritual self struggles against
my flesh. Paul noted something beautiful in regards to this... that
we know sin is not of "us" when we hate it. But, when we do not
hate our sin, when we love it, or do not even recognize it, then
it is us sinning. And, when we sin, we are not living, instead, it
is sin living in our place.
So, this defines "sin" as death, and not sinning as "life". So,
we have moral valuations within... there is death, there is life.
Death is what fills us when we have no life for our life is lost
in the material things of the world. We are mere creatures of
instinct. But, life, that is beyond this material world, and its'
will is of the spiritual world... such things that do not abide
in this world such as godly charity.
Godly charity appears like human charity - for instance - but it
is not, it is from God, and so it is also beyond our mere instinctive
love which we may have for our kin and kind. Where does the clay
charity end and the real charity begin?
> A little side-track: I tend to see the birth of mono-theism as the
> awakening to the concept of our reality as one, indivisible whole. The ol'
> Judaic bards understood that one therefor cannot contain it, capture it in
> images, visual nor conceptual, not even in the best and most impressive
> ab-stracted mathematical equations of a "Theory of Everything". This was a
> horrifying discovery, in a way! Too much for our coconut-brains to
> comprehend. Shock-and-Awe :)
I believe God created the Testimony of His Glory in Israel, to
give to all of the Nations through communicating to man through
His prophets. I believe Israel itself is part of this Testimony,
and so, in this way, I consider Israel sacred.
As for God being formless, God is formless, but yet we see Micaiah
and Isaiah seeing God on a throne... we are told we are made in His
Image, we are spoken to by Him, and He expresses feelings and
intelligence we can understand.
I absolutely believe we are made in the Image of God, and I believe
the Image of God is God, that absolute Image is Jesus Christ. I believe,
therefore that when Isaiah saw God on His Throne, He saw Jesus Christ...
when Moses saw His back, He saw Jesus Christ.
That is simply what I believe.
Actually, I am saying that "you don't find God, God finds you", but
I understand the confusion... because I am saying that one doesn't
have any faith if one does not have any works.
I am saying it starts in the heart. Our deeds, be they good or evil,
are like branches of a tree. It is always the heart that matters.
If the heart is bad, as our sinful heart is, there is no hope
for good, because only God is good.
Now we may argue that "everything is made in God and of God, therefore
everything is good", but God is a Person who has form and is formless.
I am saying, therefore, that God is not formless because He is
without form, but He is formless because He is infinite and eternal
and we can not fathom this greatness.
But, we all know how these things work, in regards to "everything
being made in God", for we ourseleves, were created in His Image,
and we have imagination... we have dreams. We know our dreams are
made from our own form, but that they are not "us". Yet, we may
be in our dreams. We may have others in our dreams. We may have
houses and walls and the earth in our dreams... but we remain "Who
We Are", and therefore we are back to "Who God Is"... and we know
that "He Is Who He Is".
(Again, that is speaking of the Name of the Lord, but it is not
in vain, for this is godly discussion in His graces.)
> But then again.... it is also one of the
> most dangerous things to do, an enormous responsability to send people away
> on some virtual-path, just in order to make them realize they never left and
> that G-d has been there with(-in) them all the time. It might even result in
> sending kids to blow themselves up in the streets of Jerusalem killing
> dozens. I'm not joking. This is really a tricky business! And easily a very
> sad one.
The problem with those kids is they have assumed God has sent them,
but God has not sent them. It is classic false prophecy, classic
presumption.
God's word lives in all our hearts, and surely teachings of
presumption tells people that this is not the case. These kinds
of teachings are in opposition to the conscience, which is God's
law written on our hearts, as Moses spoke of.
We all know this.
We all know it is wrong not to obey our conscience like it
is wrong to disobey the Law.
We all know we all have a conscience, though people like this
have seared it into some type of silence, obviously, through
teachings which oppose the conscience.
I know what I am saying here makes perfect sense. Because we
have "sense", and our "sense" enables us to rightly value
between good and evil... and we know that the Law is all knowledge
of Good and Evil... therefore, the Testimony of God begins and
ends with the Law, speaking to those who strengthen the conscience
by doing what is good through the grace of God by faith.
...
In speaking solely on "works versus grace", which is what
this part of the conversation is really about... I believe I
addressed this in my last post which I cancelled, but will
reiterate here: for me, personally, I did nothing to find God,
God found me. And, it was explicit.
Why, then, would I argue people should "pray, fast, and give
alms in secret"? Why, then, would I argue it is wise to "first
seek the Kingdom of God, not riches"? Are these not actions
we do to "find God"? Or, are they?
What I am saying is you can pray, fast, give alms, you can
even think you are doing these things in secret... but the
heart is so deceptive, so unknowable in its' deceptions. We
fool ourselves. So we become hypocrites, if the heart is not
right in doing these things. If the heart is right, then
these things will be done right. But, how can the heart be
right if we can not know our heart?
We can know the Law through our hearts, we can know the
conscience.
But, we have no ability, for our flesh is so far from God,
to follow our conscience, in and of ourself. Therefore, the
"mystery of grace" is no less then the "mystery of God",
even though there is really no mystery to the very concept
of grace itself -- what could be simpler to understand then
that God gives of Himself into our hearts so we might have
righteousness?
Yes, I agree with all of these observations. All of the above. It
is classic Plato's cave.
>
> The background of it is, I believe, that our system is simply not really
> able to "process" two disjointed realities/movies displayed at the same
> time.
I do not agree with this, because with Plato's cave, we have the
viewer and the shadows, but we do not have the "absolute reality",
or the spiritual reality. We see but as through "filtered glasses".
Paul notes that 'we see now but darkly, as a child', as is his famous
statement, what is it?
1 Corinthians 13
10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a
child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a
child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see
but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.
Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
I would argue we do not know perfection, then, as of course, we
do not. Nor do we know the perfect world, which is the spiritual
world (though it has corruption in even it).
> True and false become interchangeable entities. So we invent heaven
> and hell but then MUST become MORE violent, in thought-and/or-sward,
> inwardly or outwardly, to break down again that wall.. that disconnection,
> that dissynhronised paralellism. That is an extended-response of the
> intelligence of our body-organism that is used to heal itself from physical
> wounds. But when these organic self-healing impulses enter the mental
> scenery where grotesque and dissychronised subt-titled programs are
> running.. as a consequence e.g. the Al-Qaeda terrorist day-dreamers MUST
> destroy "the West", "Israel", "the Jews".. in order to "heal" themselves.
Well, they see good and evil, not "Heaven" and "Hell". And, all
knowledge of good and evil is found in the Law.
"Heaven" and "Hell", these things are merely extensions of good and
evil, being that there would naturally be a "place" for good and
a "place" for evil... but these things are not in their proper
places now, in fact, being that this world is evil, we see evil
in place of good and good in place of evil.
The evil grow rich and fat which the good suffer horribly.
Job 15
Why do the wicked live on,
growing old and increasing in power?
8 They see their children established around them,
their offspring before their eyes.
9 Their homes are safe and free from fear;
the rod of God is not upon them.
...
29 Have you never questioned those who travel?
Have you paid no regard to their accounts-
30 that the evil man is spared from the day of calamity,
that he is delivered from [5] the day of wrath?
31 Who denounces his conduct to his face?
Who repays him for what he has done?
32 He is carried to the grave,
and watch is kept over his tomb.
33 The soil in the valley is sweet to him;
all men follow after him,
and a countless throng goes [6] before him.
> That is basically exactly what you hear them saying. ("restoring the Arab/
> Islamic digntity") They don't understand (yet.. maybe one day) they are
> just self-destructing, surviving on a sincking ship that failed to catch-up
> with modernity, they don't see it. They are day-dreaming. But they are
> instinctively sensing their demise.. so they become even more violent..
> untill its all over. They will take unfortunately many more people down to
> the bottom of the ocean with them. But life will prevail, as usual.
My view of them is very similiar to this.
I would not say that it is as simple as saying the "Heaven" and "Hell"
is the reason for this, though you are probably saying it is beyond
that, as well, and I would probably agree with you if you said it
had something to do with absolutes, with valuations, with the concept
of "good" and "evil".
However, you seem to be trying to lay blame on the concepts of
"good" and "evil" for these people... you seem to be saying that
our Judeao-Christian traditions of making absolutes and divisions,
walls, is the reason for these evils.
I would agree there, too, if this is what you are saying.
Let's get real, Islam comes from this Judeo-Christian background,
very much so... as does so many countless cults and such in history.
Indeed, I will even argue Marxism is entirely a Western concept,
impossible without the background of Judeo-Christian teachings...
and I will go further and argue that, yes, I am saying above,
all that Islamists denounce as the "West" is foolish, for indeed,
the West is we who birthed them.
I will not say that "there is no good and evil", however, even
if I privately know for a fact that this may cause great harm
in the world... because such knowledge is inherently dangerous.
"Dangerous", there I said it.
But, what could be more dangerous then the knowledge of all
that is good and evil?
It is a great thing the Law is obscured from most of the world's
eyes, for we are inherently "evil", or shall I say, "dead", and
we would seek to use the Law for evil purposes. And, this is
exactly how we do use the Law.
But, I would not have very far to go in this, for you admit that
they are evil, though you use the words "delusion"... indeed, I
have said something very similiar:
"They claim that their "gods" are the One God of Israel, and taunt
God to stand behind their little statues they have made against Him. They
tell Israel, "This is your God, this is the God of Israel, He
has been stolen away and made into these statues!"
Born dead, born asleep, as one person they have fallen deeper into
the world of darkness below, trying hopelessly to escape the light
of day which they so despise more than anything else. They have passed
by on their way the condemned dead, who call after them to stop...
but these people are still breathing. Their blood has not yet been
spilt to the ground.
Their souls have reserved their places in the deepest depths of
the Grave. They bargain and bicker over whom might be further down,
and some of them break through to disappear into the greater depths
of darkness.
But, they can not escape the light of day, no matter how hard they
try.
"Where is God?", they ask, "That we might kill Him?""
...
End quote.
But, is it the concept of "Heaven" and "Hell" that makes them? Why do
they strive to become more evil, are they not already evil enough?
It is that they have abused the Law, they have used the Law to
construct evil, to guide them into further evil, and that evil
is the death of man... the death we are all born with, the delusion
we are born in, this "subjective-cage", as you put it, this
eternal seperation of God and man... which came through... eating
of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil...
But, how could such fruit cause such problems?
The problem was not in the fruit. The problem was that man was
not God. The problem remains that man is not God. The problem
remains that only God is good -- yet, we are made in His Image,
and so by not being God, we will continually fail to live up
to His Holy Image.
The problem was that we had no awareness of any of this, and
therefore there was no blame, no crime. Not knowing good and
evil, it was okay to walk around naked. Who would blame us?
But, now that we know good and evil and walk around naked,
we are worthy of being blamed, and so "sin" was "created".
However, the knowledge of Good and Evil, if you will notice,
has a distinct purpose. By telling us what is right to do
and what is wrong to do, we can become closer to God by
seeking out to do what is right. But, we can not seek to
do what is right unless God seeks through our hearts towards
this goodness which is Himself -- such goodness we can not
choose, for we simply are not God, and there are endless other
choices we could choose to follow. But, God can direct us
towards Himself.
What then? Can we not obey our own conscience? Indeed, we are
destined to have a conscience, but to be unable to obey it,
much less to believe it... beyond what little godliness we
already have within ourselves. Such "godliness" means that
we know we should not murder, we try and not steal or cheat,
and such simple things as these.
But, how can our conscience tell us not to covet if we have
never heard of coveting as being a bad thing? When we read
the Law, it fills our conscience, even though, inherently,
our conscience already knows.
...
I consider it fun to study all of the bad things man does.
This is my hobby, and I work in this field (about the only
personal info I will reveal on this list). Security is my
job, as well as my hobby.
In fact, I don't study it, I am obsessed with it.
Here is what I believe I have found: We are born dead. We
live dead. We live in our delusion and that delusion is both
society's consensual reality and the material world. Maslow's
pyramid needs? That is our great pyramid. Nothing we do is
unexplainable and we are thoroughly predictable as a species.
We love, sure. We love our own kin and kind, and this furthers
our own individual needs.
We strive in our careers, big mysteries there, because we are
essentially selfish. We are completely selfish. Getting beyond
our selfish needs is impossible without the guidance of God
within our hearts -- indeed, we are but brute creatures of
instinct, puppets of our own desires, dreams within this deluded
reality.
So, where on earth does Osama Bin Laden come from? Why stop
there?! Where does John Wayne Gacy come from? Where does Ted
Bundy come from? (Okay, you probably realize - as do I - Bin
Laden is more evil then these guys, but let's suspend reality
for a moment).
One of the main old Quantico BSU guys made a great argument
about behavioralism once. He noted that bad families, bad life
events don't make serial killers. He noted these can be
precipators to bring out their malicious inner person, but they
don't make them.
Some may have sad, sad stories. A lot don't. A lot of these
guys had absolutely normal lives. They had brothers and sisters
who had normal lives. No sexual abuse. No physical abuse.
And, even those who had really horrible lives - let's be honest -
a ton of people have horrible lives. Many of them go on to
become successful people, almost all go on to live their lives
without engaging in serial murder.
...
So, as you see, I use serial murder merely to isolate "the evil",
I am merely noting one thing: some people are just born bad.
But, what about Osama Bin Laden and the Hamas? We know these
guys are way, way more "evil" then mere serial killers. What do
they all have in common besides being completely dead? Well,
they all have an appetite.
I am arguing you get momentum. Momentum. The normal human life
is completely selfish, dead, delusional... but, you can go
further into this. You can fill up on pieces of this dead world,
be it in the form of sex or greed or covetousness... or blasphemy
or ... well, "more horrible things". Darker things. Things which
are "more of a lie".
For this world, there is an objective perspective of it possible,
and that perspective is from God. But, man's perspective of this
world is very, very different. And, he can make himself more
different. More of a lie. By following what is wrong more so. In
doing this he fills himself up with more of his own self, his own
conceit, his own delusions... being more filled up, he now has a
larger "stomach", a larger "appetite", and he needs to fill more
of that appetite. And when he fills it more up, then it gets bigger,
and so on.
If he is lucky he will just die before he gets very far. We last
about 70 years, give or take some.