The Gospel of Unbelief

[rtwngAvngr]

What do you mean by this RWA?

I mean which do you choose? The red pill or the blue pill?

 

[Dr Grump]

I mean which do you choose? The red pill or the blue pill?

Try being a bit more specific..

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Try being a bit more specific..

WHich do you choose. The laws of god as presented in the old testament, or the socialist, racist nonsense from the talmud?

 

[jillian]

WHich do you choose. The laws of god as presented in the old testament, or the socialist, racist nonsense from the talmud?

So you're a student of the Talmud and know what it says?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

So you're a student of the Talmud and know what it says?

I know a few things.

 

[Dr Grump]

WHich do you choose. The laws of god as presented in the old testament, or the socialist, racist nonsense from the talmud?

Neither. I'm a non-believer. BTW, if what you are saying about the Tulmad is what you believe, you realise that is a pretty hateful statement towards Judism, right?

 

[jillian]

I know a few things.

Not about Talmud, I suspect. At least when I comment on a religious writing, I've read it first hand.

Some groups and individuals consider that passages in the Talmud show that Judaism is inherently racist. Critics of these charges argue that the passages in question do not indicate inherent racism on the part of the Talmud (and Judaism), but rather mistranslation, falsification, and "quote-mining" (i.e. the selective choice of out-of-context quotes) on the part of those making the charges. The Anti-Defamation League's report on this topic states:

By selectively citing various passages from the Talmud and Midrash, polemicists have sought to demonstrate that Judaism espouses hatred for non-Jews (and specifically for Christians), and promotes obscenity, sexual perversion, and other immoral behavior. To make these passages serve their purposes, these polemicists frequently mistranslate them or cite them out of context (wholesale fabrication of passages is not unknown)...
In distorting the normative meanings of rabbinic texts, anti-Talmud writers frequently remove passages from their textual and historical contexts. Even when they present their citations accurately, they judge the passages based on contemporary moral standards, ignoring the fact that the majority of these passages were composed close to two thousand years ago by people living in cultures radically different from our own. They are thus able to ignore Judaism's long history of social progress and paint it instead as a primitive and parochial religion.
Those who attack the Talmud frequently cite ancient rabbinic sources without noting subsequent developments in Jewish thought, and without making a good-faith effort to consult with contemporary Jewish authorities who can explain the role of these sources in normative Jewish thought and practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

 

[Dr Grump]

Not about Talmud, I suspect. At least when I comment on a religious statement, I've read it first hand.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Not only that, but the Old Testament says some pretty outrageous things too...

 

[jillian]

Not only that, but the Old Testament says some pretty outrageous things too...

Absolutely. Hence it needing to be put into its proper historical context. For example, I don't think anyone has recently been stoned to death for wearing cloth made of mixed fibers or planting more than one crop in a field like it says in Leviticus.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Not about Talmud, I suspect. At least when I comment on a religious writing, I've read it first hand.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Yeah. ANd hillary supports the troops.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Hey Jillian, what does Tikkun Olam mean to you?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

It's the only one you provided for your theory that secularism is a religion.

Yeah, for that particular meaning. Didn't Webster give definition #1 and #2?

No, I am asserting that something can ONLY illogically reject itself.

On what basis?

Does a Christian who asserts that hanging the 10 Commandments on the court walls is establishing Chrisianity as the religion of the court rejecting Christianity? I don't think so. Despite the arguments and activities of the ACLU, secularism does not reject religion.

Why can't they? The ACLU is promoting their brand of Secularism. Plenty of people see the ACLU activities as practicing a "religion" of sorts.

On the basis that you cannot demonstrate that such rejection is NECCESSARILY based on faith. If that rejection is not NECCESSARILY based on faith, secularism CANNOT be religion per the definition agreed upon. That is the exact basis.

If you want to make your point, make THAT point. That on a statement of faith, secularists reject all beliefs based on a statement of faith--including their own stament of faith.

Now you are introducing a new qualifier - "necessarily". It may or it may not.

I thought I was.

Secularists are rejecting religion in "worldly matters" BECAUSE they have no proof that God does NOT exist, or that God DOES exist.

Then they are illogical. How can they reject something they don't know exists or not?

Obviously, NOT secularists.

Obviously? I think not.

Considering that you are desperately defending the entrenched Chrisitanity in our government, I am not at all surprised that you wish to continue to assert that secularists have an atheist aggenda--so much so you want to blur the distinction by asserting the self contradictory notion that (big S)ecularism is the religion of no religion. Pathetic.

I'm not desperate at all. About 90% of the American people would agree with me. The only reason the ACLU Secularists are successful is because they sneak through the Courts using doublespeak like you.

Why not use nihilism? It's really what you're after anyway--unless what you're really after is the Christian theocracy I suspect you're after.

I am not after a Christian theocracy. You Secularist guys are the pathetic ones. For some reason you can't tolerate individual beliefs being expressed from EVERY type of American.

Nope. If I were the one advocating relativistic word usage, and Christian theocratic newspeak, I'd be careful about the way I swing my presumptions about Relativism.

Then what are your guiding Principles?

 

[jillian]

Yeah. ANd hillary supports the troops.

So you think the guiding law of an entire race of people, at least the orthodox, is "hate speech"? Not very Christian. :funnyface

 

[LOki]

Yes. Beginning by destroying the previous society by destroying it's values systems, which may have cast shooting your landlord in a "bad" light.

Destroying the previous power structure is a quality all revolutionary doctrine embraces. I'm not willing to let communism hold a monopoly on it--particularly if it becomes the power structure.

Was this a one time thing? Or are christians told explicitly in a general way to kill the children of nonbelievers?

From what I've seen, this or something similar appears to be the standard order from God regarding cities/nations of non-believers--kill them all, spare no breathing thing, spare not the women or suckling child, etc...

In no sense does christianity espouse that the christians should currently be killing the babies of nonbelievers.

Please cc: that memo to me.

Since you made up that "christian teaching" the premise of this question is somewhat invalidated.

Your quote-tag mastery has me confused ... which "Christian teaching"?

And that is destructive and we can call it an "anti morality" if it must be a morality.

I see. For clarity when discussing morals I've (and those around me who know better than I about it) always used "moral" neutrally, and modified it with an appropriate adjective--sensible morals, good morals, bullshit morals, evil morals, etc...

Example:
Thievery and slavery are certainly bullshit, and a moral code that considers thievery and slavery to be the acceptable norm is a bullshit moral code, and those who ascribe to tha code have bullshit morals.

Works for me at least.

Destructive (and bullshit) as communist morals are, I am not convinced that those who subscribe to them ultimately intend harm, consequently I am reluctant to go "evil" on communism in general--though I'm not so restrained with communists in particular (e.g. Che Guevara).

 

[jillian]

Hey Jillian, what does Tikkun Olam mean to you?

Tikkun Olam (תיקון עולם is a Hebrew phrase which translates as "repair the universe" or "healing the universe". It is a belief from Kabbalah, esoteric Jewish mysticism, which is developed in the Zohar, a classic book of Jewish mysticism.

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_Olam

 

[Said1]

Tikkun Olam (תיקון עולם is a Hebrew phrase which translates as "repair the universe" or "healing the universe". It is a belief from Kabbalah, esoteric Jewish mysticism, which is developed in the Zohar, a classic book of Jewish mysticism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_Olam

Inside/Outside. Healing from the inside through social action.


I remember that one, man I'm good. <------ bows to self.

 

[jillian]

Inside/Outside. Healing from the inside through social action.


I remember that one, man I'm good. <------ bows to self.

You are! I had to look it up.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Tikkun Olam (&#1514;&#1497;&#1511;&#1493;&#1503; &#1506;&#1493;&#1500;&#1501; is a Hebrew phrase which translates as "repair the universe" or "healing the universe". It is a belief from Kabbalah, esoteric Jewish mysticism, which is developed in the Zohar, a classic book of Jewish mysticism.
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_Olam

Yeah. Leftist activism. All this lefty crap comes from the talmud.

 

[jillian]

Yeah. Leftist activism. All this lefty crap comes from the talmud.

Actually, if you note, it's a Kabbalistic concept. Kabbalists and Talmudists don't really see eye to eye.

It is, however, based on the concept that for the messiah to come, you have to do good deeds.

Now how is it "hate speech"?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Actually, if you note, it's a Kabbalistic concept. Kabbalists and Talmudists don't really see eye to eye.

It is, however, based on the concept that for the messiah to come, you have to do good deeds.

Now how is it "hate speech"?

Tikkun olam is all throughout judaism. And it's also about bringing the knowledge of the jew to the entire world, and setting up a kingdom of god on earth, with all people bound the the noahide laws, correct?