Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Those Wacky Peace Lovers


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#46    libstaK

libstaK

    Nosce Te Ipsum

  • 7,178 posts
  • Joined:06 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

  • Hello Reality and all that is True
    When Oxymoron was defined it was just for you

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:39 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 March 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Please note above in bold where you asked the question you claim you did not ask below ...
That isn't the question you said I asked.   Read carefully.  The answer to my question is a resounding NO.  The answer to your question is a resounding YES because they're two different questions.
That is the exact question I said you asked, it was the one I directly responded to initially.

Quote

I believe we do ask it of all parties, the Pope and Bishops the world over have condemned publically acts done by christians that were violent and caused harm.  
All violence causes harm Libstak, that's what violence is.   There's plenty of violence that the Bishops don't condemn and shy of all the child molesting going on, nobody asks why they don't, when they don't.
If you believe we should not condone any violence at all, then why are you questioning people's wishes that particular believers publically condemn terrorist acts if the acts are committed by someone of the same belief as them?  Which is it?  Should people be vocal in their abhorrence of violence or not, make up your mind.

As to the molesting, one issue at a time fgs, there is no answer for you there is always one more way that "failure" is inherent regardless of any step forward mankind makes.

Quote

I am no holier than the least of men, guaranteed - the human condition is a shared experience, we are all learning.
Then we should condemn violence that is a shared part of that shared experience.  Not ignore it when it's politically popular in our own state, or related to characteristics foreign to our own.
So now we should be expecting condemnation of violence from others? I thought we shouldn't expect people to speak up just because they belonged to a particular group.  If we are to condemn all violence we should always expect people to speak up and definitely to attend to the falsehoods that are within their group - how else can it work?

Quote

I reconcile Burke and Christ very comfortably - Christ sacrificed his very life in a most violent fashion to ensure that his teachings would echo through the ages, he did not sit by and do nothing, he forgave the violence perpetrated upon himself and showed the depth of his love by his parting words "Father, forgive them they know not what they do".  Had he done nothing - he would not have entered Jerusalem but bypassed it and his fate to live a long peaceful life teaching in the country side instead.  Actions of good men take many forms.
Forgiving the violent and turning the other cheek does not help prevent or end violence, and the reason why is because we don't have the carrot dangling on the string that Jesus did, that is, the promise of salvation.  Not doing nothing is pretty vague.  You can reconcile it with rhetoric in the general case.   You still haven't reconciled your position based on specifics of this topic.  Condemning people goes against Christ's instructions:  Judge not lest ye be judged yourself.   Let he who hath no sin cast the first stone.
Wait, what?  That is the exact carrot that is being dangled, salvation through denial of violence in one's own actions.

As to the "Judge not ...." again, which is it - should people be vocal against acts of violence by others of their own group or not, now you are saying no - up above you were saying they should always condemn violence, by extension they should condemn it where they see it, where they see it would be as commonly within their various groups as elsewhere.

Quote

I agree we see more of your version of faith in history.  However, I made the proviso "true faith", the true nature of faith is rarely found or upheld - refer to Jesus' faith and his final words again.
"True faith" is just words.  Everyone of faith thinks they have true faith.  That is, everyone thinks what they believe is true; that's what belief is.   The problem with the rhetoric "true faith" is that it's subjective impossible to prove.  What we do know for sure is that not everyone of different religions can have "true faith" because their beliefs are largely contradictory and incompatible.  Ergo, the conflict throughout history that differences between religious groups has fueled.  It isn't just history, it's ongoing to this day.
The subjective experience of faith imo is "if I believe things will go my way", the objective experience of faith is "what has come before me is God's will and I accept that."  It's true we will never all agree on the true nature of faith but the obvious false nature of faith is the self serving variety.

Quote

Yes exactly, the evolution of the spiritual man took a quantum leap in the new testament - we were ready to listen when someone spoke of love and not vengeance or the "eye for an eye" that dominated old testament thought.
We're not so enlightened today to the message of the New Testament that you think we are.   Old Testament justice has been far exceeded in violence by today's standards.  Modern day Israelis believe in 10 eyes for an eye or 100 eyes for an eye.  We're a terribly violent species Libstak, more so in the past 100 years than the prior 1900.
I disagree, what is best in mankind has become more apparent - at the opposite end, what is worst amongst mankind has also become more apparent.  Our faults and graces are in the glare of the spotlight and all who choose to look can see them clearly - the nature of "enlightenment" is to bring forth the murky things we hid in the dark into the light so we can comprehend and overcome them.  This is happening.  For centuries we were blissfully unaware of our faults as a race and believed only that we were great and better than others, many more than ever today are being confronted directly through the consequences of their actions that this simply is not true and we need to change - you speak like you are one of these I think.  In fact the majority of folk I have conversed with seem to take the view that we as a race need to change.  Being unenlightened is to believe we are just fine as we are - change requires tension, today there is a lot of tension and a huge impetus for change.

Quote

Read Matthew 7:16
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
So if any of these Jesus-wannabes gathered grapes or figs, that would make the difference in your belief?   Of course we're to beware of false prophets.  Jesus was another false prophet to many.  He was ridiculed and executed as a criminal.  The Jesuses in prison today aren't much different in that regard.
Taking a parable "literally" is a sign you are dismissing it's true meaning in favour of belittling it, naturally that is going to lead to confusion for you.

Quote

I can understand that demanding someone to condemn another's act or judging another's failure to do so can be a dangerous game, yet the disappointment of the "deafening silence" will ring in people's ears nonetheless, we sometimes need the assurance of existence of moderate voices to allay our fears and stop us from making rash judgements on entire groups - fear will do that to people.  My position is that we do hear this and in spades, there is no issue and no need to ask it of every single person of a particular group, public statements by leaders who represent thousands or millions is all that is needed and, as part of these leaders duties, it is usually done anyway.
Deafening silence isn't my position, that's your straw man.  My position is individuals should condemn all violence.   Not just the violence from those groups that are politically correct to condemn.  There's no need to ask it of every single person of a particular group, because the groupthink is the problem that causes the violence.  People need to spend more time and energy focusing on what brings us together, not politically correct differences that tear us apart.  Public statements by politicians are worthless.  It's just rhetoric.  Politicians universally say one thing and do the other; they're the most notorious of liars and not worth our faith.
Do you know what a "flip flopper" is?  Condemning ALL violence by extension means condemning violence where it arises and gains attention in the public arena.  If you have the public's attention then it makes sense to use that attention to take a stand.  Condemning others because they seek particular groups to make their position clear on current prevalent types of violence is just a bunch of hair splitting.  Condemning public figures for taking a stand because "they can't be trusted" makes the whole exercise of taking a stand against violence a complete non-starter.

If you are not going to be satisfied unless every form of violence is addressed at once and authentically, you are not gonna be satisfied until the longest speech in history is enacted by the speaker and when all violence has been roundly condemned and attended equally to in the speech, most folk will have lost focus and have no idea where to begin dealing with the monumental range of problems presented.  You can only eat an elephant one bite at a time, yes we should condemn all violence but if we are willing to condemn one particular violence today then that is one bite of the elephant attended to and when digested and sorted we can then take another bite.

You are playing "damned if you do and damned if you don't" with the world and all it's peoples. I think you just want to count every grain of sand on the beach, good luck with that.

"I warn you, whoever you are, oh you who wish to probe the arcanes of nature, if you do not find within yourself that which you seek, neither shall you find it outside.
If you ignore the excellencies of your own house, how do you intend to find other excellencies?
In you is hidden the treasure of treasures, Oh man, know thyself and you shall know the Universe and the Gods."

Inscription - Temple of Delphi

#47    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,766 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:24 PM

View PostYamato, on 13 March 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

Safe majority view?   Netanyahu got 30 standing ovations from the entire Congress in one speech.   Wake up.

Please inform me of where I have ever "called the fire down on those God himself has chosen".   And you slip a personal threat in to boot!   Me and those like me?  Who is "like me", and what are you threatening is going to happen to me?

The truth hurts and then, it's a painful fact that your policy views will maximize Israeli deaths.  Join me in opposing Zionism and saving lives when you start to think logically about this issue instead of stubbornly remaining blinded by "faith".  Consider it a permanent invitation for when you are finally able to admit it.   Until then, I don't care what you say about me.   I am certain you recognize the deadly consequences your opinions will cause; sometimes unfortunately having a heart and ending suffering and stopping violence can't compete with the false God of nationalism, war, and foreign welfare.
Every time you condemn the very regathering of the Jews to Zion you are spitting in God's face.  You and everyone else here who feels the same about them - "them" being the Jews (no matter where they came from) that are living in Israel.  That's your choice - and you know full well that I am not threatening you or anyone else.  Unless stating a belief threatens you somehow.  Those here at UM who hate "Zionists" and "Zionism" feel justified to advocate for a situation that would cause the nation of Israel to no longer exist. I would have a great deal more respect for them and you if you'd simply say it plainly.  But that would break some rule of political correctness I guess.  As to the "deadly consequences my opinions will cause" perhaps you can explain to me how an opinion causes anything - except potentially a change of another's opinions?  If I had never been born it would not change a single thing about the destiny of Israel.  Perhaps if I were a billionaire I could impact policies of my country toward Israel but an average citizen can do nothing except  stand in solidarity - OR - oppose the nation of Israel.  That my choice to support them bothers so many is very telling.  There are only a small handful of people I know who support Israel.  Here at this site the consensus is that the state is illegitimate and needs to "vanish from the pages of time".  It is never going to happen.  They will suffer and die regardless my opinions or your's but their nation will always remain - also, regardless my opinion or your's.  If you believe in the God of the Bible you could clearly see this statement there.  That you won't admit to it tells me you either don't agree OR you don't believe.  If you think that God exists but He isn't caring enough for the Palestinians then you should take that up with Him in prayer Yam.  But speaking steadfastly against what He has proclaimed as His will is a dangerous thing.  And before this drones on for another 5 useless pages of us talking past one another I will bid you a good day.  I hope someone else here got something from this thread - you certainly didn't seem to.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#48    third_eye

third_eye

    _ M Ġ ń Ř Ī Ş_

  • Member
  • 12,286 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia

  • - God has no religion ~ Mahatma Gandhi -

    "Legio nomen mihi est, quia multi sumus"

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:09 PM

zionapartheid is what it is ..... I wouldn't have thought any religion would've approved, not even Judaism, heck, specially Judaism

He who postpones the hour of living rightly ... is like the rustic who waits for the river to run out ... before he crosses.
Horace - Roman lyric poet & satirist 65 BC - 8 BC
~

third_eye cavern ~ bring own beer


#49    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,766 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:35 PM

View Postthird_eye, on 13 March 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

zionapartheid is what it is ..... I wouldn't have thought any religion would've approved, not even Judaism, heck, specially Judaism
Yep...the Israelis view themselves as a special lot, no doubt about it.  And in many ways they are.  Can you think of another group of human beings whose essential culture and traditions and even language have lasted about 5000 years intact?  In spite of having most of the world hate them for much of that time?  So yeah, I guess I can see why they'd have become a bit "clannish" in their behavior and outlook.  All the more reason to understand how dangerous it is to push such a nuclear armed group to the wall to a point of desperation some day - which is coming I think.  But having said that, I agree that the way they, especially the settlers, treat Palestinians can be deplorable and they should be held accountable for it.  And a fair minded person looks at the WHOLE conflict.  For every Palestinian who lost a home or land there are several Jews who were kicked out of their places in Europe and the M.E., sometimes with only a suitcase.  No one ever talks about them.  Germany did more to recompense the survivors(as should be) but many others did nothing to pay for the thefts.  This conflict between Palestinian, Arab,Muslim and Jew is supernatural IMO and will continue until all the world has learned the lesson God is trying to teach.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#50    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,233 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:41 PM

View PostlibstaK, on 13 March 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

That is the exact question I said you asked, it was the one I directly responded to initially.

If you believe we should not condone any violence at all, then why are you questioning people's wishes that particular believers publically condemn terrorist acts if the acts are committed by someone of the same belief as them?  Which is it?  Should people be vocal in their abhorrence of violence or not, make up your mind.

As to the molesting, one issue at a time fgs, there is no answer for you there is always one more way that "failure" is inherent regardless of any step forward mankind makes.

So now we should be expecting condemnation of violence from others? I thought we shouldn't expect people to speak up just because they belonged to a particular group.  If we are to condemn all violence we should always expect people to speak up and definitely to attend to the falsehoods that are within their group - how else can it work?

Wait, what?  That is the exact carrot that is being dangled, salvation through denial of violence in one's own actions.

As to the "Judge not ...." again, which is it - should people be vocal against acts of violence by others of their own group or not, now you are saying no - up above you were saying they should always condemn violence, by extension they should condemn it where they see it, where they see it would be as commonly within their various groups as elsewhere.

The subjective experience of faith imo is "if I believe things will go my way", the objective experience of faith is "what has come before me is God's will and I accept that."  It's true we will never all agree on the true nature of faith but the obvious false nature of faith is the self serving variety.

I disagree, what is best in mankind has become more apparent - at the opposite end, what is worst amongst mankind has also become more apparent.  Our faults and graces are in the glare of the spotlight and all who choose to look can see them clearly - the nature of "enlightenment" is to bring forth the murky things we hid in the dark into the light so we can comprehend and overcome them.  This is happening.  For centuries we were blissfully unaware of our faults as a race and believed only that we were great and better than others, many more than ever today are being confronted directly through the consequences of their actions that this simply is not true and we need to change - you speak like you are one of these I think.  In fact the majority of folk I have conversed with seem to take the view that we as a race need to change.  Being unenlightened is to believe we are just fine as we are - change requires tension, today there is a lot of tension and a huge impetus for change.

Taking a parable "literally" is a sign you are dismissing it's true meaning in favour of belittling it, naturally that is going to lead to confusion for you.

Do you know what a "flip flopper" is?  Condemning ALL violence by extension means condemning violence where it arises and gains attention in the public arena.  If you have the public's attention then it makes sense to use that attention to take a stand.  Condemning others because they seek particular groups to make their position clear on current prevalent types of violence is just a bunch of hair splitting.  Condemning public figures for taking a stand because "they can't be trusted" makes the whole exercise of taking a stand against violence a complete non-starter.

If you are not going to be satisfied unless every form of violence is addressed at once and authentically, you are not gonna be satisfied until the longest speech in history is enacted by the speaker and when all violence has been roundly condemned and attended equally to in the speech, most folk will have lost focus and have no idea where to begin dealing with the monumental range of problems presented.  You can only eat an elephant one bite at a time, yes we should condemn all violence but if we are willing to condemn one particular violence today then that is one bite of the elephant attended to and when digested and sorted we can then take another bite.

You are playing "damned if you do and damned if you don't" with the world and all it's peoples. I think you just want to count every grain of sand on the beach, good luck with that.
That is the exact question I said you asked, it was the one I directly responded to initially.
You misquoted me.  When you changed the words, you changed the meaning.  If you're unclear about what I mean, just ask!  Don't presume or impose.

If you believe we should not condone any violence at all, then why are you questioning people's wishes that particular believers publically condemn terrorist acts if the acts are committed by someone of the same belief as them?  Which is it?  Should people be vocal in their abhorrence of violence or not, make up your mind.
Again, people should refrain from collectivist mindsets whether they condemn violence or not, otherwise they only condemn the violence that some other group commits.  And that doesn't satisfy the ideal that we both agree on, or at least should.

As to the molesting, one issue at a time fgs, there is no answer for you there is always one more way that "failure" is inherent regardless of any step forward mankind makes.
It's another example of violence, it isn't another issue.

So now we should be expecting condemnation of violence from others? I thought we shouldn't expect people to speak up just because they belonged to a particular group.  If we are to condemn all violence we should always expect people to speak up and definitely to attend to the falsehoods that are within their group - how else can it work?
Why?   If we universally condemn all violence, what need is there of having to belong in the group committing the violence?   By "attending to the falsehoods" in the world regardless of groups.  An adult doesn't need to be a kid to champion defense of children.  I don't have to be a Catholic to condemn child molestation.   I don't have to be an eco-terrorist to condemn whale poachers.   I don't have to be a Muslim to defend human rights of Palestinians.  I don't have to be a Zionist to condemn Zionist policies.   If I'm to "always expect you to speak up and attend to the falsehoods within your group", where's a link to you always doing that?   Surely you condemn plenty more than that, and why wouldn't you?

Wait, what?  That is the exact carrot that is being dangled, salvation through denial of violence in one's own actions.
Sorry I know of no such carrot in your group.  You have to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as the son of God who died for your sins and by believing you will be saved.   There is no requirement of pacifism in Christianity as all history and the scriptures prove.

As to the "Judge not ...." again, which is it - should people be vocal against acts of violence by others of their own group or not, now you are saying no - up above you were saying they should always condemn violence, by extension they should condemn it where they see it, where they see it would be as commonly within their various groups as elsewhere.
I'm not the one claiming adherence to Jesus Christ's teaching.   I don't need to reconcile judging-not with judging, much less pacifism with violence.  By reminding you of Jesus's teachings, I'm not hamstringing myself.   To condemn or not to condemn misses my point.  Groupthink and collectivist mindset is what justifies the violence of that group and by extension, fails to condemn it.    Catholic Bishops fail to do it.  Muslim Imams fail to do it.  Governments the world over fail to do it.  Individuals fail to do it I think often because they don't apply their own personal values to the larger groups they identify with.  I am a very sweet and tender guy.  I don't believe in violence.  I only practice violence in self defense, therefore I condemn all acts that initiate violence.   The human race is a group I also belong to.  Starting to understand now?

I disagree, what is best in mankind has become more apparent - at the opposite end, what is worst amongst mankind has also become more apparent.  Our faults and graces are in the glare of the spotlight and all who choose to look can see them clearly - the nature of "enlightenment" is to bring forth the murky things we hid in the dark into the light so we can comprehend and overcome them.  This is happening.  For centuries we were blissfully unaware of our faults as a race and believed only that we were great and better than others, many more than ever today are being confronted directly through the consequences of their actions that this simply is not true and we need to change - you speak like you are one of these I think.  In fact the majority of folk I have conversed with seem to take the view that we as a race need to change.  Being unenlightened is to believe we are just fine as we are - change requires tension, today there is a lot of tension and a huge impetus for change.
What made you think I'm blissfully unaware?   As a race, the human race, we never stop changing.  Humans have always changed.  Change is the one reliable constant.   Many changes are good, many aren't.   We're reproducing like cockroaches.  We're destroying the planet's ecosystems, natural habitats, and large animals.   We're consuming mass quantities of finite natural resources at an ever-increasing rate .   Christianity is dying.   We're always looking for a better kind of gun to hold advantage over other groups that we identify as different than ourselves, usually on the other side of an arbitrary line drawn by governments called borders.   When we get rid of groupthink we get rid of the lines that divide us.   "If it is to be, it's up to me."

Taking a parable "literally" is a sign you are dismissing it's true meaning in favour of belittling it, naturally that is going to lead to confusion for you.
That's your subjective interpretation.  Some subjectively interpret it literally.   Who are you to decide what's literal and what isn't?   Who is anyone to do that?  That's the problem with scripture when we can cherry pick it to mean whatever suits our needs.   If something confuses you if you take it literally, don't take it literally, it's just a parable.   The agreeable things you can understand?   Taking those literally is fine.  I think the violent people who justify their violence in the world are the ones suffering from the real confusion, which religious group's scriptures they might believe, notwithstanding.

Do you know what a "flip flopper" is?  Condemning ALL violence by extension means condemning violence where it arises and gains attention in the public arena.  If you have the public's attention then it makes sense to use that attention to take a stand.  Condemning others because they seek particular groups to make their position clear on current prevalent types of violence is just a bunch of hair splitting.  Condemning public figures for taking a stand because "they can't be trusted" makes the whole exercise of taking a stand against violence a complete non-starter.
What does "flip flopper" have to do with this?   It doesn't need to be a public affair.  If it's a personal affair for every individual, it will work.  If we can't stop focusing on foreign groups we don't identify with to start trouble with, and simultaneously ignore that group's condemnations which are everywhere (what brought you here in the first place) we will never end this violence that both of our country's governments are participating in.

If you are not going to be satisfied unless every form of violence is addressed at once and authentically, you are not gonna be satisfied until the longest speech in history is enacted by the speaker and when all violence has been roundly condemned and attended equally to in the speech, most folk will have lost focus and have no idea where to begin dealing with the monumental range of problems presented.  You can only eat an elephant one bite at a time, yes we should condemn all violence but if we are willing to condemn one particular violence today then that is one bite of the elephant attended to and when digested and sorted we can then take another bite.
It's not reliant on some public speech.  It's what's inside of us that counts.  The principle to condemn the initiation of violence is a very simple concept LIbstak and you're making it unnecessarily difficult.   The only true freedom is individual freedom.  It's an intimately personal and individual exercise.   Groups like religions, governments and mass medias bind us, they tell us what to believe, they tell us what to think, what to value, how we're valued.   Each and every one of us is valuable because we're all individuals with our own diverse thoughts, beliefs, potentials, and paths.   Groups indoctrinate; individuals educate.

You are playing "damned if you do and damned if you don't" with the world and all it's peoples. I think you just want to count every grain of sand on the beach, good luck with that.
I don't have to count every grain of sand, that would be up to the group thinkers who have to divide the beach up into many beaches and then rank order them in endless hierarchies based on how many grains of sand each contains.   Principles like non-violence encourage unity and that is conducive to simplicity, not difficulty or impossibility (i.e. damned either way).  Dividing people into groups is what creates all the complications.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#51    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,233 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:55 PM

View Postand then, on 13 March 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Every time you condemn the very regathering of the Jews to Zion you are spitting in God's face.  You and everyone else here who feels the same about them - "them" being the Jews (no matter where they came from) that are living in Israel.  That's your choice - and you know full well that I am not threatening you or anyone else.  Unless stating a belief threatens you somehow.  Those here at UM who hate "Zionists" and "Zionism" feel justified to advocate for a situation that would cause the nation of Israel to no longer exist. I would have a great deal more respect for them and you if you'd simply say it plainly.  But that would break some rule of political correctness I guess.  As to the "deadly consequences my opinions will cause" perhaps you can explain to me how an opinion causes anything - except potentially a change of another's opinions?  If I had never been born it would not change a single thing about the destiny of Israel.  Perhaps if I were a billionaire I could impact policies of my country toward Israel but an average citizen can do nothing except  stand in solidarity - OR - oppose the nation of Israel.  That my choice to support them bothers so many is very telling.  There are only a small handful of people I know who support Israel.  Here at this site the consensus is that the state is illegitimate and needs to "vanish from the pages of time".  It is never going to happen.  They will suffer and die regardless my opinions or your's but their nation will always remain - also, regardless my opinion or your's.  If you believe in the God of the Bible you could clearly see this statement there.  That you won't admit to it tells me you either don't agree OR you don't believe.  If you think that God exists but He isn't caring enough for the Palestinians then you should take that up with Him in prayer Yam.  But speaking steadfastly against what He has proclaimed as His will is a dangerous thing.  And before this drones on for another 5 useless pages of us talking past one another I will bid you a good day.  I hope someone else here got something from this thread - you certainly didn't seem to.
No nation should "exist" when "existing" means state-sanctioned terrorism, UNSC Resolution violations, Geneva Convention violations, collective punishment, destruction of private property, theft by taking, assassination, human organ trafficking, arms proliferation, civilian slaughters, bigoted nationalism and a charter that only recognizes all the land for themselves.    Israel can exist, it needs major changes to the way it's existing, and the simple way to do that is to get rid of the regime.   You can't understand the difference between replacing government officials and "a nation no longer existing" only when it comes to Israel.  Where domestic politics are concerned you get it.  You can't eat your own cooking where Israel is concerned.   There will still be an Israel without Zionism.  An Israel that will play by the same set of rules as the rest of God's creation and actually be welcomed as a respected nation in the 21st century.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#52    third_eye

third_eye

    _ M Ġ ń Ř Ī Ş_

  • Member
  • 12,286 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia

  • - God has no religion ~ Mahatma Gandhi -

    "Legio nomen mihi est, quia multi sumus"

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:10 PM

View Postand then, on 13 March 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Yep...the Israelis view themselves as a special lot, no doubt about it.  And in many ways they are.  Can you think of another group of human beings whose essential culture and traditions and even language have lasted about 5000 years intact?  In spite of having most of the world hate them for much of that time?  So yeah, I guess I can see why they'd have become a bit "clannish" in their behavior and outlook.  All the more reason to understand how dangerous it is to push such a nuclear armed group to the wall to a point of desperation some day - which is coming I think.  But having said that, I agree that the way they, especially the settlers, treat Palestinians can be deplorable and they should be held accountable for it.  And a fair minded person looks at the WHOLE conflict.  For every Palestinian who lost a home or land there are several Jews who were kicked out of their places in Europe and the M.E., sometimes with only a suitcase.  No one ever talks about them.  Germany did more to recompense the survivors(as should be) but many others did nothing to pay for the thefts.  This conflict between Palestinian, Arab,Muslim and Jew is supernatural IMO and will continue until all the world has learned the lesson God is trying to teach.

the bane of self fulfilling prophecies and desperate 'god's latest chosen one's
they're all relying on the same book essentially, its like a script and everyone thought they're scripted in with the heroes of olde
they're all working to make the book true isn't it ? you work at it hard enough .... all you can make true is except what is beyond yours to make

the common denominator here is 'an end'

He who postpones the hour of living rightly ... is like the rustic who waits for the river to run out ... before he crosses.
Horace - Roman lyric poet & satirist 65 BC - 8 BC
~

third_eye cavern ~ bring own beer


#53    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,766 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:17 PM

View PostYamato, on 13 March 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

No nation should "exist" when "existing" means state-sanctioned terrorism, UNSC Resolution violations, Geneva Convention violations, collective punishment, destruction of private property, theft by taking, assassination, human organ trafficking, arms proliferation, civilian slaughters, bigoted nationalism and a charter that only recognizes all the land for themselves. Israel can exist, it needs major changes to the way it's existing, and the simple way to do that is to get rid of the regime.   You can't understand the difference between replacing government officials and "a nation no longer existing" only when it comes to Israel.  Where domestic politics are concerned you get it.  You can't eat your own cooking where Israel is concerned.   There will still be an Israel without Zionism.  An Israel that will play by the same set of rules as the rest of God's creation and actually be welcomed as a respected nation in the 21st century.
And if they try to play by those rules while being opposed by groups that absolutely will not make peace and only want to destroy them?  Funny that you keep leaving that piece of the puzzle out...  no, for the anti Zionist it is inconceivable that anyone else is in error.  Only the "regime" in Israel.  Am Yisrael Chai, Yam - and they always will.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#54    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,766 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:19 PM

View Postthird_eye, on 13 March 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

the bane of self fulfilling prophecies and desperate 'god's latest chosen one's
they're all relying on the same book essentially, its like a script and everyone thought they're scripted in with the heroes of olde
they're all working to make the book true isn't it ? you work at it hard enough .... all you can make true is except what is beyond yours to make

the common denominator here is 'an end'
If they are "self fulfilling" then they are working harder at it than any other people ever have in history.  5733 is the current year on THEIR calendar.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#55    Black Red Devil

Black Red Devil

    Mean as Hell

  • Member
  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 13 March 2013 - 11:09 PM

View Postand then, on 13 March 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Every time you condemn the very regathering of the Jews to Zion you are spitting in God's face.  You and everyone else here who feels the same about them - "them" being the Jews (no matter where they came from) that are living in Israel.  That's your choice - and you know full well that I am not threatening you or anyone else.  Unless stating a belief threatens you somehow.  Those here at UM who hate "Zionists" and "Zionism" feel justified to advocate for a situation that would cause the nation of Israel to no longer exist.

I'm not complaining and it doesn't affect me too much because I'm agnostic but, I have to say, that's quite a label to pin on people who don't have sympathy for Israel's Zionist policies and who have Faith and believe in a God.  It might be just your opinion and may not be the catalyst that starts WWIII, but it can be quite irritating to read and offensive for some.

{EDIT}

To be a Christian and believe in the Bible, you must acknowledge that Jews are the chosen people and God has given them a Promised Land which they are entitled to, which includes all of current Israel (of course), all or parts of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Jordan, otherwise you are spitting in God's face.

:unsure2: Wow

Edited by Black Red Devil, 13 March 2013 - 11:30 PM.

We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell

- Oscar Wilde

#56    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,766 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:26 AM

View PostBlack Red Devil, on 13 March 2013 - 11:09 PM, said:

I'm not complaining and it doesn't affect me too much because I'm agnostic but, I have to say, that's quite a label to pin on people who don't have sympathy for Israel's Zionist policies and who have Faith and believe in a God.  It might be just your opinion and may not be the catalyst that starts WWIII, but it can be quite irritating to read and offensive for some.

{EDIT}

To be a Christian and believe in the Bible, you must acknowledge that Jews are the chosen people and God has given them a Promised Land which they are entitled to, which includes all of current Israel (of course), all or parts of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq & Jordan, otherwise you are spitting in God's face.

:unsure2: Wow
Fair enough, I see your point.  Let's put it this way then... say you have children you love dearly and you have great plans for them.  You've given instructions to their friends that these children are very special to you and if the friends help these children, you will help them.  If they harm these children you will harm them.  Now out of all these friends, only a tiny handful take you at your word.  The rest get angry because you are so attached to your kids and they beat them up and try over and over to actually kill them.  How do you imagine that would make you feel?  It's a clumsy analogy but I think it's close.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#57    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,233 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 14 March 2013 - 07:44 AM

View Postand then, on 13 March 2013 - 06:17 PM, said:

And if they try to play by those rules while being opposed by groups that absolutely will not make peace and only want to destroy them?  Funny that you keep leaving that piece of the puzzle out...  no, for the anti Zionist it is inconceivable that anyone else is in error.  Only the "regime" in Israel.  Am Yisrael Chai, Yam - and they always will.
People are all the same everywhere in the world.  We all want peace in our lives, love in our hearts and the freedom required to do so.  The groups that oppose Israel are just because they don't have that freedom, so of course Israel's policies are opposed by people either suffering from its policies or compassionate enough to care for those who are.  

Groups are what I've been talking about the whole time here.  Leaving that piece of the puzzle out?   Not in the least.  I just see the whole puzzle and recommend that we glue the pieces together, not tear them apart.

Israel is a state that's hyper-aware of its differences between its own group and other groups, and just look at the problems it has.  It might as well be Exhibit A in the case study of my position.  "The Jews" can live in peace and security in the US.  They are welcome to be my next-door neighbors and already are.   They're not suffering from oppression under the laws, rights and privileges that I enjoy.  There's no reason for my neighbors to move to Israel.  There's no reason why Israelis can't move here and get out of that lame excuse for a state, and before it's too late according to your prophecy.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#58    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,233 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 14 March 2013 - 07:58 AM

View Postand then, on 14 March 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

Fair enough, I see your point.  Let's put it this way then... say you have children you love dearly and you have great plans for them.  You've given instructions to their friends that these children are very special to you and if the friends help these children, you will help them.  If they harm these children you will harm them.  Now out of all these friends, only a tiny handful take you at your word.  The rest get angry because you are so attached to your kids and they beat them up and try over and over to actually kill them.  How do you imagine that would make you feel?  It's a clumsy analogy but I think it's close.
Move your kids half way around the world to a dangerous life where they're living in a terrorist state surrounded by enemies when they should have just stayed in your country with you.   How "very special" that is!  It's not only patronizing - pat the little Jews on the head and send them off to their deaths- and then, boom.   Crazy Christian mission accomplished.

It's time that people got the memo that a religion that's thousands of years old is infinitely greater and more important than a greedy hyper-militant nation trying to hog ethnic and religious identities all to itself.  Good people the world over who practice Judaism aren't to be belittled by Zionists trying to reduce their identity into a nationalistic political movement.  Judaism did just fine without these terrorists who became the heads of the Israeli government and it'll stay just fine despite them.

Let us not understate how huge this case is.  Zionism is the greatest threat to Judaism on the face of the earth since the Allies restored peace in 1945.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users