Posted on 10/25/2002 12:14:19 AM PDT by jennyp
Well, let me be a little more specific. You are hanging your argument on the fact that I've used an abstract concept labeled "the ovens" to stand for the death camps like Sobibor or Auschwitz. Which were, just to be clear, a complex of buildings, including incinerators, sorting and packaging rooms, rooms labeled and touted as showers, into which zylon B gas was pumped to kill jews in masse, who were shipped there, in no small measure, thanks to the priests of Slovokia, for loading the cattle cars, the priests of Germany, for supplying ancient marriage records so the Waffen SS could sort the lambs from the sheep, the priests assigned to the Waffen SS to absolve the troops engaged in rounding up and shipping the Jews to Sorbibor&etc., and Pope Pius XII, who had nothing to say about all this, despite repeated requests from the Allies and the free jews, until it was absolutely certain the allies would win the war.
If you pointed out that you are a good parent, and a loving husband, do think that should prevent you from being prosecuted as a serial killer?
That's why I can't treat you seriously Don.
I'd be more inclined to guess that you can't take me seriously because you can't stay on point long enough to make a cogent response because, like the rest of the christian world, you don't recognize that the Holoucaust was, and quite obviously to the objective observer, prepared for and nurtured by 1600 years of disgraceful christian behavior toward jews, encouraged and re-inforced by the christian gospels, most spectacularly, in John and Mathhew, as I have given you specific verse reference to demonstrate. Even the officials of the Catholic Church have acknowledged this in official pronouncements arising from the furor over the "we remember" coverup.
The fact that you are hiding this truth from yourself, as the vast majority of the christian world does, is what is causing the inability to engage the issue in the straightforward manner that would be required to heal this wrong, if the christian world actually wanted to do so.
You say that good parents and loving husbands should be persecuted as serial killers, not because they are guilty but because you don't like them.
No. I don't like them because they are patently obviously guilty, and because their refusal to make the effort of moral repair will guarantee that jews will face another millennia of the boot in the behind. I think that's acutely disgraceful in an institution that is supposed to work for the moral and the good in the world.
Ovens are not an abstract concept.
‘Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan.’ ( John 8:48).
"What's in a name? More particularly, What's in a nickname? Many nicknames don't mean much at all. For example, its hard to explain why a person named Robert by his mother, should be called Bob by everyone else. Or why should Richard be known as Dick?"
"Other nickname derive from certain eccentricities that individuals become known for. I had an uncle whom everyone called 'Pong.' At first I couldn't understand that, but I did later."
"In religion, nick names abound. Bible basher, holy roller, devil dodger, psalm singer, amen snorter. Protestants were once called left-footers. Catholics were called fish."
"Jesus was called a Samaritan. It was meant to be disparaging. They way that it was spoken to him indicates that it was probably a standing accusation levelled against him. We know from John's gospel, something about the... prejudice---that existed among Jews, against Samaritans. The woman at the well alluded to it when she frankly observed: "Jews have no dealings with Samaritans"(John 4:9). There was a religious basis to this prejudice. Jews believed that Samaritans had compromised the law. Therefore they were ritually unclean, and a threat to all who came in contact with them. By calling Jesus a Samaritan, they were accusing him of the same uncleanness; the same laxness with regard to the faith. See how powerful nicknames are? We ought to be careful what we call people."
Yes, exactly.
It took me awhile to figure out that by "symbol" you mean tactile sign language, equivalent to sign language for the deaf but not blind. Am I understanding you correctly in this as well?
Yes, as well. It was the same sign language for spelling words with hands developed for the deaf, that was all they had at the time.
So...?...getting into heaven or avoiding hell is the only reason I might want to obey god's law? That I simply might want to behave morally isn't a factor? The carrot and stick approach to morality?
If you don't care about God and you are not concerned about consequences - then all you have to do to lead a moral life is to do what seems right to you.
The freedom we Christians enjoy is not to commit consensual adultery as you suggest. It is this:
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace. Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.
But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together. Romans 8:1-17
John the Baptist referred to the Pharisees as a generation of vipers in Matthew 3 and Luke 3. Jesus Christ also referred to them as vipers in Matthew 12 and 23. In Matthew 23, Jesus specifically indicts the Pharisees of that generation. In Matthew 12, He explains the cause – a wrongful heart:
I hope your Thanksgiving was perfect!
Yes, exactly.
So the mental process precedes the first concept, and it was a tabula rasa mind, a mind without concepts, that performed the mental process that produced the first concept?
Pharisees is just another word for jews.
Or, to be a little more exact: what "wrongful heart" means is clinging to the laws of one's fathers, and refusing to believe in Godhead of Jesus, as that violates the Commandments.
I rest my case.
You are welcome, and thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to try to make the case for something that concerns me, and which I rarely get to expand on at length.
As always, I find your contributions here extremely thoughtful.
Then I rest my case.
The spread of mad cow disease in britain has been attributed to this.
Very well, how many outbreaks of Mad Goat disease are recorded? How about Mad Gazelle disease? Herbevores are not built to digest meat in any remotely relevant sense, and it is a fundamental contraint of terrestrial biological reality that herbevores are going to outnumber carnavores by quite a bit.
Nonsense.
Quote the law please so that there is no confusion.
Give me a break. What child does not know that Jews don't eat pork because of the long list of Laws handed down by God along with the 10 commandments?
I have provided on this thread a long list of references I ought not to have had to without any spectacular acknowledgement on your part. I have lost patience. I don't need to prove things I've been asked for that are common knowledge. Everybody who actually reads the bible for themselves knows the Jews killed Jesus according to the gospels, everybody knows that Germany was the most staunchly christian country in Northern Europe, both before and after WWII. Where do you think Martin Luther made is chief inroads? Where do you think the 30 Year's war was chiefly fought? Everybody knows the christian world, from 414 to 1943, confined jews to ghettos, accused them of christ-killing and infant-killing, and periodically slaughtered them on that account. That is a fundamental part of European history in any textbook. Everybody knows the root christian concept of salvation by grace is predicated on the jews being christ-killers, and specifically excludes orthodox jews from salvation, as a matter of biblical authority in the Gospels and Acts. That's why, when jewish scholars make presentations in 3rd world countries in catholic churches, they have that epithet thrown at them.
What a bucket load of moral fog this salvation by grace business turns out to be in practice. Why can't christians, at least once in a while, take some rudimentary responsibility for the practical results of their chosen beliefs?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.