Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:38 pm Yep, there is. Sorry.
There is no need to express sorrow. I studied the issue to the degree that I was able, or that I felt was necessary, and what I revealed to you about what I determined to be true, is simply the perspective I have. Generally though, I opt not to talk about anything that pertains to non-conventional topics vis-a-vis Jews and modern history. And the reason why these things are better left alone cements my (personal) understanding about the power of distortions and deceptions. There are topics that are made non-discussable. I borrowed a term from Chomsky: unthinkable thought.

My opinions in regard to the specific matter I mentioned are my own.
Thus, Holocaust denial has no traction with me. I've seen too much independent evidence to be unsure. I believe the Jewish accounts, as well...for most simply confirm the independent accounts. Now, in any field of reportage, there will be a few errors and exaggerations, of course; that's human nature. But I think the overwhelming thing is the amount of good, solid data.
We can, and perhaps should, let this drop -- these are subjects that cannot be discussed publicly unless one 'recites from the conventional version of events'. Yet it is exactly in this area where I myself had doubts arise (the issue of *data*). I certainly did not always think this way. Indeed I was taught exactly the opposite. Examination of the data is rendered an unconscionable act. No sane person should be willing to subject themselves to the risk that confronting the conventional story(s) entails. It takes an *outlaw* I guess.

I am interested in exposing, if it is possible, all areas where distortions, exaggerations and lies have been concocted and injected into modern interpretation (of reality).

I read closely and I can say I understand full well the view that you have -- it certainly fits into your larger, and specifically Christian, interpretation of history.

As you can gather from my entire exposition of late -- I am uncertain how to interpret at this scale. But I note that interpretations are needed and must be applied.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Alexis Jacobi to Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 9:09 pm I am interested in exposing, if it is possible, all areas where distortions, exaggerations and lies have been concocted and injected into modern interpretation (of reality).
Great! Me too! :D I apply it, however, to all interpretations... rather than using it to justify/bolster a certain storyline.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 12:27 am
Age wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 5:26 am LOL
You have 13 pointless, rambling, unthinking messages in my box.

I'm reading none of them. Sorry. Bye.
GOOD.

Here is ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of just how STUPID these adult human being could be and WERE.

This one CLAIMS it is NOT reading ANY of those 13 writings of mine, but then ALSO CLAIMS those 13 messages of mine were "pointless", "rambling", AND "unthinking messages". Which how this could be KNOWN is beyond us.
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 9:28 pm Great! Me too! :D I apply it, however, to all interpretations ... rather than using it to justify/bolster a certain storyline.
Yes, indeed you do that. But you do it (I think) injudiciously, and too broadly, and formulaically. And then I also think that you are not fully conscious of your *motives* in doing 'all that'. You are not alone. What you are doing is part-and-parcel of on-going epistemological trends.
Nick_A
Posts: 5904
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Nick_A »

The easiest human norm to justify and deny is genocide. There is always a reason for it. Hitler understood how quickly it is denied and forgotten. The speed and brutality by which it takes place makes it easy to ignore. He learned it by what happened to the Armenians. Did god hate the Armenians as well?

https://www.armenian-genocide.org/hitler.html

"Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?"
[August 22, 1939]

My decision to attack Poland was arrived at last spring. Originally, I feared that the political constellation would compel me to strike simultaneously at England, Russia, France, and Poland. Even this risk would have had to be taken.

Ever since the autumn of 1938, and because I realized that Japan would not join us unconditionally and that Mussolini is threatened by that nit-wit of a king and the treasonable scoundrel of a crown prince, I decided to go with Stalin.

In the last analysis, there are only three great statesmen in the world, Stalin, I, and Mussolini. Mussolini is the weakest, for he has been unable to break the power of either the crown or the church. Stalin and I are the only ones who envisage the future and nothing but the future. Accordingly, I shall in a few weeks stretch out my hand to Stalin at the common German-Russian frontier and undertake the redistribution of the world with him.

Our strength consists in our speed and in our brutality. Genghis Khan led millions of women and children to slaughter -- with premeditation and a happy heart. History sees in him solely the founder of a state. It's a matter of indifference to me what a weak western European civilization will say about me.

I have issued the command -- and I'll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad -- that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formations in readiness -- for the present only in the East -- with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space (Lebensraum) which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?

Kevork B. Bardakjian, Hitler and the Armenian Genocide (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Zoryan Institute, 1985).

The text above is the English version of the German document handed to Louis P. Lochner in Berlin. It first appeared in Lochner's What About Germany? (New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1942), pp. 1-4. The Nuremberg Tribunal later identified the document as L-3 or Exhibit USA-28. Two other versions of the same document appear in Appendices II and III. For the German original cf. Akten zur Deutschen Auswartigen Politik 1918-1945, Serie D, Band VII, (Baden-Baden, 1956), pp. 171-172.
Nick_A
Posts: 5904
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Nick_A »

Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 9:28 pm
Alexis Jacobi to Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 9:09 pm I am interested in exposing, if it is possible, all areas where distortions, exaggerations and lies have been concocted and injected into modern interpretation (of reality).
Great! Me too! :D I apply it, however, to all interpretations... rather than using it to justify/bolster a certain storyline.
Of course it is the opposite with Christianity. Every effort is made to justify distortions, exaggerations, and lies in defense of Christendom. John 15:
18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. 20 Remember what I told you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’[a] If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. 21 They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the one who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 Whoever hates me hates my Father as well. 24 If I had not done among them the works no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. As it is, they have seen, and yet they have hated both me and my Father. 25 But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: ‘They hated me without reason.’
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13386
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by henry quirk »

Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:33 pm
henry quirk wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:28 pm
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:48 pmBeyond that... there is more.
you say such things often, but you never get around to describin' what that more actually is that lies beyond

it's all very abstract and nebulous and, mebbe, safe
I've described all kinds of ways that there is more (and different) than what you (or someone else) may be claiming. I'm trying to show that beliefs are limited and contrived by man, which creates the prison/box he lives in and builds onto and defines himself with. Neither does such reflect any kind of greater/broader potential he can access or tune into. He is simply king of his castle -- and how true can that be?

It's not difficult to notice the diversity of views/claims/beliefs which work in so many ways. Perhaps what’s challenging is to consider the implications of that: there is clearly vast potential for our lives and our thinking, individually and collectively. So why do so many people rigidly lock-in to such obviously limited viewpoints/beliefs? Because it is serving them, yes? If we're not choosing to be served in such a way, might we be more conscious and self-directive in exploring beyond that? What might that reveal? Does it matter? Or might it obviously be worth exploring beyond where we are?
there is clearly vast potential for our lives and our thinking: there it is again, there is more, but no description of the more...it's, as I say, all very abstract

there's more than the stiflin' boxes we create for ourselves: okay

describe that more...give it a form, even if only a vague one...give us reason to pursue it...give us a direction to start off in, sumthin' other than beyond or over there

right now you're just pointin' out toward the horizon, tellin' us more is there, but you offer no directions on gettin' from here to there, and no description of what's actually there

you've given no cause for anyone should abandon his spiritual or philosophical home beyond what seems to be your distaste for our hovels
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:36 pm
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:48 pm “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Albert Einstein
That is a statement attributed to him but, in fact, he did not say that. (If my sources are correct)...
Ah, good to know! I think I may have heard that before. The value of the statement rings true, though, doesn't it? Regardless of the exact wording or who said it. A lack of specifics doesn't diminish the value of the point being made. :D
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:36 pm My impression? You have developed a discursive shtick that you use all the time.
Pretty shallow conclusion of yours for what I've described and expanded on across many posts -- but I understand your resistance to anything that questions your beloved position and theories.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:36 pm Can Lacewing transcend Lacewing? now that is the question!
She does it all the time! Being open to more is a way of life. Otherwise, it probably wouldn't occur to her to notice or talk about it, much as it doesn't occur to those who apparently cannot even conceive of such a thing unless they are given a frickin' handbook.

I find it baffling that anyone cannot imagine there always being more that is worthwhile to explore and consider. But it's interesting to realize how some people are content to live in extremely small Universes with small little gods fashioned after themselves. :D
Dubious
Posts: 3105
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:49 amPaul does not denigrate good deeds. Nor does any part of the Bible. But they are not the means of salvation, as both Paul and Jesus Himself explicitly teach. See Ephesians 2:8-9.
...and yet the quote to which I replied does resound with a degree of equity to make the idea of divinity more palpable.

BTW, Ephesians is not considered an authentic Pauline epistle.
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:49 amBut now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith" (Romans 3: 9-25)
For all that is merely mortal, falling short of a god entity is not sin. Is a deed done in error also a sin? How is sin to be defined? I would ask Paul, why would that require redemption by a blood sacrifice performed in the same manner as happened to countless others during the Roman period?

What's the difference between one cross and another?
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:49 amSo Jew and Gentile alike are saved not by their deeds, but by faith in Jesus Christ. One needs the whole train of thought, from Romans 1 onward, to get the flow of the propositions Paul is advancing
Yes, it was Paul who insisted on faith in Jesus as a practical necessity. Deeds alone, whatever their merit, could never accomplish the extraction of "god-worshipers" or "god-fearers" from the Judaic fold into the separate order he was attempting to build without a core vision to gravitate to. The value of deeds are personal to oneself and, as such, too decentralized in forging any kind of doctrinal unity.

Ergo, the cohesion expressed by faith in Jesus and his blood sacrifice trounced any number of good or great deeds in creating a system in which all of its proselytes maintained a strict equality in their belief in Jesus as savior.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15181
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dubious wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:19 am Ephesians is not considered an authentic Pauline epistle.
Interesting that you frame that claim in the passive voice. In the passive voice, the doer of an action is left unspecified. But we should specify it, because there are certainly plenty of authorites who disagree with that statement.

Who is the person doing the "considering" in your claim?
For all that is merely mortal, falling short of a god entity is not sin.
Actually, failing to live up to the standard of one's Creator is the very definition of "sin." In the Bible, the word is hamartia, meaning, "a missing of the mark," or "a falling short of a target." In this case, the "target" is righteousness. All men fall short of that. All men sin.
...the extraction of "god-worshipers" or "god-fearers" from the Judaic fold...
Such a project is never mentioned or considered anywhere in Scripture. Rather, Judaism is anticipated to consummate in the appearance of Messiah, and all Jews are required and expected by God to celebrate and participate in His rule. One doesn't need to "extract" anybody from a position that ought, by all rights, to lead directly into the right course.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm
Age wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 11:56 am
iambiguous wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:15 pm Christians, Muslims and Jews all believe in the God of Moses and Abraham.
And, what EXACTLY is the God of "moses" and "abraham"?
It is the God that Christians, Muslims and Jews worship and adore. Each given their own Scripture.
So, in other words, you really do not know, correct?

Or, are you able to explain what 'that' is, exactly, which so-called "christians", "muslims", and "jews" worship and adore?
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm
Age wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 11:56 am
iambiguous wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:15 pm So, for Christians, how important is it to establish whether Jesus Christ Himself is in fact an integral component of God's Scripture? Whether he was God on Earth or not would seem to pale next to how one construes Him to either be or not to be their own personal savior on Judgment Day.
When EXACTLY is 'judgement day', and, what EXACTLY happens on 'judgement day'?
Exactly? Here, of course, it comes down to faith. Since no one [to the best of my knowledge] has ever actually demonstrated the existence of Judgment Day, individual Christians, Muslims and Jews take their own existential leap of faith to whatever they think it is. And that's the beauty of faith. Nothing really has to be demonstrated. It's all "in your head".
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm
Age wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 11:56 am
iambiguous wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:15 pm Ask a Christian, ask a Jew, ask a Muslim. What of Judgment Day for each of them?
But, 'you' wrote it here, as though it was some 'thing' REAL. So, I am asking 'you'.
That's not my point. My point is to note that Christians, Muslims and Jews all seem to believe in the same God. Just different "versions" of him.
What 'difference/s', exactly?
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm So, what happens when the Christian dies and, given Judgment Day, the God of Moses rejects the Jesus Christ rendition.
But how many of these God 'things' are there exactly?

Also, "judgment day" has absolutely nothing at all to do with when one individual human dies.
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm
Age wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 11:56 am
iambiguous wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:15 pm Or, for the God of Moses and Abraham, does it really come down merely to what your "interpretation" is on Judgment Day. You may be utterly wrong about the existence of Jesus Christ or Muhammad. But God is still willing to grant you immortality and salvation if you can, what, convince Him that you still deserve it?
God gave 'you' immortality since your conception into this One and ONLY Existence. And, God would NEVER say one 'deserves' more or something else, from "another". This is because God KNOWS, EXACTLY, WHY 'you' are EXACTLY how 'you' ARE.
And one would go about demonstrating this...how?
Very easily and very simply.
iambiguous wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:15 pm Of course, there are those who don't put much stock in Judgment Day at all. Their own "private and personal" God is considerably more tolerant when it comes to connecting the dots between morality "down here" and immortality and salvation "up there".

God doesn't think at all like hundreds of millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews around the globe think He does. No, instead, God thinks like they do.
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm
Age wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 11:56 amBut God does NOT 'think'. God KNOWS.
Okay, but in the absence of actual demonstrable proof that a God, the God, my God does in fact exist, doesn't that then come down to what each individual Christian, Muslim and Jew merely believes to be true in their head?
No, not at all.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:39 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 12:43 amHe died young....probably of siphilis, definitely insane. That much, his biographers can tell us. But he did leave a great road map for people like Hitler, who was quite fond of Nietzsche. So he certainly had his own legacy.
I think that Hitler, as the source of evil, or as the sole emblem of it, needs to be taken off his pedestal. Really, there is far too much focus on the evil him and he functions like humanity's scapegoat. Every argument, every conversation, resolves eventually into some statement or mention of Hitler!
The one known as "hitler" was the GREATEST PERSON that ever lived. Just like ALL of 'you', ONCE WERE, ALSO.

But do NOT even attempt to ASSUME what this actually means as only thee Truly INTELLIGENT of 'you' could work it out and come to KNOW what was ACTUALLY MEANT.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:39 pm What I mean is that all states and nations, and definitely the nations that opposed Hitler and the German enterprise, all employ exactly the same tactics as did the Germans. It is not even a question of 'degree' really, though the German effort to expel the entire Jewish population of the region is unprecedented.

Who *did* this though? Let's be really really truthful: Europe did this. All the people of Europe did it. It was something like a general social will. Some part of the impetus for oppression of Jews in Europe, under those conditions, derives directly from the Christian Gospels. And if anything is *true* God Himself is a terrifying anti-Semite. (See here).

Will-to-Power

The meaning of the entire question -- these sets of assertions -- about Will to Power applies to modernity across the board. How it came about that action and movement, assertion, dominance and winning ground (the powerful will that stands behind these impulses) have come to be central as a fundamental ethic in our present, is not a doctrine invented by Nietzsche that Hitler, or anyone, could admire and emulate. The doctrine of Will to Power is really a doctrine about action in this world. That Nietzsche invented this is an absurd misunderstanding. In a certain sense what Nietzsche *saw* pulled his psyche apart. It exploded him. Nietzsche, like a biblical seer in a strange way, saw right into the depth of the issue and the problem. He saw, he prophesied, a veritable sea-change that had come to the *world*.

It is also a fact that what he saw coming is still on its way.

The Nazi Project

The Nazi project (according to Raul Hilberg in The Destruction of the European Jews) began as a banishment, not genocide. It is a false assertion that industrial gas chambers were designed and built for mass-elimination of Jews in a pre-planned project. This seems to have been Soviet propaganda. That millions of Jews were assassinated, mostly in the East, as the war deepened, this is true and even revisionists like David Irving admit this. But he also asserts (I do not know if it is true or not) that it was Nazi underlings that did most of the open, intentional killing (ie. bullet in the head). The deaths in the camps were often from starvation and disease, a *natural* result of war-conditions. Some millions died under those conditions (if my understanding is correct).

And the desire, if I can call it that, to be rid of Jews in Europe, throughout Europe, is quite literally as European as Apple Pie is to the Americans. Jewish fate is tied up in Jewish identity. Jewish identity leads, like the roads of Rome, to Jewish tragedy. Jews are in a terrible fix: God tells them of the evil that He will bring on them if the disobey and are contaminated by 'false religion' ("a snare for you") but Christianity is that snare. That is, in the minds of traditional, strict Jews (and this is as true today as in the past). Jewish fate is *in the hands of God* until Jews decide to act against that imposed Fate. Then they become Israelis . . . 😉

There is no 'happy end' in Jewish history. And Jews seem to know this (thus *Jewish depression*). How Jews wound up in Europe, why they wound up in Europe, and not in their own lands -- now that is a complex question. If you are theist: God did this to His people. The Exile fits into the horrifying predictions in Deuteronomy. We need to speak truthfully here: there is no one that wanted the Jews and in some senses today there is still no one that wants them. But here is a really curious thing: To dislike Jews has been turned into the worst possible moral sin any human being can commit. Just think it through. But we all know that dislike of Jews has appeared historically without cease, everywhere. But what happens today is that because this dislike is not tolerated and is vilified, it can do nothing but *go underground*. It is turned into a false-love, a false-respect, a false-toleration. But the underpinning dislike (or contempt, or hatred) builds up in an invisible dam. Then, the dam bursts.

No one wants the Jews

I mean this in the sense of having such a powerful minority, with such developed historical will, gain as much power as Jews have traditionally, and historically, shown themselves interested in gaining. There was a certain equilibrium attained in the Sephardic world though. But the Emancipation of Jews in Europe opened up the whole problem. The "Jewish Problem" arose then. Within Judaism this phenomenon (sets of phenomena) is knows as diaspora pathology. Meaning that the Exile that forced Jews to take up residence in Europe, and to build their networks, derived from a pathology-producing event. The question is What is the cure for this pathology? Assimilation?

This all points back, once again and in a way that will not end, to core problems within Judaism itself. Or to put it another way it is Jewish identity, in combination with historical and cultural and social factors, that lead time and again to the same recurrent problem. If you think that Jewish history is over you are likely wrong. That tragedy arrives is part-and-parcel of the system. In any case that is how it has seemed to me.

God only knows what the solution is (and that was a very bad, or a very good, joke!)

The interesting question that I often asked myself was Could a mass expulsion of a given ethnic group within a generally homogenous culture ever be *justified*? Haven't issues of this sort been the basis of civil wars and inter-national conflicts? My question of course abstract or it takes place in a domain outside of the *real*. Can you imagine a 'movement' within America (for example) to expel, say, the more or less 20 million Mesoamericans that entered the US illegally, as part of a project to *protect* American culture? What if France expelled its Muslim population? What if things get to that point? (And these tensions are developing).

Does it matter if Nietzsche simply broke down, or had syphilis, of cancer of the brain? Do we retrospect a man's work and achievement by considering how he died and through that to invalidate his work? I do not see how Nietzsche can be got around. To dismiss him as someone not serious, and even as someone who misunderstood Christianity (or his own Christian self) seems a substantial error. It seems to me that one either confronts Nietzsche and chooses to resolve him, in one way or another, or one can do nothing else but put him aside without consideration.

These are just some thoughts that I have had as I have (tried to) examine these issues, but also tried to see things truthfully, not through contrived lenses.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

henry quirk wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:28 pm
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:48 pmBeyond that... there is more.
you say such things often, but you never get around to describin' what that more actually is that lies beyond

it's all very abstract and nebulous and, mebbe, safe
This is because the 'ego' here k own as "lacewing" is just still trying to control and reign with its stories. "it" makes these stories up so that "it" can feel more safe and secure. This is how these human being egos work.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:33 pm
henry quirk wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:28 pm
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:48 pmBeyond that... there is more.
you say such things often, but you never get around to describin' what that more actually is that lies beyond

it's all very abstract and nebulous and, mebbe, safe
I've described all kinds of ways that there is more (and different) than what you (or someone else) may be claiming. I'm trying to show that beliefs are limited and contrived by man, which creates the prison/box he lives in and builds onto and defines himself with. Neither does such reflect any kind of greater/broader potential he can access or tune into. He is simply king of his castle -- and how true can that be?
And it is your OWN contrived and limited 'beliefs' also "lacewing" that are OBVIOUSLY limiting 'you' to what thee ACTUAL Truth IS.
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:33 pm It's not difficult to notice the diversity of views/claims/beliefs which work in so many ways. Perhaps what’s challenging is to consider the implications of that: there is clearly vast potential for our lives and our thinking, individually and collectively. So why do so many people rigidly lock-in to such obviously limited viewpoints/beliefs?
'you' could ask "your"'self' this also "lacewing" as it is 'you' who is HOLDING FIRM BELIEFS here, and which are VERY LIMITING indeed.
Lacewing wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:33 pm Because it is serving them, yes? If we're not choosing to be served in such a way, might we be more conscious and self-directive in exploring beyond that? What might that reveal? Does it matter? Or might it obviously be worth exploring beyond where we are?
You ask all these questions as though do not apply to you but ONLY apply to "others", which is staggering to watch and observe here especially considering just how CLOSED you Truly ARE because of the VERY LIMITING BELIEFS you STICK with.
Age
Posts: 10958
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:38 pm
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:06 pm But no Jew, no practicing Jew, believes that they had ever abandoned God.
To obey HaShem is a matter decided by HaShem. One's belief about the adequacy of one's own religiosity could not be more irrelevant than it is.

A man may be sincere...and sincerely wrong..


Just LOOK AT what "Immanuel can" does for an example. "Immanuel can" sincerely BELIEVES IN God. But "Immanuel can" could not be MORE sincerely Wrong about what God IS
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:38 pm
...to cease being a Jew generally ends the Jewish Problem...

Actually, the opposite was true.

You could ask any number of Holocaust survivors, and they will tell you the same: the most remarkable feature of the Nazis was their complete implacabillity. There was literally nothing a Jewish person could do, no gesture of solidarity with the Germans, no betrayal of his own people, no denial of his own faith, that would induce the Nazis to be propitious or to care for a Jewish life. You couldn't make yourself useful to them...never useful enough not to be shot, beaten or gassed.

____________________________
(I assume that you know that the term HaShem [the word] is a replacement so that G-- is not vainly referred to?
Not quite.

It's a Jewish term, translating as "the Name" (ie. the name of God, the reputation of the One True God). And yes, it's partly a coinage they prefer in order to avoid saying "God" or even "YHWH," (sometimes pronounced, "Yahweh," which has been unfortunately anglicized as "Jehovah"). Jewish people have a curious fear of the Name itself...as if it is too holy for them to pronounce...which would suggest an uneasy relationship with the Divine, would it not?

As a Christian, I simply speak of "God," of "the Lord," of "my Father," or of "Jesus Christ the Messiah," or "my Lord." But I share the Jewish concern that His Name and reputation should be honoured in this world. So I embrace Hebraisms like YHWH, and the honourific HaShem as well. It is the same God of Whom we speak...even when they do not know it. But I feel a love and have a familiarity with the Lord that seems to frighten them...

Not me. He is my Father. He loves me. And a child is not terrified of a good father, and does not fear to speak his name.
Post Reply