homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » The "boycott, divestment, sanction" movement against Israel - is it wrong? (Page 7)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: The "boycott, divestment, sanction" movement against Israel - is it wrong?
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In other words, as I said earlier, despite saying that Israel can in theory be criticised, anyone who does so will be met with various ad-hom non-arguments and refusal to engage.

Y'know, I suspect that Palestinians whose day to day activities, like, I don't know, getting life-saving cancer treatment and what not are frequently made impossible by Israel's policies consider that for them, these are pretty urgent ongoing issues as well.

[ 31. October 2016, 11:43: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17698 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Can I also add, by the way, how interesting it is that those more inclined to support Israel have a tendency to conflate Israeli with Jew?

My argument is not with Jews. It is with Israel.

And they make veiled accusations of anti-Semitism whilst they are conflating the two. Indeed, one is inclined to think the conflating is intentional to enable them to flog the anti-semitism line against Israel's critics.

[ 31. October 2016, 11:46: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17698 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Are there any measures taken by the Israelis against the Palestinians that are in your view justified, but which wouldn't be justified if the Shoah hadn't happened?

I am interested neither in lecturing Israel's Jews, nor indulging in tutorial- room hypotheticals with what, for them, are very real and urgent ongoing issues.
A better place for this discussion.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7178 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Though, when the Israeli government pursues policies with clear similarities to those of the German government between 1933-45 then the irony of that should be mentioned.

I'm for the Jewish people having a safe homeland. I also think that *everyone* there should be safe.

And, much as I hate to say it, I do sometimes worry that they're considering The Palestinian Question.

And the evidence for the latter concern is?

The major drivers of Israeli policy, AFAICS, are a general awareness that some sort of settlement would be a good idea fatally vitiated by a (not wholly unjustified) scepticism about the good faith of the Palestinian leadership and the necessity of winning nationalist and settler votes in order to win elections. Only Sharon could pull Israel out of Gaza in the way he did; not even Sharon could have pulled the same trick twice with the West Bank. And given Israeli full spectrum military dominance over the Palestinians and the inability of anyone in the wider Muslim or Arab world to constitute any kind of threat that would make the question of peace urgent the status quo, inevitably, prevails. To claim, as Kaplan Corday and Jamat, have done that Israeli attitudes towards Arabs are in no way characterised by racism is dishonest but, to my mind, the nearest analogy is British attitudes to Ireland where a guilty consciousness that the success and freedom of one community have been largely purchased at the expense of another is mitigated by the conviction that the losing side lack vital moral qualities possessed by the winners.

Incidentally, I don't think that the Holocaust is the red herring in this debate that others think it is. There was a great deal of churn among the early Zionist settlers with people coming in whilst others decided that the whole thing was a bad idea and moving onto better things. This ended sharply in 1933 when you know who came into power and the creation of a Jewish state gained a fair degree of moral impetus in the 1940s when it became apparent that European Jews were being murdered in large numbers. By 1945 there were large numbers of displaced persons of Jewish origin and they had only one place to go. When the breakdown of British control over the Mandate of Palestine became apparent, it also became apparent that the Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine, was going to have to take steps to defend itself from the Arab League. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to think that an Arab victory in 1948 would not have been good news for the Jews of Palestine, nor to see how the first successful Jewish feat of arms since the days of Judas Maccabeus must have felt to the Jewish people at that juncture. If anti-Semitism was the Voldemort of Jewish history, then Israel was "the boy who lived". There were two Jewish communities in the 1940s, one which trusted itself to the good will of the nations and one which defended itself by it's own strength of arms. This, I think, is at the root of Israeli attitudes to the peace process. Rationally, some sort of settlement which works for both peoples is a good idea, emotionally, a sense of being a beleaguered community who, in the final analysis, can only depend on themselves - hardly, it may be added, a view without historical basis - tends not to incline one to look for internationally backed peace processes as a guarantee of safety and freedom.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There have been some interesting psychological analyses of Israeli racism, along the lines of the oppressed yearning to oppress, or the victim becoming the tyrant. Interesting, but impossible to prove, I would think. But some victims of abuse tend to abuse others, as a means of re-enactment.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9702 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There have been some interesting psychological analyses of Israeli racism, along the lines of the oppressed yearning to oppress, or the victim becoming the tyrant. Interesting, but impossible to prove, I would think. But some victims of abuse tend to abuse others, as a means of re-enactment.

Except that Israel is settled mostly by people not directly affected by the event which created the country.
Except that having been abused is a reason, but not an excuse to abuse others.
I am not saying you are trying to excuse such behaviour, but the line of reasoning you use often is.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17082 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There have been some interesting psychological analyses of Israeli racism, along the lines of the oppressed yearning to oppress, or the victim becoming the tyrant. Interesting, but impossible to prove, I would think. But some victims of abuse tend to abuse others, as a means of re-enactment.

Except that Israel is settled mostly by people not directly affected by the event which created the country.
Except that having been abused is a reason, but not an excuse to abuse others.
I am not saying you are trying to excuse such behaviour, but the line of reasoning you use often is.

Is it? I've spent my working life encouraging abused people not to re-enact their abuse. It's hard work, as it's quite tempting to reverse roles.

Interesting point about people not affected; I would think that a country can be deeply affected by a kind of mythos, long after it happened. People say that England still yearns for empire, or the US is affected by various events, such as the Civil War, but very difficult to prove.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9702 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It tends to be 'religious' Jews who object to 'holocaust' since it means 'a burnt offering'.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23073 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by lilbuddha:

quote:
Except that Israel is settled mostly by people not directly affected by the event which created the country.
Most of the earliest citizens of Israel were Mitteleuropean Jews. They were either survivors of the holocaust or got out earlier. Of the ones who got out earlier pretty much all of them would have left behind families and communities which were exterminated. The exception would have been the small number of Jews indigenous to Palestine, with a semi-exception for the Jews driven out of the Arab lands in retaliation for the expulsion of the Palestinians. Hence, the self-identity of Israel as a community gathered together as a response to anti-semitism.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Fair analysis from my POV Callan:
quote:

"Rationally, some sort of settlement which works for both peoples is a good idea,

One that massively, fairly compensates the Palestinians for an alien invasion and the irreversible formation of an alien state, all by the UN.
quote:

emotionally, a sense of being a beleaguered community who, in the final analysis, can only depend on themselves
-
hardly, it may be added, a view without historical basis
-

Aye, we've all done it.
quote:

tends not to incline one to look for internationally backed peace processes as a guarantee of safety and freedom."

Israel will not. We must. It's the only emotionally intelligent thing to do. The West must ransom Israeli security = Palestinians blood and our own with tribute, compensation to the Palestinians. There are twelve million. $10K each per year: $120 Bn. The 4.4 million in Gaza and the West Bank at least: $44 Bn. Roughly a quarter of Israel's per capita GDP. They currently get 8% of that if that.

The Western signatories for partition AND the UK to pay according to GDP.

Put our money where our mouths were.

A rockets fired from Palestine in to Israel hold the flow.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Can I also add, by the way, how interesting it is that those more inclined to support Israel have a tendency to conflate Israeli with Jew?

My argument is not with Jews. It is with Israel.

And they make veiled accusations of anti-Semitism whilst they are conflating the two. Indeed, one is inclined to think the conflating is intentional to enable them to flog the anti-semitism line against Israel's critics.

The problem is that the conflation is both reasonable and unreasonable at the same time. Whether we like it or not, Jews and the country they inhabit in the middle east is special. And is more special than other countries within the history of the world. And The Meme which inspires other nations, whether the shining city on a hill, Jerusalam in this fair land, the march of the Boers, the new Rome in Moscow, and the search for various Holy Grails.
Posts: 11159 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Incidentally, I don't think that the Holocaust is the red herring in this debate that others think it is.

I think it's a red herring in the context of a thread which is about consumer boycotts in response to perceived current-day Israeli abuses.

If one is to answer the question "Why build the wall across Palestinian land instead of along the Green Line?", then a sensible response will refer to the tradeoff between security and freedom and how the wall achieves this. And if the line of the wall can be justified on these grounds, then there's no need to refer to the Holocaust.

The only way, AFAICS, in which the Holocaust can be brought into such an argument is if one is really saying something on the lines of "Well the location of the wall isn't really justified, but you can excuse the Jews for being extra-cautious on the basis of their racial trauma", which seems to me problematic for a number of reasons.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7178 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well now, if the thread had confined itself to that question, I would agree with you. But as we appear to have ranged further and discussed whether or not the foundation of Israel is a "live issue" and to what extent the Jews need or deserve their own state, inevitably, the circumstances of its foundation assert themselves.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The rebuke is well made. But even *I* haven't claimed that the Holocaust is a red herring in the context of the foundation of the state of Israel.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7178 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think this whole thread - not that this is unique to the Ship of Fools - suffers from what the philosopher Miranda Fricker terms Testimonial Injustice. In Fricker's terms Testimonial Injustice is what occurs when, say, a black person's claim of police brutality is ignored because the jury choose to trust the police, rather than the evidence. I think that, by and large, the pro-Palestinian side downplay Anti-Semitism, current and historical and Palestinian, Arab and Muslim hostility to Israel. I also think that the pro-Israel side tend to underplay the injustices done to the Palestinians and the existence of Israeli racism against the Palestinians. I incline loosely, on the Ship, to the pro Israel side partly because we are a minority and partly because you'd have to be the late Yasser Arafat to wish the cause of Israel to be left to the tender mercies of Jamat and Kaplan Corday. But my basic view is that the situation is a complete 'mare and that the most necessary response from those not involved is, to invoke Anatole France, pity and irony and not uncritical engagement on either side.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
you'd have to be the late Yasser Arafat to wish the cause of Israel to be left to the tender mercies of Kaplan Corday

Golly, yes.

Good point.

Old Yasser would have been euphoric hearing someone defend Israel's right to existence and security.

Posts: 3234 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
you'd have to be the late Yasser Arafat to wish the cause of Israel to be left to the tender mercies of Kaplan Corday

Golly, yes.

Good point.

Old Yasser would have been euphoric hearing someone defend Israel's right to existence and security badly.

I fixed your post.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
you'd have to be the late Yasser Arafat to wish the cause of Israel to be left to the tender mercies of ... Kaplan Corday

Golly, yes.

Good point.

Old Yasser would have been euphoric hearing someone defend Israel's right to existence and security badly.

I fixed your post.

Me too.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:


As you know, pareidolia means seeing patterns which aren't there. Postmodernism identifies them, strips them away as far as it can, although, of course, that is logically impossible as the observer's share is enculturated in every word and thought. You are objecting to there being observers' shares - narratives, stories, stuff we make up - as they are what we bring to all that we observe. You are objecting to perceptual reality.

Using postmodern deconstruction is the most powerful tool for identifying inescapable pareidolia in textual analysis.

Seeing the modern world in two and a half thousand year old texts is extreme pareidolia. [/QUOTE]

In your HO perhaps. To me, having considered the PM view carefully, the denial of objective reality because of the inability to dissociate from a set of preconceptions is a mere ploy that excuses behaviour and divorces it from moral absolutes.

All moral choices become subject to circumstance and pretty well anything can be said to be justified depending on circumstances.

The other thing is the way you can use it to say all metanarratives are human creations and all truth stories are in fact fictions we invent as we need them. This is a lie that will land you in confusion. It plays into the hands of atheists.

I am not in any way denying the fallibility of perceptual reality as you assert. I simply believe we have a ruler to measure it by. The scriptures.

My view of Scriptural texts sees prophecy as God reaching into time. Objectivity is ensured by his predictions that are measurable against history.
one eg is the incarnation. Isaiah said a virgin would conceive and 600 or so years later a virgin did.

Another example is the many predictions in the OT that God would restore the Jews to their original real estate promised to Abraham..precisely what we have historically seen since 1948 and mightily in spite of world opinion. The UN has turned flips to undo Israel. Five wars against superior forces have been won by them. QED. We cannot explain the survival of the Jew apart from the supernatural intervention of a sovereign God.

The Bible talks a lot about judgement and it is certainly not a popular idea these days. But what if one day after this life when we all all stand before him we have to answer for the culture of denial?

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 2978 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
you'd have to be the late Yasser Arafat to wish the cause of Israel to be left to the tender mercies of Kaplan Corday

Golly, yes.

Good point.

Old Yasser would have been euphoric hearing someone defend Israel's right to existence and security.

From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:

quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States.
Seems like it doesn't matter if you try to be conciliatory or not, if the people you're trying to reconcile with want to push you into the Med.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63200 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

Originally posted by Martin60:

As you know, pareidolia means seeing patterns which aren't there. Postmodernism identifies them, strips them away as far as it can, although, of course, that is logically impossible as the observer's share is enculturated in every word and thought. You are objecting to there being observers' shares - narratives, stories, stuff we make up - as they are what we bring to all that we observe. You are objecting to perceptual reality.

Using postmodern deconstruction is the most powerful tool for identifying inescapable pareidolia in textual analysis.

Seeing the modern world in two and a half thousand year old texts is extreme pareidolia.

quote:

In your HO perhaps.

No. Whatever that is.
quote:

To me, having considered the PM view carefully, the denial of objective reality because of the inability to dissociate from a set of preconceptions is a mere ploy that excuses behaviour and divorces it from moral absolutes.

Objective reality is denied by reality. By physics. The only alternative to which is magic. What behaviour am I excusing and what moral absolutes am I divorced from?
quote:

All moral choices become subject to circumstance and pretty well anything can be said to be justified depending on circumstances.

What has this vague nonsense got to do with anything?
quote:

The other thing is the way you can use it to say all metanarratives are human creations and all truth stories are in fact fictions we invent as we need them. This is a lie that will land you in confusion. It plays into the hands of atheists.

I don't see the connection. At all. What other thing? All metanarratives are human creations by definition, all stories that claim to be true, to contain truth, above which metarratives are created too. We invent everything we think, say and do. We make it all up. As a Christian I have one clear exception.

Where's the lie? What is the lie? What is the truth? That there are metanarratives that are not human creations? Which? That there are stories that claim to be true which are? Which? Apart from the One of course.
quote:

I am not in any way denying the fallibility of perceptual reality as you assert. I simply believe we have a ruler to measure it by. The scriptures.

They are a denial of perceptual reality.
quote:

My view of Scriptural texts sees prophecy as God reaching into time. Objectivity is ensured by his predictions that are measurable against history.
one eg is the incarnation. Isaiah said a virgin would conceive and 600 or so years later a virgin did.

A universal trope.

Marduk? Horus? Hatsheput? Amenhotep III? Melchizedek? The Buddha? Qi? Laozi? Abaoji? Perseus? Apollo? Leto? Hermes? Dionysus? Zagreus? Persephone? Athena? Aphrodite? Mithras? Krishna? Karna? Drona? Rama? Alexander? The Ptolemies? And the Saviour of the world himself of course, Augustus and the other Caesars? Isa? Our very own Quetzalcoatl? Bodonchar? Deganawida?

Objectively, truthfully, there is no mention of a virgin giving birth in Isaiah of course.

Especially 600 or so years later.
quote:

Another example is the many predictions in the OT that God would restore the Jews to their original real estate promised to Abraham..precisely what we have historically seen since 1948 and mightily in spite of world opinion. The UN has turned flips to undo Israel. Five wars against superior forces have been won by them. QED. We cannot explain the survival of the Jew apart from the supernatural intervention of a sovereign God.

Why are you ignoring so much of the historicity of the Bible?
quote:

The Bible talks a lot about judgement and it is certainly not a popular idea these days. But what if one day after this life when we all all stand before him we have to answer for the culture of denial?

What will your answer be?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:

quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States.
Seems like it doesn't matter if you try to be conciliatory or not, if the people you're trying to reconcile with want to push you into the Med.
It's more nuanced than that. The PLO was marginalized at the time. It was operating out of Tunisia. It could only gain any entry to talks brokered by the USA if it accepted the UN resolution #242 which recognized Israel's right to exist. The PLO or Jordan was going to lead the talks, and Arafat didn't want the PLO to become irrelevant if Jordan represented the Palestinians. So Arafat negotiated with the USA for wording that might satisfy America. The 1985 prior PLO statement didn't quite measure up. Once the PLO accepted the resolution, Israel's right to exist and renounced terrorism, the USA went forward to facilitate talks, knowing that it had forced the issue with Arafat. The PLO however didn't behave as it as promised. The USA didn't denounce this, but Israel did.

I frankly don't think the PLO was serious, and while Israel may not have been either, it is not reasonable to blame just Israel and/or the USA.

Posts: 11159 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Who else? A man convinced against his will ... the Palestinians certainly aren't to blame in this matter apart from how they brokenly respond to being displaced by the West and the Soviets.

If Britain had fallen to the Nazis I'd have expected nothing less and a lot more, ANYTHING to defeat those bastards. To get my country back.

Now barely repudiated in Christ and still viscerally felt.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
]

From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:
quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States. [/QUOTE

How cynical of Israel to doubt the word of someone with such a record of ethics and integrity.
Posts: 3234 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
]

From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:
quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States. [/QUOTE

How cynical of Israel to doubt the word of someone with such a record of ethics and integrity.

Unfortunately, you don't get to make peace with people of ethics and integrity. You get to make it between your enemy and yourself.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Seems like it doesn't matter if you try to be conciliatory or not, if the people you're trying to reconcile with want to push you into the Med.

Not sure whom you are talking about here.

It was Israel's opponents who first talked about pushing the Jews into the sea.

Posts: 3234 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
Not sure whom you are talking about here.

It was Israel's opponents who first talked about pushing the Jews into the sea.

Israel just wants to push the native non-Jewish population of Palestine across the Jordan.
Posts: 2858 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yeah! Damn Palestinians should go back to where they didn't come from!

[ 01. November 2016, 20:40: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17082 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
]

From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:
quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States. [/QUOTE

How cynical of Israel to doubt the word of someone with such a record of ethics and integrity.

Wise to mention also that he was on the Arabic Radio stations pretty soon after assuring his followers that he was only buying time, using a strategic lie for advantage justified by Muhummad, that in fact their would be no peace EVER with the Jewish state.


quote:
Martin 60: there is no mention of a virgin giving birth in Isaiah of course.
Perhaps you forgot Isaiah 7:14
"A virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel."

Incidentally, as this is a tangent I will not be posting further on it.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 2978 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Seems like it doesn't matter if you try to be conciliatory or not, if the people you're trying to reconcile with want to push you into the Med.

Not sure whom you are talking about here.

It was Israel's opponents who first talked about pushing the Jews into the sea.

You're not sure that the Palestinians were driven out of their land, to ghettos by the sea, by aliens alienated and driven from the West? And after that expressed the desire for that to be reversed?

How strange.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
]

From the New York Times, December 8, 1988:
quote:
STOCKHOLM, Dec. 7— Yasir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States. [/QUOTE

How cynical of Israel to doubt the word of someone with such a record of ethics and integrity.

Wise to mention also that he was on the Arabic Radio stations pretty soon after assuring his followers that he was only buying time, using a strategic lie for advantage justified by Muhummad, that in fact their would be no peace EVER with the Jewish state.


quote:
Martin 60: there is no mention of a virgin giving birth in Isaiah of course.
Perhaps you forgot Isaiah 7:14
"A virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel."

Incidentally, as this is a tangent I will not be posting further on it.

I didn't realise that Isaiah was Anglic! Wow, over two thousand years before Early Modern English existed.

If he'd have been Hebraic, he'd have used the word 'betulah' for virgin wouldn't he?

Isaiah 7 describes a prophecy for King Ahaz in 753 BC. The writer of The Gospel of Matthew took the liberty of arrogating that for the purposes of validating the Incarnation myth, using standards that no modern person possibly could, that are not acceptable in any modern discourse for the past 400 years. Even pre-modern, pre-scientific, pre-Enlightenment thinkers like Aquinas couldn't use such utterly outmoded 'reasoning'.

The past is another country. They do things differently there. It's IMPOSSIBLE even to visit.

The use of methods we have all long since evolved beyond in the educated West in all other discourses, to justify present abuse, is completely irrational, utterly invalid, as bizarre as witchcraft.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
teddybear
Shipmate
# 7842

 - Posted      Profile for teddybear   Author's homepage   Email teddybear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:

Given that Jews have lived in the land for millennia and have every right to be there; that their nation has every right to existence and security; that there was a realistic attempt to exterminate them within living memory; and that they are currently surrounded by lunatics who would like to exterminate them on racial and religious grounds, it is unbelievable what an open, liberal and progressive society Israel is.

That's ok then - we'll arbitrarily decide tomorrow that people who haven't lived in the land you live on for nearly a thousand years are entitled to it and move you out, bulldoze your home, delegitimise your state, force you to go to live in an open-air prison and make your life uncomfortable.

And then we'll see if you want to call that state you never asked for a liberal democracy.

Millennia? Really? And what about the Palestinians? They lived there too for millennia and a couple thousand years more than the most of the Jewish folks who moved back in the 1940's. Modern Israel is an artificial state just like Iraq, Iran and most of the Middle East that was set up by the Brits to keep things all tidy and organized over there. And most of Israel's problems have been caused by their own actions from the first time the Zionists started moving in under the Ottomans. Killing innocent civilians, stealing homes, farms and businesses, bulldozing villages, you name it. And you wonder why they throw stones and make raids? They are contained on reservations like America did her Indians and then wonder why they fight back? Israel has never treated anyone who wasn't Jewish as an equal partner in building their country. And that includes white Christians from around the world. They like you no more than they do the Palestinians, they just get in more trouble when they are open about it, unlike the way they can be the Palestinians...Christian or Muslim.
Posts: 475 | From: Topeka, Kansas USA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Martin 60:
I didn't realise that Isaiah was Anglic! Wow, over two thousand years before Early Modern English existed.

If he'd have been Hebraic, he'd have used the word 'betulah' for virgin wouldn't he?

Isaiah 7 describes a prophecy for King Ahaz in 753 BC. The writer of The Gospel of Matthew took the liberty of arrogating that for the purposes of validating the Incarnation myth, using standards that no modern person possibly could, that are not acceptable in any modern discourse for the past 400 years. Even pre-modern, pre-scientific, pre-Enlightenment thinkers like Aquinas couldn't use such utterly outmoded 'reasoning'.

The past is another country. They do things differently there. It's IMPOSSIBLE even to visit.

The use of methods we have all long since evolved beyond in the educated West in all other discourses, to justify present abuse, is completely irrational, utterly invalid, as bizarre as witchcraft.

To the Jew the sign of a supernatural birth goes back to that of Isaac. To a human, it goes to Genesis 3.

Regarding Is 7:14 It was not about the king at all. Two births are mentioned in the passage, one was, one was not.

The word used here is 'Almah', a word used for young woman but also used in Song of Solomon (1:3, 6:8) for Virgin. It is a normal usage for 'virgin'. Some Rabbi's contest it, notably Rashi but his motive is to discredit Jesus and his messianic claims. He also mutilates Is 53.

All the Rabbis who created the Septuagint (250 of them) translated 'Almah' as 'parthenos' Greek for virgin.. The word is rightly translated as a virginal young woman. Remember, this Is 7:14 event was a sign..like Isaac it was a supernatural sign. These Rabbis lived about 1300 years closer to the time of Isaiah than Rashi did.

Refer also to Gen 3:15. Jesus(the Messiah) was the seed of a woman ie implying he would not have a father.

Jesus entered the earth via a virgin birth. This is a foundational truth, a fact not a myth. You point out yourself that the apostles concur with the translation of virgin in the New Testament, particularly Matthew. Perhaps your dismissiveness is a trifle displaced. Can you not learn from the way THEY interpret? THEIR hermeneutic?

Martin the arrogance of your claims is frightening; you are saying that the historical writers are all superseded by modern insights? I'm speechless! Shakespeare? .

@Hosts: Apologies for tangent which If it continues I will take to Kerg.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 2978 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The ignorance in that post is frightening and completely germane to the unreasoning throughout, there is nothing tangential about that.

The prophecy to Ahaz was completely fulfilled from the next chapter.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Much more relevant would be the prophecies relating to the return of the Jewish people to the land. Since these were all given in the context of the Exile in Babylon, the question is why would anyone think they hadn't been fulfilled with Ezra and Nehemiah?

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32183 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And Jamat, Jews aren't human then?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And Jamat, where in the chapter is there another baby?

I can only find this reference which is obviously to one:

Isaiah7:14 All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign—a child shall be born to a virgin![c] And she shall call him Immanuel (meaning, “God is with us”). 15-16 By the time this child is weaned[d] and knows right from wrong, the two kings you fear so much—the kings of Israel and Syria—will both be dead.

c. Isaiah 7:14 a child shall be born to a virgin. The controversial Hebrew word used here sometimes means “virgin” and sometimes “young woman.” Its immediate use here refers to Isaiah’s young wife and her newborn son (8:1-4).

This, of course, was not a virgin birth.

God’s sign was that before this child was old enough to talk (v. 4), the two invading kings would be destroyed.

d. Isaiah 7:15 By the time this child is weaned, literally, “For before this child shall know [is old enough] to refuse evil and to choose the good . . . and [is old enough to] eat curds and honey.” the kings of Israel and Syria, implied. will both be dead, or “the lands will be deserted [of their kings].”

Bible Gateway commentary.

I can't find a translation anywhere, including directly from the Hebrew, that talks of two?

What one are you using please? Can you quote from it if you can't say?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Much more relevant would be the prophecies relating to the return of the Jewish people to the land. Since these were all given in the context of the Exile in Babylon, the question is why would anyone think they hadn't been fulfilled with Ezra and Nehemiah?

And any road, I'd be wary of any attitude that accepts it's fine to ride roughshod over normal standards of justice, decency and law because of religiously founded considerations. Does God not care about the Palestinian people? Has he got it in for them? Does God say that it's ever OK to turf people off their land and claim it for your own?

[ 02. November 2016, 10:29: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17698 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
hosting/

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Agreed.

Martin60 and Jamat, if you insist on continuing this tangent, do so elsewhere: for instance, by making the Isaiah passage the subject of a Kerygmania thread.

/hosting

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17284 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To Kerygmania

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Much more relevant would be the prophecies relating to the return of the Jewish people to the land. Since these were all given in the context of the Exile in Babylon, the question is why would anyone think they hadn't been fulfilled with Ezra and Nehemiah?

And any road, I'd be wary of any attitude that accepts it's fine to ride roughshod over normal standards of justice, decency and law because of religiously founded considerations. Does God not care about the Palestinian people? Has he got it in for them? Does God say that it's ever OK to turf people off their land and claim it for your own?
Er ...

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Much more relevant would be the prophecies relating to the return of the Jewish people to the land. Since these were all given in the context of the Exile in Babylon, the question is why would anyone think they hadn't been fulfilled with Ezra and Nehemiah?

And any road, I'd be wary of any attitude that accepts it's fine to ride roughshod over normal standards of justice, decency and law because of religiously founded considerations. Does God not care about the Palestinian people? Has he got it in for them? Does God say that it's ever OK to turf people off their land and claim it for your own?
Quite. Prophecy is a matter of interpretation. "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal", less so.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9702 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The particular example of the fulfillment of prophesy of the young woman/virgin giving birth is, of course, irrelevant to the establishment of the modern nation of Israel.

Much more relevant would be the prophecies relating to the return of the Jewish people to the land. Since these were all given in the context of the Exile in Babylon, the question is why would anyone think they hadn't been fulfilled with Ezra and Nehemiah?

Even my former cultic fellowship acknowledged the almost total historicity of the prophets. But it claimed 'duality' and more. It claimed that there were aspects of the prophecies that were messianic of Jesus' incarnation and return, in particular:

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever.

which also has no historic fulfilment, and typically ambiguously, oracularly, apocalyptically:

Isaiah 2:2
Now it will come about that
In the last days
The mountain of the house of the Lord
Will be established as the chief of the mountains,
And will be raised above the hills;
And all the nations will stream to it.

Nothing in Isaiah is fulfilled by a Jewish state three thousand years later except by the fallacy of affirming the consequent:

1.If P, then Q.
2.Q.
3.Therefore, P.

we get the error

1.If Isaiah prophecies the restoration of the Jewish state prior to Christ's return, then Isaiah is messianic.
2.Isaiah is messianic.
3.Therefore, Isaiah prophecies the restoration of the Jewish state.

[ 02. November 2016, 13:54: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by teddybear:
And most of Israel's problems have been caused by their own actions from the first time the Zionists started moving in under the Ottomans.

Including getting themselves targeted for genocide in order to further their insidious global agenda

Fiendishly cunning, those bloody Jews.

quote:
Israel has never treated anyone who wasn't Jewish as an equal partner in building their country. And that includes white Christians from around the world. They like you no more than they do the Palestinians, they just get in more trouble when they are open about it
Well, we've always known that Jews are two-faced and duplicitous and out to exploit Christians.

Look at Shylock.

Posts: 3234 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
{H/As: Don't know if this is considered part of the forbidden tangent. Sorry, if so.}

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Does God say that it's ever OK to turf people off their land and claim it for your own?

Uh, yes. In the OT, God tells/orders the Jewish people to kill all the people of certain places (kids included), and move on in. That's one reason many people hate the OT image of God, and religion in general.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18152 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
{H/As: Don't know if this is considered part of the forbidden tangent. Sorry, if so.}

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Does God say that it's ever OK to turf people off their land and claim it for your own?

Uh, yes. In the OT, God tells/orders the Jewish people to kill all the people of certain places (kids included), and move on in. That's one reason many people hate the OT image of God, and religion in general.
Indeed. This is one of many reasons that people who take these passages at face value worry me - if they'll swallow that moral repugnancy, what else are they willing to accept if someone persuades them it's God's plan?

[ 03. November 2016, 08:44: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17698 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's not their fault. Intelligent, well educated, Western protestant clergy to the highest level are trapped by such nonsense. The major three Old World denominational leaders are warmongers and homophobes because they can't move along the trajectory. It's even worse for Muslims. And Americans.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16987 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, you have a point. There's been a video floating around of a bloke flogged in Saudi for being an atheist. Plenty of condemnation, but how do you really condemn it with any consistency if your theology tells you that God will do something considerably more unspeakable to him in the hereafter?

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17698 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So basically, should Israel exist?

The 'classic' Israeli position rests on God having granted the land to Israel back in the days of Abraham. So Israel's right to the land depends essentially on covenant faithfulness to God, not just on genetics/ethnicity.

And here's the problem – if the Christian position is right, then Jesus is both King of the Jews by physical descent from David, entitling him to be the 'Anointed' (Messiah/Christ) King, and also King of the Jews as God incarnate. Faithfulness to God requires, therefore, faithfulness to Jesus. And Jews who reject Jesus are not being faithful to God, but rather are actively rejecting God. And so they cannot have a right to the land under the covenant. An 'Israel' of Jews who reject Jesus is essentially impossible – yet that seems to be exactly what the modern state attempts to be.... Hmmmmm!

In contrast, both Jews who have accepted Jesus by faith, and Gentiles who are also adopted children of Abraham through faith in Jesus, are logically entitled to the land. But paradoxically, precisely by that faith they have entered into a wider and deeper – not to mention eternal – blessing of which the physical land was only a symbol/picture/down-payment; and so Christians (of whatever ethnicity), though entitled to the land, don't need it. And indeed in the present could not lay claim to the land without contradicting the kind of kingdom Jesus told them to form, a kingdom not limited to one land but comprising all believers globally....

The above is a summary of stuff found all over the NT but particularly in the Epistle to the Hebrews....

Posts: 2149 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The religious angle is bullshit. From a religious POV, but most importantly, the world id not Jewish or Christian. Beliefs of any particular religious group should not trump that of others or of secular society.
If God wants a particular group to take residence in a particular place, let him speak up now.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17082 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools