Posts: 6,430
Threads: 204
Joined: Feb 2003
One God, who was indeed The God of the Ancient Hebrews. A fundamentalis rabbi who brought the same message to remind everyone about "the basics." I find it hard to reconcile your assertion with the Creator in the Book of Genesis, which is a Canonical Hebraic Text, since "the other Gods" were, as I recall, all denounced as "false" gods, but I am now reaching a bit on detail. I'll stop there.
You made a great post a year or so back, one I loved, about "people get stupid, wise goes man into the desert, emerges with wisdoom" rinse and repeat from Moses Jesus and Mohamed. It's all the same God. If one God is God, it is monotheism.
The three in one is still One, and I'd say that element of dogma hardly supports Christians as being not monotheistic, or even haphazardly so. However, I have a neighbor who is a Jehovah's Witness who will I am sure be happy to discuss that with me the next time I am damn fool enough to bring it up with him, which I am not. We have agreed to certain topics being "off the table" given our sons play together.
The Jews, the Hebrews.
You split an interesting hair, between "One God" of the Hebrews and "The Biggest God Who PWNS Your Gawd" approach, particuarly in the Old Testament context I mentioned above.
So, in 600 AD, you posit that the Hebrew's God is . . . not yet The One God? Even with Genisis still being Canonical?
I'll have to look into Judaism from that period to understand your reference. Thanks for the tip, I expect to learn something new and interesting as I explore this tangent.
Thanks, I appreciate the nudge. :)
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Posts: 3,947
Threads: 44
Joined: Feb 2003
... these are hairs.
The idea of "false gods" is rather vague; it can mean either that there is a true (existing) god, or a true (correct) god. Since the other gods were either non-existent or non-deserving of worship, the Jews were either way monotheists since they only worshipped one god. I'm not sure if it denies the possibility of other gods; one disadvantage of that interpretation is that it means that, in the Jewish theology, only Jews have a god, whereas everyone else only has lies. Since it's a non-proselytizing religion, that means most people are just plain screwed. That's a fine idea, for a single ethnic group, the chosen people. But Christianity and Islam have much more sophisiticated mechanisms for incorporating other groups, and that bodes well for social organization, and therefore for civilization on a large scale.
I seriously disagree about Christianity. The whole package was sold to the Romans on precisely the idea that it wasn't really "pure" monotheism, but retained many of the ritualistic ideas of the old systems. So, while the message of Jesus Christ (the wisdom of the desert, as I said way back when in a more lucid moment) was fundamentally Monotheistic, in the same sense as Islam, it hedged its bets very early on, especially in the Catholic tradition. Later versions returned closer to the original Monotheism, but those didn't arise until a millenium after Islam.
Islam, on the other hand, is unquestionably a pure Monotheism. There is only one god, as every Muslim hears every day, over and over. He had no son, no saints, nothing. Just him. All manifestations were simply aspects of him; his Koran is a part of him just as is his Wrath or his Mercy. Mohammed is no more than a dude through whom it was transmitted. Allah is lord of all people; other religions are merely poorer reflections of his glory.
Not that I believe a word of it, of course. But it is philosophically cleaner, a more refined version of the earlier concept.
Jester
02-25-2008, 09:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-28-2008, 02:15 PM by Griselda.)
Edited
-Griselda
Posts: 3,947
Threads: 44
Joined: Feb 2003
Quote:What do you think of Obadiah Shoher's views on the Middle East conflict? One can argue, of course, that Shoher is ultra-right, but his followers are far from being a marginal group. Also, he rejects Jewish moralistic reasoning - that's alone is highly unusual for the Israeli right. And he is very influential here in Israel. So what do you think?
1) Is there some reason for this exercise in thread necromancy, other than to give me a nostalgic walk down memory lane?
2) Is there some reason this post is identical to one posted at http://foolmoon.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?u...t&Number=258961 , http://forum.sonshi.com/showthread.php?threadid=2605 ,
and I'm sure a dozen other places?
3) Is there any reason at all we shouldn't instaban you for spamming?
Oh, and in answer to your question? "Certified crackpot."
-Jester
Posts: 3,487
Threads: 544
Joined: Apr 2010
Quote:So what do you think?
I think Jester is a very good Internet sleuth, and that you're banned.
What I can't figure out is what the goal of this particular bot is.
-Bolty
Quote:Considering the mods here are generally liberals who seem to have a soft spot for fascism and white supremacy (despite them saying otherwise), me being perma-banned at some point is probably not out of the question.
Posts: 3,947
Threads: 44
Joined: Feb 2003
Quote:I think Jester is a very good Internet sleuth, and that you're banned.
What I can't figure out is what the goal of this particular bot is.
-Bolty
I can only suspect the answer is to drum up interest in whatsisface's book.
-Jester
Posts: 1,063
Threads: 48
Joined: Feb 2003
Quote:I think Jester is a very good Internet sleuth, and that you're banned.
What I can't figure out is what the goal of this particular bot is.
-Bolty
It's search results for that particular guy. They want to make sure that their phrases come on top when somebody searches for him. Maybe I've been too quick to delete his spambots before, if you haven't seen them. I'm going to edit the content of the post so that the bot isn't able to serve its purpose here.
Why can't we all just get along
--Pete
Posts: 6,430
Threads: 204
Joined: Feb 2003
02-29-2008, 10:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-29-2008, 10:16 PM by Occhidiangela.)
Quote:It's search results for that particular guy. They want to make sure that their phrases come on top when somebody searches for him. Maybe I've been too quick to delete his spambots before, if you haven't seen them. I'm going to edit the content of the post so that the bot isn't able to serve its purpose here.
The thread title refers to a forever war, so its now and again resurfacing, like a bad bit of chili, isn't out of place. The only downside on this occasoin is the ricardo con queso who triggered this iteration of the old refrain:
"So, them Israelis and Palestinians are still killing each other? All's right with the world, situation normal."
The past four weeks' news on that front shows us that normal is those folks sustaining their blood feud, and butchering fresh meat with a monotonous regularity.
Occhi
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
|