"I think we should throw those books in a fire"

[Gondwanaland]

Do you have to teach a child to lie? No. (Just the opposite, right)?

I think you underestimate how much children learn by observation.

Does the child know it is doing something wrong when it tells a lie? Yes.

When we teach them such, yes.

All people have a conscience. (Granted some have "seared" theirs by ignoring that "inner voice" one too many times).
Con meaning with.
Science meaning knowledge.
So all people sin (err) with knowledge. Where does this knowledge of what is morally right and wrong come from? It is God speaking to them and a conscience only has to do with morals what is wrong and what is right.
This is how I understand objective morality. We all know what is morally right and wrong without it being taught to us by any human being.

You posit that it is evidence of God speaking to them. But have no evidence that God exists.

[rogue06]

The Jews were not subject to racist treatment by Rome before Christianity and they had special status in Egypt under the Ptolemies which may been the cause of, or added to, Egyptian hostility.

Sources please.

FWIU, it was more of a mixed bag. In fact, from your favorite source:

a74954f0-fdeb-4c6d-828a-1e4a211de0b5.jpg

That opening paragraph is an eye-opener, wouldn't you say?

It has been argued that European antisemitism has its roots in Roman policy

Prepare for high winds as H_A begins her frantic and furious hand waving routine

[rogue06]

Being mostly a reader on this forum and not a responder, I do not wish to constantly limit myself to cheerleading, but I have really enjoyed reading this thread and in particular MM's responses to HA's! (I am sure not even very deep down she has too! )

Are you trying to make Gondwanaland jealous?

[CivilDiscourse]

You have misread what I wrote [again].

I never wrote that racism did not exist in the Roman world, I illustrated that it was not enshrined in societal mores to prevent certain races or peoples from achieving status or position.

And such racism isn't "enshrined" in the societal mores of the USA either. We can tell people that, and our problems will be over!

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

In short, he attempted to stamp out Judaism.

This was a political move against groups in Jerusalem. There were Jews living elsewhere at the time.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Congratulations! You've proved that Racism doesn't exist in the United States. After all, if it existed there's no way a mixed heritage black man could rise to become the president of the USA.

You have misread what I wrote [again].

I never wrote that racism did not exist in the Roman world, I illustrated that it was not enshrined in societal mores to prevent certain races or peoples from achieving status or position.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

That hardly addresses the issue of Jews being subjected to racist treatment long before Christianity existed, a matter which has satisfactorily been confirmed. Racism is what it is, and extends from times as far back as records go. It is not a recent development, nor a uniquely European conduct, nor yet a uniquely Christian conduct.

The Jews were not subject to racist treatment by Rome before Christianity and they had special status in Egypt under the Ptolemies which may been the cause of, or added to, Egyptian hostility.

The Temple in Jerusalem was permitted to make offerings on behalf of the Emperor - to avoid any idolatry. The Roman forces would bring aniconic standards into the city to avoid upsetting Jewish sensibilities. Pilate went against this and the ensuing protest by the Jews resulted in him removing those standards. You can read about that in both Josephus' Jewish War and his Jewish Antiquities.

The following extract is from Chapter 21 "Conclusion" from E Mary Smallwood's work The Jews Under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian. Brill, Leiden, 1976

Throughout the history of Rome's dealings with the Jews runs the thread of the toleration and protection of Judaism as a religion. In handling a racial and religious minority which would countenance neither compromise in the practice of their cult nor assimilation into their gentile environment, Rome was faced with the alternatives of suppression and toleration; and the latter carried with it the corollary of positive measures to protect the sect from molestation by gentiles, whether gentile residents in Palestine or the gentile communities with which Diaspora settlements were liable to be at odds. Judaism as a cult fulfilled the Roman criteria for permitted survival: it was morally unobjectionable and, at least among the Diaspora with whom alone Rome had direct and continuous dealings as subjects when formulating her Jewish policy in the first century BCE , politically innocuous.


Rome therefore made the sensible and generous choice of a policy of toleration, and pursued it with almost complete consistency during the period of the pagan empire, despite the vicissitudes of her political relations with the Jews both in Palestine and elsewhere. One of the
earliest episodes recorded of Rome's relations with the Diaspora concerns the exemption from the ban on the export of precious metals from the empire granted in favour of the Jewish Temple tax, a concession followed shortly by the exemption of the Jews from Roman military service. The charter of Jewish religious liberty formulated by Julius Caesar and confirmed, with extensions, by Augustus, gave Judaism the status of a religio licita throughout the empire, a status which it was to retain basically unaltered for three centuries, except during the last few years of Hadrian's reign.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

and?

it doesn't need to be "wndemic" to exist you brainless wonder.
I didn't make sweeping statements. I stated that anti-semitism existed and was acted on. Any historian worth their degree knows this.

and now you move on to braindead strawman arguments. Get a life girl.



I repeat again: antisemitism existed and was acted on toward Jews in harmful ways long before Christianity existed. Your attempts to insist otherwise only further show your claimed credentials are a load of hogwash.

So, according to you anti-Semitism as we now understand that term, was to be found within societies throughout the Graeco-Roman world?

Have I understood you correctly?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You miss the point that the antagonism was mutual.

If a province rises up in revolt, to describe that as antagonism seems something of an understatement.

[Esther]

what are "the laws"? What does that refer to? Try phrasing it a sensible manner. Are you asking me if societies have created laws against murder?
[/lquote]

The heavens declare the glory of God and the skies proclaim His handiwork.

Yeah yeah, and every amazing bowl of pasta declares and proves the might and power of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. [/QUOTE]

Grrr thought you were cleverer than this Gondwanaland!

Do you have to teach a child to lie? No. (Just the opposite, right)?
Does the child know it is doing something wrong when it tells a lie? Yes.

All people have a conscience. (Granted some have "seared" theirs by ignoring that "inner voice" one too many times).
Con meaning with.
Science meaning knowledge.
So all people sin (err) with knowledge. Where does this knowledge of what is morally right and wrong come from? It is God speaking to them and a conscience only has to do with morals what is wrong and what is right.
This is how I understand objective morality. We all know what is morally right and wrong without it being taught to us by any human being.

[Esther]

Fair enough. Let it be understood that you kicked someone out because they requested you make a good faith effort at answering a question before they went down your flowery path.

Of course if the mods Sparko or rogue06 deem this request to essentially be frivilous, I'll be back.

lol

[Esther]

First of all, you declared that objective morality doesn't exist. That premise can only lead to one conclusion: Anything goes. As you yourself have said, if morality is subjective, then who can say what is good and proper? It's in the eye of the beholder, right?

Second, I don't much care what other groups who wave the Christian flag might advocate, because I have no obligation to defend their beliefs. I only need defend mine.

Finally, you claim that it is up to each person to decide for himself what he reads. Are you suggesting, then, that children should be given unrestricted access to sexually explicit material, leaving it up to them whether or not to read it?

Being mostly a reader on this forum and not a responder, I do not wish to constantly limit myself to cheerleading, but I have really enjoyed reading this thread and in particular MM's responses to HA's! (I am sure not even very deep down she has too! )

[Cow Poke]

Learn to read your prof and it's an easy A.

Yup, and I always aced those essay tests, cause all you had to do was write a bunch of nonsense. The Prof thought it was genius.

[tabibito]

The Jews were not singled out as one group for vilification and persecution across the ancient Hellenised world as they were by the later Christian world.

You miss the point that the antagonism was mutual.

[rogue06]

We can only wish.

Another lover's quarrel brewing?