We All Live On Stolen Land...

[Sparko]

Conquoring is stealing.

*cough*Hebrew's Promised Land*cough*

[Whateverman]

Well of course the Jews, with the Romans we instrumental in the death of Christ. Are we supposed to harm them or take revenge? How are we told to deal with our enemies Whateverman? [...]

You can go lecture your own brothers and sisters on biblical interpretation. The facts stand:

The atheist has a better moral ground by which to judge things than the Christian, because the atheist's moral ground isn't polluted by things which divinely justify persecution.

You know, if you hadn't lied about atheists and moral grounds, I never would have said anything. You're welcome to disagree with my system of morality all you want - but as soon as you lie about and demonize the group I belong to, I'll respond. Righteously.

[Cow Poke]

Conquoring is stealing.

When you are attacked from all sides, and manage to conquer the bad guys and gain some land, is that stealing?

[Cow Poke]

The atheist has a better moral ground by which to judge things than the Christian, because the atheist's moral ground isn't polluted by things which divinely justify persecution.

Maybe that sounded better in your head?

[Sparko]

Exactly.

Land disputes are never easy to solve, but if I had my wish, it'd be that the US would immediately revert whatever they legally stole back to native Americans. I know this isn't possible in a practical sense, but it seems to be the closest thing to actual "justice" I can think of in this context.

Maybe we can give them southern California. But nobody is allowed to leave. The current residents become indentured servants to the Indians to work off reparations to them.

[seer]

You can go lecture your own brothers and sisters on biblical interpretation. The facts stand:

The atheist has a better moral ground by which to judge things than the Christian, because the atheist's moral ground isn't polluted by things which divinely justify persecution.

I asked you a specific question, why are you hand waving now? And whose atheist's moral ground are you talking about? Mao's? Stalin's? Did they need divine justification to slaughter millions? That is a stupid argument Whatever...

You know, if you hadn't lied about atheists and moral grounds, I never would have said anything. You're welcome to disagree with my system of morality all you want - but as soon as you lie about and demonize the group I belong to, I'll respond. Righteously.

Lied about what? Can you show me the atheist's moral guide? Is it written down somewhere? Is your moral sense more correct or valid than Stalin's? If so why? Simply because it is yours?

[Whateverman]

Maybe we can give them southern California. But nobody is allowed to leave. The current residents become indentured servants to the Indians to work off reparations to them.

OK, I disagree with you on a bunch of issues, but this made me chuckle out loud. Thanks :)

[Whateverman]

I asked you a specific question

In order to avoid dealing with your errors, yes, you did.

[seer]

In order to avoid dealing with your errors, yes, you did.

So it is OK for you to hand wave but not me?

[Cow Poke]

OK, I disagree with you on a bunch of issues, but this made me chuckle out loud. Thanks :)

It's wrong to chuckle with somebody with whom you disagree?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Actually it was the Jewist leaders and elites that did this. There's no indication that the common Jew was involved in the plotting. (Yes, I know about the mob that chanted crucify him. I also know how easy it easy to form a mob and direct them at what you want.)

Regardless of your own opinions Matthew 27:25 employs the term λαὸς [i.e. people, group, tribe, nation] is used and that "blood libel" along with other verses found in the NT was used by the ECFs in polemical sermons and writings to libel the Jewish people as the "Christ killers". The later Christian church and its adherents would use those verses found in the NT and the writings of those ECFs to persecute and murder the Jewish people who lived among them.

The notion that the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus dead for blasphemy is merely Christian apologetics.

[seer]

The notion that the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus dead for blasphemy is merely Christian apologetics.

How do you know that?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

How do you know that?

For information:


[See Vermes, G The Passion]

[Thoughtful Monk]

Regardless of your own opinions Matthew 27:25 employs the term λαὸς [i.e. people, group, tribe, nation] is used and that "blood libel" along with other verses found in the NT was used by the ECFs in polemical sermons and writings to libel the Jewish people as the "Christ killers". The later Christian church and its adherents would use those verses found in the NT and the writings of those ECFs to persecute and murder the Jewish people who lived among them.

The notion that the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus dead for blasphemy is merely Christian apologetics.

Please note that in my post, I didn't attribute a motive or reason for the Jewish leaders wanting Jesus dead. You are imposing 'blasphemy' on to my post and I resent that.

[seer]

So to recapitulate, no Jewish law of any age suggests that a Messianic claim amounted to the crime of blasphemy[/I] [See Vermes, G The Passion]

Mark 14: the Son of the Blessed OneTHE Son of God. Not merely a son of God. Why wouldn't they see that as blasphemy, even if it is not in the strictest sense.