View Single Post
  #32 (permalink)   Report Post  
Beach Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default



usual suspect wrote:

> Skanky wrote:
>
>>>>>> I respect those that are.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't. Their diets and customs are their own business. I'm not
>>>>> Jewish,
>>>>> nor am I under their laws -- not the ones about food, not the ones
>>>>> about
>>>>> stoning children for insubordination, not the ones about stoning
>>>>> homosexuals, not any of them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Whoa, where did you hear that
>>>> one? Jews stoning children and
>>>> gays???
>>>
>>>
>>> I've read it in the Bible.

>>
>>
>> The bible is what Christians follow.

>
>
> Non-Christians also follow it, or parts of it (as the Jews accept the
> Torah -- which is part of the Bible, dummy -- and prophets).
>
>> It's a book full of a lot of violence,
>> both by man and his god. The
>> Jewish torah is the same

>
>
> The Torah is included in the Bible, dumb ass.
>
>> but just leaves out some parts,

>
>
> You must've attended the same seminary some of Karen Winter's favorite
> theologians attended.
>
>> the parts about Jesus being a messiah.

>
>
> You're in over your head, dummy. Christians point to TORAH and see Jesus
> Christ; Jews reject him _in toto_.
>
>> So if you're going to blame Jews
>> of old for abominations, blame
>> the Christians of old too. They
>> were one and the same.

>
>
> You're incredibly ignorant of Judeo-Christian history, not to mention
> theology. That doesn't exactly surprise me.
>
>> Above you refer to stoning as if it is
>> happening in present day Judaism,

>
>
> No, DUMB ASS, I was making a point most people with SOME familiarity
> with the Bible can comprehend: that the very same texts which outline
> kashrut (or kosher since you appear especially dim today) commandments
> also command stoning for a variety of offenses. IOW, why should someone
> who finds all the commands to stone homosexuals, adulterers, or
> insubordinate children objectionable insist that the peculiarities of
> dietary commands given to desert nomads 5000 years ago be practiced today?
>
>>> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey
>>> the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that,
>>> when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then
>>> shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him
>>> out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
>>> And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is
>>> stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a
>>> glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone
>>> him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from
>>> among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
>>> Deuteronomy 21:19-22

>>
>>
>> What a full-of-love book.

>
>
> Given your juvenile defiance, you're quite lucky you weren't around then.
>
>>> And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely
>>> put to death. And he that curseth his father, or his mother,
>>> shall surely be put to death.
>>> Exodus 21:15, 17

>>
>>
>> What a gentle and kind god.
>>
>>
>>> If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them
>>> have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to
>>> death. Their blood shall be upon them.
>>> Leviticus 20:13

>>
>>
>> No violent intentions by a fascist
>> god there, eh? Man sure knows
>> how to make them up.
>>
>>> And fwiw, Dreck, who's claimed before to be "part" Jewish, would have to
>>> deal with his wife and brother in similar fashion:
>>>
>>> 'The man who commits adultery with another man's wife, he who
>>> commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the
>>> adulteress, shall surely be put to death.
>>> Leviticus 20:10

>>
>>
>> Do you actually believe in this stuff?

>
>
> That's the whole deal, stupid Skank. I made a point in response to two
> ****ing idiots who called me either an anti-Semite (Bob) or "prejudiced"
> (you) on the basis of my rejection of OT dietary laws and elaboration
> that asked why Jews uphold the archaic dietary laws but none of the
> others. Those dietary laws come from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the same
> two books which told the Israelites to stone insubordinate children,
> homosexuals, adulterers, and everyone else outside of Israel. Funny how
> you now sarcastically write it's "full of love" and so on; you're a
> ****ing hypocritical asshole for impugning me on a point which you seem
> to concur. You're a blithering ditz.
>
>>> The dietary laws come from these same texts in Deuteronomy and Leviticus
>>> which prescribe stoning and hanging for various transgressions. If the
>>> rigid laws about human relationships are no longer operative, why do
>>> some Jews believe other rigid laws about diet are? THAT, stupid, was my
>>> point. As I've also noted (and you snipped):

>
>
> Why did you not apologize for calling me prejudiced when you find those
> commands at least as objectionable as I do?! Whore!!
>
>>> Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism hold that these
>>> laws are no longer binding. Most Jews in Reform Judaism have
>>> considered these laws a hindrance, rather than a facilitator, of
>>> piety; this is still the mainstream Reform position. Some parts
>>> of the Reform community have begun to move towards a more
>>> traditional position. This tradition-leaning faction agrees with
>>> mainstream Reform that the rules concerning kashrut are no
>>> longer binding, but holds that keeping kosher is an important
>>> way for people to bring holiness into their lives. Thus Jews are
>>> encouraged to consider adopting some or all of the rules of
>>> kashrut on a voluntary basis. The Reconstructionist movement
>>> advocates that its members accept some of the rules of kashrut,
>>> but does so in a non-binding fashion; their stance on kashrut is
>>> the same as the tradition-leaning wing of Reform. The different
>>> movements' positions on kashrut are reflective of their broader
>>> perspectives on Jewish law as a whole.
>>> http://www.answers.com/topic/kashrut
>>>
>>>
>>>> I know some very
>>>> orthodox Jews and they do NOT
>>>> do the above.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then maybe they're not Orthodox enough. Why do they pick and choose
>>> which rules to follow and obsess over?

>>
>>
>> Why do the ones who have talked
>> you into turning on their lights (work)
>> during their sabbath not stone
>> people to death?

>
>
> Go ask them, ****.
>
>> Are they not
>> picking and choosing?

>
>
> It appears so to me. That was my whole point, you ignorant buffoon.
>
>> And since it's a part of both the bible and
>> the torah,

>
>
> The Torah IS the Bible, you illiterate fool. Torah is also called the
> Pentateuch, or first five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
> and Deuteronomy.
>
>> why aren't you accusing
>> Christians of stoning?

>
>
> Because Christianity isn't based on keeping OT law (vicarious atonement:
> Christ is the fulfillment of the law).
>
>>>> Where are you
>>>> getting your info from, the KKK?
>>>
>>>
>>> No, the Bible.

>>
>>
>> Nice book, that.

>
>
> With your sarcasm dripping all over the place, why do you hold so much
> contempt for my statement that Jews should follow ALL of the laws rather
> than just (some of) the dietary ones?
>
>>>> Usual, you're even more of a
>>>> prejudiced
>>>
>>>
>>> There was nothing prejudiced in what I wrote, you loathsome bitch.

>>
>>
>> Loathsome bitch?

>
>
> Yes, a loathsome, insufferable, boorish, uncreative, slacking,
> home-bound, agoraphobic, stoned, CAR-LESS psycho BITCH.
>
>> I guess if I were your mother or father,

>
>
> You aren't.


The Torah is not part of the Bible, is is the 5 books of Moses. The New
Testament translates incorrectly into Greek and hundreds of years later
add some books.