The Day After Judgement Day

[Lord Baal]

Did you not claim to be a Jew in another thread? Are you not, in this thread, attesting to the veracity of the 'God' (and Son) of the Bible (and the Qu'ran, now that you've added it) in this thread? Does that not imply a necessary religious change on your part? I addressed the point succinctly in my other post. So far, your proclaimed faith does not match your proclaimed view. I addressed another point in both the "Adam and Eve" thread and the "Read the Bible thread."

Excuse me? How does believing in the existence of other religions conflate with a belief in those religions? Also, I don't think you understand what a "Jew" actually is. Judaism is a religion, but 'Jewish-ness' is an ethnicity. You might as well accuse me of not being able to be both Mexican and Catholic.

Spoiler :

Of course, if one were capable of acting according to his {mistaken} viewpoint {about me}, then he'd do as he said he would do before.

I assume this is a crack at me for not ignoring you. I often click on "view" when the ignored post happens to be the only unread post in a thread, though I really shouldn't waste my time.

Jesus's tribulations with the Pharisees illustrate his conflicts with Orthodox Judaism. Even though these religions may agree on a monotheistic principal, the details are no small matter as numerous episodes of violence bear witness to...

If you'll kindly point out where I claimed that the Abrahamic religions believe the same things about God...

Buddha is not considered to be a deity. His teachings are not considered perfect, and are subject to expansion, elaboration, and revision. That there are multiple paths for exploring those branching from the path Buddha described isn't a reason to not acknowledge the earlier contribution.

Never called him a deity. And again, you miss the point. There are three major Buddhist sects, two of them larger than the third. Those three sects don't just "expand" or "elaborate" on the Buddha's teachings, they flat-out state that he said different things. That's not revision, it's alteration. They also believe he has a different appearance, which is where my comment about "veneration" ties in.

 

[Rashiminos]

Excuse me? How does believing in the existence of other religions conflate with a belief in those religions?

It doesn't.

Also, I don't think you understand what a "Jew" actually is. Judaism is a religion, but 'Jewish-ness' is an ethnicity. You might as well accuse me of not being able to be both Mexican and Catholic.

Nah, Jewish-ness is descendance from adherents of Judaism. To deny the religious derivation of the term is to be confused about what it means to be Jewish (even if one can be Jewish by default), and impedes understanding of Judaism (clearly evident here). You can't be both Jewish and Catholic (If you're Catholic, then you're not Jewish according to Jewish law.) So if you're a practicing Jew ( and it seems that you're really not), then affirming the validity of the new Testament, and the actions of 'God' via Jesus Christ, implies that you have an issue between yourself and 'God.' If you aren't a practicing Jew, Christian, or Muslim, I think your ability to assess the differences is somewhat lesser.

I assume this is a crack at me for not ignoring you. I often click on "view" when the ignored post happens to be the only unread post in a thread, though I really shouldn't waste my time.

More of a response to the accusation of trolling, although if I wanted a crack at it, I'd just parry with "you responded to a seemingly (although it wasn't) troll statement, whereupon your response must be more pathetic than the statement in question."

If you'll kindly point out where I claimed that the Abrahamic religions believe the same things about God...

Right around when you said they worshiped the same 'God'. Having different impressions of 'God' is tantamount to having different 'God's. (First/Second Commandments)

Never called him a deity.

Then analogously comparing doctrinal differences in Abrahamic religions to Buddhism is simply inappropriate, full stop.

And again, you miss the point. There are three major Buddhist sects, two of them larger than the third. Those three sects don't just "expand" or "elaborate" on the Buddha's teachings, they flat-out state that he said different things. That's not revision, it's alteration. They also believe he has a different appearance, which is where my comment about "veneration" ties in.

I should have tacked on an et cetera. Geeze, what a nitpick that one is.

 

[Lord Baal]

It doesn't.

Then how does your previous statement make any sense?

Nah, Jewish-ness is descendance from adherents of Judaism.

In my case, yes. In my grandmother's case, no. Jewish ethnicity can also be gained through conversion to the Jewish religion, as in her case.

To deny the religious derivation of the term is to be confused about what it means to be Jewish (even if one can be Jewish by default), and impedes understanding of Judaism (clearly evident here). You can't be both Jewish and Catholic (If you're Catholic, then you're not Jewish according to Jewish law.)

Excuse me for both the smilie and the coming Godwin, but that's ridiculous. One might as well say that if one couldn't be both Jewish and German in the '30s due to German law. As Jewish-ness is an ethnicity it is clearly possible to be of Jewish ethnicity and an alternative religion. One cannot be both Roma and live in a house. One cannot be both German and American, as Germany doesn't allow dual citizenship. So on and so forth.

So if you're a practicing Jew ( and it seems that you're really not),

Why the snarkiness?

Then affirming the validity of the new Testament, and the actions of 'God' via Jesus Christ, implies that you have an issue between yourself and 'God.' If you aren't a practicing Jew, Christian, or Muslim, I think your ability to assess the differences is somewhat lesser.

This is a strawman argument. I never made any claims for the validity of any religion or religious document. Why would one need to be a practitioner of a religion to assess its differences from another religion? Does one need to be a member of a political party to assess its differences from another party?

More of a response to the accusation of trolling, although if I wanted a crack at it, I'd just parry with "you responded to a seemingly (although it wasn't) troll statement, whereupon your response must be more pathetic than the statement in question."

It's pathetic to clarify that a troll is lying? It would be better to not respond at all, but that might, unfortunately, give the impression that said troll had 'own' an argument, instead of just not being worthy of a response.

Right around when you said they worshiped the same 'God'. Having different impressions of 'God' is tantamount to having different 'God's. (First/Second Commandments)

Is it your argument that every single Christian sect worships a different god? Or that every religious individual, most of whom have slightly differing views of God or gods, worships an entirely different god from everyone else? Because if you're separating things to that degree, fair enough. I am not.

Then analogously comparing doctrinal differences in Abrahamic religions to Buddhism is simply inappropriate, full stop.

They are both religious affiliations. A comparison to a various Hindu beliefs might have been more appropriate, but I know more about Buddhism than any other non-Abrahamic religion.

I should have tacked on an et cetera. Geeze, what a nitpick that one is.

You nit-picked the use of the word "worship" as opposed to "venerate," but I'm the one going too far? Seems like you don't have a counter-argument.

 

[Domen]

You can't be both Jewish and Catholic (If you're Catholic, then you're not Jewish according to Jewish law.)

You can be ethnic Jewish Catholic and then you are called a neophyte.

Such neophytes were usually assimilating within a few generations, so their great grandchildren were no longer aware of their Jewish ancestry.

ISo if you're a practicing Jew ( and it seems that you're really not),

Lord Baal wrote:

My ancestry is a combination of Palestinian, German and British, with who knows what else thrown in for good measure. My family on one side - the Anglo-German side - practiced Judaism in the nineteenth century but abandoned it for Christianity before WWII. The Palestinian side converted in the late-'40s, with my parents dropping the religion for good old agnosticism a few decades ago.

=================================

One might as well say that if one couldn't be both Jewish and German in the '30s due to German law.

Nazi Germany did recognize Jewish ethnicity though. They called it race of course, which is wrong as such thing like Jewish race does not exist.

Nazis even had such categories like half-Jew, quarter-Jew and full Jew. Quarter-Jews and half-Jews were sometimes spared.

There were 90,000 quarter-Jews and 60,000 half-Jews as well as some 5,000 - 10,000 full Jewish collaborators serving in the Wehrmacht.

This includes for example Marschal Erhard Milch, Major Ernst Bloch, General Helmut Wilberg or Admiral Bernhard Rogge.

 

[Lord Baal]

Nazi Germany did recognize Jewish ethnicity though. They called it race of course, which is wrong as such thing like Jewish race does not exist.

That's a good point.

 

[Rashiminos]

Then how does your previous statement make any sense?

Your question about conflating belief about existence of religions and belief in those religions was not part of the earlier point, but I didn't see a reason to not answer the particular question at the particular time.

In my case, yes. In my grandmother's case, no. Jewish ethnicity can also be gained through conversion to the Jewish religion, as in her case.

"Adherent of Judaism."

Excuse me for both the smilie and the coming Godwin, but that's ridiculous. One might as well say that if one couldn't be both Jewish and German in the '30s due to German law. As Jewish-ness is an ethnicity it is clearly possible to be of Jewish ethnicity and an alternative religion. One cannot be both Roma and live in a house. One cannot be both German and American, as Germany doesn't allow dual citizenship. So on and so forth.

You're excused, and I accept what Godwin entails for your argument. Consult a rabbi. Consult Yahweh (the one who allegedly made the rule)..

Why the snarkiness?

In this case, it's not snark.

This is a strawman argument. I never made any claims for the validity of any religion or religious document.Why would one need to be a practitioner of a religion to assess its differences from another religion? Does one need to be a member of a political party to assess its differences from another party?

You made a comparison between Christianity and Judaism. Even if in reality, there might be no such thing as god, asserting a relative "truth" (the 'God' of one is the same as the 'God' of the other) doesn't mean that theologians of the respective religions support that view, or that your assertion is superior to theirs. A practitioner is more familiar with the religions in question, usually.

It's pathetic to clarify that a troll is lying? It would be better to not respond at all, but that might, unfortunately, give the impression that said troll had 'own' an argument, instead of just not being worthy of a response.

No Baal. A troll would be fishing for a response. Responding to the troll is giving what it what it wants (feeding the troll). If you really think I'm trolling, then your response is the report button, not the reply button. Now as to lying... is there some truth about 'God' you'd like me to capitulate to that you can verify instead of sharing your personal interpretation of the identity of the 'God'(s) of Abrahamic religions?

Is it your argument that every single Christian sect worships a different god? Or that every religious individual, most of whom have slightly differing views of God or gods, worships an entirely different god from everyone else? Because if you're separating things to that degree, fair enough. I am not.

Depends on the sects in question. Most Christian sects accept that other sects are worshiping the same 'Father', if not in the most appropriate manner in their view.

They are both religious affiliations. A comparison to a various Hindu beliefs might have been more appropriate, but I know more about Buddhism than any other non-Abrahamic religion.

That's a very thin angle of comparison. Buddhism doesn't come packaged with the belief of an entity that would punish a blasphemer.

You nit-picked the use of the word "worship" as opposed to "venerate," but I'm the one going too far? Seems like you don't have a counter-argument.

Worship is an indication of allegiance (all the references to LORD 'God' are not for nothing). The semantic difference between worship and venerate is much more significant than between "revision" and "alteration."

Nazi Germany did recognize Jewish ethnicity though. They called it race of course, which is wrong as such thing like Jewish race does not exist.

Nazis even had such categories like half-Jew, quarter-Jew and full Jew. Quarter-Jews and half-Jews were sometimes spared.

There were 90,000 quarter-Jews and 60,000 half-Jews as well as some 5,000 - 10,000 full Jewish collaborators serving in the Wehrmacht.

This includes for example Marschal Erhard Milch, Major Ernst Bloch, General Helmut Wilberg or Admiral Bernhard Rogge.

I would not be the first to suggest that Nazi notions about Jews were in error. Someone with no previous Jewish ancestry becomes fully a Jew by converting to Judaism. The religious principle* dominates the eugenic principle as far as Judaism is concerned.

*Having Jewish ancestry and sharing genetics does not alone make one a Jew (except by default, which is conceded by accepting another religion over Judaism). Belief in Yahweh and following "his commands" does.

Spoiler :

In the default case, one is still fully a Jew.

 

[timtofly]

Would it not be Hebrew or Israelite, if anything? The term Jew in latin and greek more than likely was referring to an individual living in Judea. Technically Judea is not a nation in whole. It was one tribe out of 12. It did have a king though for quite some time, even under the jurisdiction of Rome.

It is probably the only ethnicity one can convert to. From the other 12 tribes of Abraham, there is a bigger difference, hence Arabians are not considered an Islamic ethnicity.

 

[Domen]

Someone with no previous Jewish ancestry becomes fully a Jew by converting to Judaism.

So would you also consider Khazars - who converted to Judaism - as Jews?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Conversion

Apart from Khazars, other historical nations which converted to Judaism were - according to wikipedia: Idumeans under John Hyrcanus, Itureans under Aristobulus I, kingdom of Adiabene under Queen Helena, the Ḥimyârî kings in Yemen, and Berber assimilations to North African Jewry.

====================================

Being an adherent of Judaism is not absolutely necessary to be ethnic Jewish:

Ethnicity or ethnic group is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on a shared social experience or ancestry.[1] Membership of an ethnic group tends to be associated with and ideologies of shared cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language or dialect, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.

Ethnicity is an important means by which people may identify with a larger group. Many social scientists, such as anthropologists Fredrik Barth and Eric Wolf, do not consider ethnic identity to be universal. They regard ethnicity as a product of specific kinds of inter-group interactions, rather than an essential quality inherent to human groups.[2] Processes that result in the emergence of such identification are called ethnogenesis. Members of an ethnic group, on the whole, claim cultural continuities over time, although historians and cultural anthropologists have documented that many of the values, practices, and norms that imply continuity with the past are of relatively recent invention.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Ethnicities are socially constructed. In Eastern Europe, Soviet practice of defining ethnicity had a major influence of emphasising the ethnic aspects of "Jewishness", to the point where "I'm not a Jew, I'm Russian" sounds much more natural then "I'm not a Jew, I'm a Catholic".

It is probably the only ethnicity one can convert to.

Well, there's such thing as "assimilation".

Oh, and returning to the OP, why does God hate Stupidity so much? Better stupid, meek and humble then smart, but arrogant and prideful, like Satan, right?

 

[bhsup]

From the other 12 tribes of Abraham, there is a bigger difference, hence Arabians are not considered an Islamic ethnicity.

*blink blink*

There were not twelve tribes of Abraham. There were twelve tribes from Jacob (aka Israel), who was the son of Issac, who was the son of Abraham. There was also Ishmael, first son of Abraham who is traditionally accepted as the father of Arabs.

 

[Rashiminos]

So would you also consider Khazars - who converted to Judaism - as Jews?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Conversion

Apart from Khazars, other historical nations which converted to Judaism were - according to wikipedia: Idumeans under John Hyrcanus, Itureans under Aristobulus I, kingdom of Adiabene under Queen Helena, the Ḥimyârî kings in Yemen, and Berber assimilations to North African Jewry.

To the extent those conversions are recognized by Orthodox* or Reform Judaism, yes.

(I tend towards the Reform designation based on the personal opinion that claiming to be a Jew while observing the rites of a non-Jewish religion is Jewish-in-name-only territory, and for most intents and purposes, is not really being a Jew)

Being an adherent of Judaism is not absolutely necessary to be ethnic Jewish:

Being descended from one is (and not being claimed by another religion).

Originally Posted by wikipedia
Ethnicity or ethnic group is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on a shared social experience or ancestry.[1] Membership of an ethnic group tends to be associated with and ideologies of shared cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language or dialect, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.

Ethnicity is an important means by which people may identify with a larger group. Many social scientists, such as anthropologists Fredrik Barth and Eric Wolf, do not consider ethnic identity to be universal. They regard ethnicity as a product of specific kinds of inter-group interactions, rather than an essential quality inherent to human groups.[2] Processes that result in the emergence of such identification are called ethnogenesis. Members of an ethnic group, on the whole, claim cultural continuities over time, although historians and cultural anthropologists have documented that many of the values, practices, and norms that imply continuity with the past are of relatively recent invention.

Oh look. It happens that criteria are rather explicitly stated in the Talmud and halakha.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

A Jew can be excluded from Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return if he or she is considered to be dangerous to the welfare of the State of Israel. Jews who have a past that involves a serious crime, such as murder, or who are fugitives in another country for any felony (unless they are persecution victims) can be denied the right of return, (e.g. Meyer Lansky, Victor Vancier).[3] The Law of Return also excludes any "person who has been a Jew and has voluntarily changed his religion."

Would it not be Hebrew or Israelite, if anything? The term Jew in latin and greek more than likely was referring to an individual living in Judea. Technically Judea is not a nation in whole. It was one tribe out of 12. It did have a king though for quite some time, even under the jurisdiction of Rome.

It is probably the only ethnicity one can convert to. From the other 12 tribes of Abraham, there is a bigger difference, hence Arabians are not considered an Islamic ethnicity.

Specifying a tribe would be closer to an ethnical definition.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

*blink blink*

There were not twelve tribes of Abraham. There were twelve tribes from Jacob (aka Israel), who was the son of Issac, who was the son of Abraham. There was also Ishmael, first son of Abraham who is traditionally accepted as the father of Arabs.

The bible actually records Abraham as being the father of eight sons.

When Sarah seemed barren, he fathered Ishmael by her handmaiden Hagar.

Later Sarah bore his promised son, Isaac.

After Sarah died, he married Keturah and fathered Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah.

(There are some who believe that Hagar and Keturah are two names for the same person, and that Abraham sought her out to reunite his family after his jealous wife would no longer come between them.)

We are never told how many daughters the various patriarchs might have had. We are only told that Jacob/Israel had at least one daughter (Dinah) in addition to his twelve sons.



Ishmael is considered the father of some of the Arab tribes, but not of all Arabs.

The Pure Arabs or Qahtanian Arabs are considered to be the descendants of Ya‘rub bin Yashjub bin Qahtan. His grandfather Qahtan was identified by early Islamic historians with Yoktan son of Eber, the great-grandson of Shem (the son of Noah) from whom Abraham was also a distant descendant.

The Jurhum tribe of Qahtanian Arabs was said to have given shelter to Hagar and Ishmael. Other Qahtanian tribes were typically described as wicked heathens.

The ‘Adnani Arabs are considered to be descendants of Ishmael through his descendant Adnan, who married into the Jurhum tribe.

Muhammad was an ‘Adnani Arab and as such claimed to be a descendant of Abraham, but he described several of the other Arab tribes as instead descendants of those who persecuted Abraham.




Isaac was not only the father of Jacob, but also of Esau. As such he is also the father of the Edomites and Idumaeans. The modern descendants of those peoples have adopted the Arabic language and identity after they became Muslims. The Arabs of Palestine and Jordan would likely have more connection to Esau than Ishmael.

 

[Phrossack]

I ignore your apocalypse and substitute my own; notably I just blew off a supermutants head with an Anti-Material Rifle while assisting a Brotherhood of Steel patrol in the recapture of HELIOS 1.

Traitor! NCR! NCR! NCR! Legion go home!

 

[strijder20]

The third man steps forward. He has rippling muscles, a trim moustache and wears a snappy military uniform. He speaks with thundering confidence. “I am Human Ambition. I have brought great swaths of the world under my heel, time and again, purging the unfit and rewarding the strong. All progress relies on my zeal.”

Long live nazism

 

[Phrossack]

I ignore your apocalypse and substitute my own; notably I just blew off a supermutants head with an Anti-Material Rifle while assisting a Brotherhood of Steel patrol in the recapture of HELIOS 1.

Traitor! NCR! NCR! NCR! Legion go home!

Spoiler :

Well, helping the BoS is maybe okay as long as you don't fight the NCR. They may be like the little brother who knocked up the preacher's daughter and whose home away is the county jail, but they're still family.

Spoiler :

As Cass would say.

Anyway...

Long live nazism

His views are a little disturbing, aren't they? A visceral, irrational hatred of atheism combined with the glorification of power for power's sake.

 

[Rashiminos]

Depends on the sects in question. Most Christian sects accept that other sects are worshiping the same 'Father', if not in the most appropriate manner in their view.

And in that vein, some sects of "Christians" had radically different opinions of the "God" of the Old Testament:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_Christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulicianism

 

[Lord Baal]

Yeah, I found out today that Rashimos thinks people living five thousand years ago can define what an ethnicity is now. Makes even attempting to continue that debate utterly worthless.

 

[Hygro]

Wait, attackfighter, where's the punchline?

 

[Hygro]

OOOOH I get it, I reread.

It is a post-postmodern joke with no punchline.

So God or whatever punishes his own creation as the other, as the sinner, the evil one, and by defining him as evil and the others as opposition to evil, even the spiritual old man is so weak that he succumbs to sadistic pleasure of being a hunter, itself a beastly predator concept, such that God is always an agent of evil, forever dividing humankind and contaminating good with evil.

It should have been obvious from the start when the men represented phallic objects in turn representing themselves (pillars) and were, well, all only men.

It's not unlike the Illiad, where when things start to get resolved by humans being humans, the gods would arbitrarily show up and ruin everything in a really plot-frustrating way.

It begs the question, is the only freedom from evil then to become the hunted, or is it to reject the paradigm completely? It seems being a pillar and a great man ultimately means corruption.

It plays of course on Christian theology so Jesus was the one to die for sin (not to hunt sin, obvi), to turn the other cheek, to be the hunted.

But still an excellent joke and critique of modern conservatism. to you attackfighter!

 

[Rashiminos]

Yeah, I found out today that Rashimos thinks people living five thousand years ago can define what an ethnicity is now. Makes even attempting to continue that debate utterly worthless.

Naw. The question of who's Jewish has legal interpretations in current times. I'm just repeating the authoritative standards provided by the very people to whom those standards matter. Your insistence on "ethnicity" is a personal placement of the goalpost, rather than an actual disagreement that a sociological definition should prevail.

Spoiler :

Good luck with copying the spelling of my name too.

So God or whatever punishes his own creation as the other, as the sinner, the evil one, and by defining him as evil and the others as opposition to evil, even the spiritual old man is so weak that he succumbs to sadistic pleasure of being a hunter, itself a beastly predator concept, such that God is always an agent of evil, forever dividing humankind and contaminating good with evil.

Judgment day has a certain "carrot and stick" functionality associated with it (Even though attackfighter's last paragraph in the OP undermines the notion that those seeking the carrot are virtuous.)