Orlando Florida horror

[Ken B]

A few of the foolish things said or implied on this thread

ISIS is just like Pat Robertson, he throws gay men off buildings regularly
ISIS is like Pat Robertson because killing people is exactly like saying "let them kill themselves" (So Pat Robertson is just like those here who think we should not have intervened in Syria and just lest them kill themselves I suppose?)
Christianity is just like it was 1000 years ago, or 300 years ago
The difference between what Christianity was like 1000 years ago and what it was like 300 years ago is the burning question of the day
Pharisees are relevant to the massacre in Orlando
We should not call people Muslim even if they call themselves Muslim, we should subject them to a test and correct their mis-impression
The Gospels are not anti-semitic

[28Orot]

In my translation at least, it's extremely unclear just who is being addressed because there's a very long sequence with only "them" or "you" and no identifier.

Well he wasn't referring to the Turks thats for sure.
The whole story took place with Jews in Israel , so who he was referring to?

The Mongolians?

[Madiel]

Even if that was true, let assume for a moment that the Jews were supposed to be the best and especially didn't live up to their higher calling. God touches on this possibility if it may arise and says clearly the following:

"For the LORD your God is a merciful God; he will not abandon or destroy you or forget the covenant with your ancestors, which he confirmed to them by oath." Deuteronomy 4:31

Clearly God's official statement here that even if the Jews will not live up to their higher calling, he will never leave them, never forsake them, and never break the covenant he has made with their forefathers, meaning never swap them for another people or nation. He didn't say : 'Synagogue of Satan' or referred to them as 'Children of the Devil'.

Can anyone in his right mind conjure up a more absurd phenomenon that the Creator of all living things who has made an everlasting covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob and their descendants , that he will call Abraham Isaac and Jacob and Moses and Joshua and all the Prophets of the Tenach as 'Children of the Devil'...?

I wasn't talking about the Jews as being supposed to be the best of all people, I was talking about the Pharisees as being supposed to be the best of the Jews. As in fact you recognised in the previous exchange.

Perfect example of the dangers of throwing around "they" without identifying who is being spoken about.

[Madiel]

Well he wasn't referring to the Turks thats for sure.
The whole story took place with Jews in Israel , so who he was referring to?

The Mongolians?

Now you're being deliberately obtuse. The choice is between talking about a particular group of Jewish people or the entire Jewish people. As I suspect you well know.

But hey, let's deal with monoliths again, right? They're simpler.

[28Orot]

I wasn't talking about the Jews as being supposed to be the best of all people, I was talking about the Pharisees as being supposed to be the best of the Jews. As in fact you recognised in the previous exchange.

Perfect example of the dangers of throwing around "they" without identifying who is being spoken about.

You're playing semantics. It makes absolutely no difference if it refers to the Pharisees or the Jews at large. The Christian who is been exposed to this anti semitism won't make any distinctions like this. Pharisees are the Jews as far as he is concerned, and he is been educated that they have killed God. Clearly a recipe for hate and disaster.

[28Orot]

Now you're being deliberately obtuse. The choice is between talking about a particular group of Jewish people or the entire Jewish people. As I suspect you well know.

But hey, let's deal with monoliths again, right? They're simpler.

You're playing semantics. It makes absolutely no difference if it refers to the Pharisees or the Jews at large. The Christian who is been exposed to this anti semitism won't make any distinctions like this. Pharisees are the Jews as far as he is concerned, and he is been educated that they have killed God. Clearly a recipe for hate and disaster.

[28Orot]

Interesting post, thanks.  One comment:

I don't disagree with or contest the content here.  Just wish to clarify that, while it is incorrect (and possibly dangerous) to dismiss Robertson as not representative of many American Christians, he certainly does not speak for all, nor are his "blindspots" to be attributed as a fault of all Christianity.

You're Welcome

[Madiel]

ISIS is like Pat Robertson because killing people is exactly like saying "let them kill themselves" (So Pat Robertson is just like those here who think we should not have intervened in Syria and just lest them kill themselves I suppose?)

You should try seeing how the LGBT community currently feels about all the people like Pat Robertson, like the politicians who are against LGBT rights, like all the people who encourage hatred of queer folk.

There's a general reaction to the whole "oh, but we don't actually kill you" position that I can best summarise as "you can take your fine distinction and shove it".

[Madiel]

You're playing semantics. It makes absolutely no difference if it refers to the Pharisees or the Jews at large. The Christian who is been exposed to this anti semitism won't make any distinctions like this. Pharisees are the Jews as far as he is concerned, and he is been educated that they have killed God. Clearly a recipe for hate and disaster.

I have already acknowledged this to you. But please don't tell me that just because some idiot of a Christian will ignore the distinction that you and I should wave away the distinction. We should in fact be insisting on the distinction for exactly that reason.

Because the distinction changes the outcome.

But frankly you give me the impression of not being interested in changing the outcome. No, you want to use the outcome to paint the "other" (in this case, Christianity) as something bad. You like having an enemy to criticise.

You're not looking for resolution. You're looking for fuel.

[28Orot]

I have already acknowledged this to you. But please don't tell me that just because some idiot of a Christian will ignore the distinction that you and I should wave away the distinction. We should in fact be insisting on the distinction for exactly that reason.

Because the distinction changes the outcome.

But frankly you give me the impression of not being interested in changing the outcome. No, you want to use the outcome to paint the "other" (in this case, Christianity) as something bad. You like having an enemy to criticise.

You're not looking for resolution. You're looking for fuel.

I have been spending so much time explaining to you that Christianity today is not the same as it was with its regard to how it approaches Jews, and many Christians today do make this distinction. I was simply explaining how the 'early' Christian regarded this all the way to the Holocaust. After the Holocaust, Christianity acknowledged that if it wants to stay a sane and normal religion and community and to never witness yet another Holocaust, it will have to make this distinction, and it did.

[Florestan]

But frankly you give me the impression of not being interested in changing the outcome. No, you want to use the outcome to paint the "other" (in this case, Christianity) as something bad. You like having an enemy to criticise.

Oh, but that´s been his trick ever since he registered here as Saul. Jews are monolithically good and wonderful and "Gentiles" are monolithically evil and hostile to Jews.

According to him, if I say that a spexific, individual Jew is an idiot, or a wicked man, then I have automatically labeled all Jews, past, present and future as idiotic or wicked.

By his token, anyone qualifying Donald Trump as an asshole, or Hillary Clinton as power-hungry has ipso facto insulted George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or John Adams.

Some of his more sensible and rational posts made me believe that he changed during all the years he was absent from GMG. Unfortunately, I was wrong. I´m done with replying to him.

[Madiel]

For the record, few things enrage me more than being told I'm playing with semantics, as if the differences between different words have no meaning.

I spend my professional life picking and choosing words precisely because they have different shades of meaning. I work with the difference between a category and a subcategory every day. I deal with how "orange" relates to "citrus" relates to "fruit" relates to "food" all the time.

And then I get into these kinds of conversations with people who chop and change and don't really care about consistency, except when they tell you to read their words carefully, and who talk about semantics when you attempt to maintain a distinction they aren't interested in.

It's simply not worth it.

Goodnight.

[28Orot]

Oh, but that´s been his trick ever since he registered here as Saul. Jews are monolithically good and wonderful and "Gentiles" are monolithically evil and hostile to Jews.

According to him, if I say that a spexific, individual Jew is an idiot, or a wicked man, then I have automatically labeled all Jews, past, present and future as idiotic or wicked.

By his token, anyone qualifying Donald Trump as an asshole, or Hillary Clinton as power-hungry has ipso facto insulted George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or John Adams.

Some of his more sensible and rational posts made me believe that he changed during all the years he was absent from GMG. Unfortunately, I was wrong. I´m done with replying to him.

Is this even worth replying?

Absolutely not, its so false, and its so distorted and its so not what I believe that its not even worth replying.