Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,418 Year: 3,675/9,624 Month: 546/974 Week: 159/276 Day: 33/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Movie: "God on Trial"
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 2 of 114 (600392)
01-14-2011 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by hooah212002
01-14-2011 10:22 AM


Hi hooah,
Yes, I've seen that film. It's gripping stuff, with some outstanding performances. It is very loosely based on what is supposed to be a true story; Jews held in Nazi camps placed God on trial and found him guilty of abandoning them.
It's well worth a watch.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by hooah212002, posted 01-14-2011 10:22 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by hooah212002, posted 01-14-2011 10:50 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 7 of 114 (600592)
01-15-2011 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by iano
01-15-2011 7:19 AM


Hi Iano,
Proof positive that the Jew is as much in need of New Testament illumination as the next guy.
I wonder what could have put Jews off the New Testament...
quote:
"There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" Romans 2:9
Well, stuff like that ought to suffice. The Jews suffer first do they? Classy. It would seem perverse for Jews to embrace such blatantly anti-Semitic works.
Although well-dramatised, the piece is really only a compendium of the kind of atheistic argumentation you see wheeled out all the time. There isn't even the benefit of seeing the standard defences given the same treatment (the defence sits on it hands throughout)
This is probably a fair criticism of the piece, in so far as it goes. It's pretty clear that the author is behind the prosecution's case. The other side of the argument is not as sympathetically portrayed. For a theist, I can see how that might be a little grating. On the other hand, they are free to deliver whatever message they like in their play. It doesn't have to be one that you agree with. Further, I don't believe that the moral questions raised by the film have ever been satisfactorily answered by theists.
There certainly isn't anything new
Well of course there isn't. When arguing against Bronze Age superstition, how much novelty do you expect? For as long as there have been superstitions, there have been those who chose not to believe them. Naturally, the arguments don't change that much.
what about the innocent children (and idiots)
Good question. Why don't you go and find some innocent children who are suffering and explain to them how God somehow justifies not bothering to help them? They might not find it very helpful, but I'm sure you can find some idiots who will be impressed with your excuses.
how can God slay all those 'innocent' people
Did you just put the word innocent in quotation marks? Creepy.
God is behind whoever claims he is their's
Yeah, it's funny that isn't it? Just a coincidence I suppose.
Of course, it must come as a bit of a wake up call, when you believe yourself to be one of God's chosen people, only to find your people being slowly exterminated in ghettos and death camps. This strikes me as being the film's strongest argument. Obviously, it's one you need not overly concern yourself with, given that it is an argument aimed specifically against Judaism.
slew/smite/destroy/wipe-out/kill - as if there's anything particularly problematic about God doing that.
You know, it's statements like that that occasionally make me wonder if you're not some sort of sociopath Iano. Have you ever been tested for any sort of sociopathic/psychotic personality disorder?
If you are unable to grasp what is problematic about an omnibenevolent god casually smiting his subjects, then I doubt I possess the ability to adequately explain it to you.
man's justice is better than Gods. Man has the big picture in mind - not God.
Damn right it's better. Certainly, it's better than the total absence of justice that we get from your imaginary friend.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by iano, posted 01-15-2011 7:19 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 01-15-2011 1:13 PM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied
 Message 9 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 7:57 AM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 19 of 114 (600781)
01-17-2011 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by iano
01-17-2011 7:57 AM


Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
Iano writes:
I think the underlying point was that all will reap the reward of sin: both Jew and Gentile.
And as we are both aware, Romans 2:9 is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to New Testament anti-Semitism. Please don't play dumb. The hatred aimed at Jews in the NT ought to be enough to put them off it.
I didn't find it at all grating. But when faced with that kind of one-sided approach, the neutral observer can get to wondering why the counter isn't being aired.
Did you ask a neutral observer?
Is it that the prosecution is afraid to do so?
No. It is simply that the defence has no case. There are no answers here that would suffice.
You might not, for instance, find it satisfactory that a creator/owner can lay down the moral law for you to obey - but I've never heard a satisfactory answer informing me why it is I should be able to do as I please - irrespective of what a creator/owner says.
That is because you in particular embrace one of the most repugnant versions of Christianity. You pose God as a cosmic slave master, with no morals beyond ordering us to obey him or face his wrath. Your god is an immoral monster and you have, for reasons that escape any free, thinking individual, who takes responsibility for their own life, chosen to blind yourself to his evil.
Nobody owns me and nobody owns you. The very idea is sick. You may chose to wallow in this warped fantasy, but I can only advise you to emancipate yourself from mental slavery, as the song goes.
I wasn't labouring under the notion of an omni-benevolent God. Since God is revealed in the Bible as furious wrath against sin (amongst other things) I'm at a loss as to why his expressing that wrath should be so problematic for some.
Most Christians manage to delude themselves into thinking that God is good. That you do not and yet still continue to worship the vile reptile says more about you than him.
I think that your comments confirm what I said above. If you cannot understand why normal people would be put off by the idea of worshipping a genocidal serial killer, you are never going to get it.
Of course, the problem here is not so much God expressing his wrath, as God egregiously failing to to turn that wrath upon the Nazi war machine. The Jews in the Death camps saw no divine wrath. They had to wait for men to come and save them and far to many never made it. Where was God for them? This notion that God would sit idle as his worshippers were tortured and killed is incompatible with the idea that God takes an active interest in our world.
Well, maybe it's compatible with your version of God, the slave owning, wrathful serial killer God, but most people aren't going to want to worship him, having correctly concluded that he doesn't deserve worship.
It seems to me that you can't have love without hate. I mean, how can you love children without hating the acts of a paedophile?
A better question would be to ask how the paedophile can claim to love the children he murders. Your God is apparently supposed to love us and yet he is responsible for the deaths of more children than any other entity in history (if your favourite book is to be believed). By comparison, the average paedophile comes across as a bumbling amateur.
Have you a problem with God punishing your sin? On what basis?
*sigh* Iano, the point is that God, being a fictional character and all, has no justice to offer. He can only offer the same justice he gave to the inhabitants of Birkenau and Auschwitz, i.e. none at all.
Human justice is superior simply because there is no other kind.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 7:57 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 9:38 AM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 21 of 114 (600793)
01-17-2011 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by iano
01-17-2011 9:38 AM


Re: Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
The Jewish authors of the NT are anti-semites? Can this be (on a technical level)?
Again, you play dumb. The authors were actively turning their backs on Judaism. They chose to write a line under the Jewish heritage of their religion by casting Jews as Christ-killing villains.
You are well aware of the anti-Semitic content of the NT. Please do not pretend that phrases such as "blood libel" are unfamiliar to you. It ought to be perfectly obvious why so few Jews embrace the NT.
You omit the other option: obey his ways and enjoy his blessing - which includes a life after death in which the desire to sin is absent. Your objection needs to take account of the whole - else it suffers as the film suffers.
No, I did not omit that option; that is still slavery. You are free to believe in this mental slavery, you may even chose to think it a good thing, but it is still slavery.
As I said earlier: wrath and goodness are compatible. Have you an answer to that?
Yes and it is one I have already mentioned; where was his wrath during the Holocaust? Selective wrath is not justice, especially when it ignores such horrors.
Again I point you to the NT. If true, then the Jews are no worshippers of God. They are followers of a religion which eschews God in favour of an idol. Your argument needs to take account of such basics.
But the film does not. The film addressed a supposedly true incident. The Jews in the concentration camps were not arguing the relative merits of their NT, they were arguing about Judaism. That is what the film portrays. You act as if the film could have been improved had its protagonists all converted to Christianity at the end. That's not what happened. The film addresses Judaism and ignores the NT because that's what the film is about. For it to have brought in explicitly Christian apologetics would have been a damn insult.
Besides, a god who would choose the Jews as his "chosen people" only to turn his back upon them is not worth worshipping.
A god who would turn his back upon anyone who suffered as the victims of the Holocaust suffered, is not worthy of worship.
A god who would turn his back on anyone for so trivial a non-crime as idolatry is not worthy of any respect whatsoever.
Suffering can be used for punishment. It can be used to discipline. It can be used to halt the advance of sin. It can be used as a tool to bring the rebellious lost to their knees. Your uni-dimensional view doesn't even begin to tackle this variation.
The use of suffering as a tool by so powerful a being as God is necessarily invalid. Humans should only resort to the use of suffering as a tool when we have no other options. It should always be a method of last resort.
God is not so constrained. He can choose any solution he wants. He could, quite easily come up with a solution where everybody is happy, but instead, he prefers suffering.
I can see why you would like to drag the discussion onto this. You seek to obscure the main message of the film. The film's core message is not that God is damned because of what he did, it's that he is damned because of what he did not do. He sat idle whilst people were thrown into ovens by those who claimed to act in his name.
Asking a better question is one way of avoiding an answer. Love necessitaties hate. Discuss.
Not even the issue, but very well.
Whether it is necessary to hate the actions of paedophiles or not, it is not necessary to mimic them. The extent of God's wrath, as depicted in the accounts of his atrocities, represents a hideous over-reaction. One may hate the actions of a paedophile without responding with evil in return, without visiting that hate upon the person. I do not believe in punitive punishment. The kind of eternal punishment so often celebrated by Christians strikes me as being the ultimate act of evil.
Disbelief doesn't rebut an argument.
No, the lack of any evidence of any form of justice being offered by your god rebuts your argument. You say his justice is better? Well show it to me. Show me how the victims of the Holocaust receive their justice.
We have two versions of justice on offer. one is man's version, which is imperfect, but at least capable of protecting the innocent from further harm. the other is God's version, which, as far as I can tell, has no effect of any kind at all and is indistinguishable from a complete lack of justice.
Take a look back at your post GM. It's virtually all huff and puff.
And when I look at yours, I see a callous indifference to the suffering of others, an inability to recognise moral failings,and an inability to recognise the worth of your fellow human beings. You even seem unable to realise that an innocent child is innocent.
I will stick to being huffy thank you. It seems the appropriate response in the face of such disgusting attitudes.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 9:38 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 3:23 PM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 45 of 114 (600916)
01-17-2011 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by iano
01-17-2011 3:23 PM


Re: Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
Again you pretend that you have no idea what I am talking about;
Turning your back on the religion of your birth doesn't make you an anti-semite. Could you be a little bit more precise - perhaps supplying some text to back up your position?
quote:
When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. I am innocent of this man’s blood, he said. It is your responsibility!
All the people answered, His blood is on us and on our children!
Matthew 27:24-25
Regardless of the Christian defences against the clear anti-Semitism in this passage (and others), it is ludicrous for you to act as though you cannot conceive why Jews would be dismissive of Christianity. The Blood Libel is perfectly sufficient reason for Jews to abominate the NT.
In the sense that God didn't create us to operate independently from him I'd have to agree with you (that we are "enslaved"). However, the argument is that we are 'we' because he breathed himself into us. Made in his image and all that. If it weren't for that there would be no "we" to speak of. We'd be down all that makes us people.
Could you deal with that omission?
God supposedly gave this gift with no conditions. We cannot be said to have agreed to any conditions or stipulations at the time of our birth. He then imposes conditions upon us after the fact. Further, he seems to have made sure that his one true route to heaven is indistinguishable from myths, campfire tales and lies.
This is not a true gift. This is not a fair contract. It is merely slavery.
I'd be careful what I wish for if I were you. If desiring his wrath being expressed at the moment it is deserved then Poof! - there goes Granny Magda (and iano).
Would you still like God to act at the moment of evildoing?
Judge yourself Iano, not me. I would have no fear of standing before any just tribunal, since I do not believe that I practice evil.
I would not place myself before judgement by your god though, because he has roved himself a moral imbecile and a cruel, vindictive monster.
Oh and by the way, how pathetic that you bring up my alleged "sins" in comparison with the fucking Holocaust! Yes, I would wish to be judged and extirpated before I went so far as to commit genocide. As it goes, I don't have any genocidal ambitions right now, but should I ever become a genocidal maniac, then yes, I would hope that God would stop me.
You're discussing with a Christian.
And you were criticising a film. If the film does not contain your preferred theology, that's just tough.
You would agree that suffering and strife focus' attention in a way that nothing else can do? It's certainly the way of this world - we desist from a desirable path when it pains us too much to continue on it. And only then.
No, that's not true. Some people are capable of desisting from a course of action because it simply isn't right. Not everyone shares the primitive and selfish attitude that you describe. Certainly I would hope that God would be above that sort of pettiness.
Suggestions? It would help if you could frame the problem first.
Pretty simple really; everyone gets what they want. The murderers and paedophiles can simply be killed, in order to protect others. Instead of hell and suffering though, they are given heaven, their own heaven. They would be unable to hurt others, but God would not need to stoop to the base practice of punitive measures.
Or, if you insist on punishment, God could make Hell a temporary sentence. He could then practice a little of what he preaches; forgiveness, a concept that seems to have been absent from previous Christian imaginings of the afterlife.
If his purposes are better served by permitting suffering then what's the issue.
He is an omnipotent, or at least awesomely powerful, deity. The fact that he apparently cannot be bothered to thin up a better way is utterly damning. The Bible exhorts his power and capabilities at great length, but he can't think of a better solution than eternal punishment for failure to adhere to a set of arbitrary and obscure rules? That simply makes no sense.
No end could justify the suffering visited upon the victims of the Holocaust. in arguing that such a thing could serve a greater good, you are lowering yourself to a state of moral debasement.
It can't be helped, such is the depth of the desire for independence from God.
You are projecting. I do not desire independence from your imaginary friends. I am already independent from that which has no sign of existing.
This boils down to a question of degree. As love > infinity so will hate (and the reaction to that which insults love). Similarily, depending on how one see's the crime, so to will one's sense of punishment be informed. There is no reason to suppose all should stop at your weighing up of things.
Again, this is no ore than an attempt to suggest that the suffering of Holocaust victims could have some higher purpose. That is a sick and despicable effort.
But then, you seem to have no problem with worshipping an evil god, whose only conception of morality is that might makes right.
GM writes:
Show me how the victims of the Holocaust receive their justice.
iano writes:
Let's not lose our context: God in the OT judging. And men finding that judgment unjust.
No, having seen the film, which you have not, I consider that the manifest lack of justice that left the inmates of concentration camps to die, is very much the context.
The men in the film are facing death at the hands of a merciless enemy. They know that God will do nothing to help them. This is the central issue. God's justice amounted to absolutely nothing. If he was real at all, he had abandoned them.
Doesn't this depend on a particular view of innocence?
If your version of innocence does not apply to those innocent children who died in the holocaust, I assure you, it's not one worth having.
The worth of my fellow human beings is best represented in the sacrifice undertaken by this self-same God on their behalf.
Another vile notion. Human beings have a worth and dignity beyond the morbid and pointless blood ritual your god feels he must go through before he can forgive us for his mistakes. Mature and genuine forgiveness is not something that comes with conditions. Christianity preaches forgiveness, but its central tenet shows that Christianity provides only a mockery of forgiveness.
Neither you nor that snippet of film (insofar as it is commandeered to condemn the biblical God) make any mention of that.
God, how dense are you? That's because the film is about Jews. To criticise it for not offering Christian theology is moronic. If the film did that, and the characters found Jesus, it would be horrifically offensive.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by iano, posted 01-17-2011 3:23 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by iano, posted 01-18-2011 5:25 AM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 90 of 114 (601251)
01-19-2011 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by iano
01-18-2011 5:25 AM


Re: Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
iano writes:
I'm not sure I understand your argument. If this is an accurate report of what took place then there is nothing anti-semitic about it.
Be real. There is nothing realistic about this nonsensical scene. The dialogue given is patently unrealistic. People simply don't talk or behave that way. The Jewish crowd are portrayed as cartoon villains, there is no attempt at realism. The Gospels describe this scene in very different ways and what they do describe is counter to everything we know about Roman governance. The whole scene with Pilate and Christ is, if not a fiction, at best a highly fictionalised account. Claiming it as accurate reportage is a big stretch of the imagination.
This quote is one of the most troublesome in the long history of Christian persecution of Jews. It is Blood Libel. It portrays an entire people as being Christ-killers. And, as you are again doubtless already aware, this is far from the only such offensively anti-Semitic quote. Perhaps this one is a little less ambiguous for you;
quote:
2:14 For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:
2:15 Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:
2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
1 Thessalonians 2;14-16
The Jews killed Christ, they are "contrary to men", they are against God, they always sin to the maximum possible and one day wrath will visit them.
That you should offer this as a potential source of spiritual comfort to Jews who were being persecuted by Christians is disgustingly offensive. I suppose if they were starving, you would have offered them bacon sandwiches.
To unravel:
1) God placed conditions "don't eat or else"
Not to me he didn't. I have taken none of his precious fruit. You revel in collective punishment. That you are unable to grasp that punishing innocent children for the "sins" of their ancestors is evil, is yet another sign of your utter moral blindness.
And that is before we even note that the Eden story is bloody fictional and that these "sins" never took place at all.
2) God doesn't have to ask our permission to set conditions. He owns us and can set any condition he likes.
Once again, you embrace slavery, thus offering further evidence that you are sociopathic or simply evil.
3) His one true route isn't in any way affected by the fact that blind men can't see it. You see, it's his job to save us, not ours.
And every Muslim would no doubt call you blind. Typically empty religious excuse making.
By the way, all God needs to save us from seems to be himself. He could simply not send people to hell, but no, he has to dress it up in a ridiculous parlour game. This makes absolutely no sense.
If measuring yourself according to the Biblical standard? Surely not!
By the "Biblical standard" (as if there was so simple a thing) we are all sinners. That is one of the most vile notions I have ever heard. It undermines any claim by Christians that the Bible can offer us any kind of morality. So, no, I would not use the Biblical standard, because neither a sociopath or a moron. If everyone is an evildoer, the word evil loses any value.
GM writes:
I would not place myself before judgement by your god though, because he has roved himself a moral imbecile and a cruel, vindictive monster.
iano writes:
As if that alters anything.
It may not alter anything for you, but I think that most people would prefer not to worship a vindictive monster. That you don't seem to see the problem is yet further indication of your sociopathic tendencies.
Yet you wouldn't hope God stops you committing the sins you'll commit today.
I have committed no "sins" today and quite frankly, fuck you, you arrogant arse.
So let me illustrate: as far as God is concerned, you and Hitler are like two grains of sand on the beach with you pointing out that you're ever so much closer to the moon (if closeness to it reflected your level of goodness) than Hitler.
You might not like it but that's the position.
Now you are comparing me to Hitler? Seriously, fuck you iano.
And, yet again, we see more evidence that you have not the slightest clue what morality is.
Start cranking up the desire level until the "simply not right" restraint is overcome.
Again, bullshit. Not everyone thinks like you. Some people have a wonderful thing called a conscience. That you seem unfamiliar with the concept is, yet again, an indicator of severe personality disorder. Not everyone thinks like you, thank God.
But God wants to punish wrongdoing. It's a function of holiness - something which he cannot change about himself.
And that is why I call him a monster; he could prevent or forgive wrongdoing, but instead, he chooses wrath.
To forgive means to pay the cost of the offence yourself. God offers to do that in Christ.
Jesus having a bad weekend has absolutely no connection to real forgiveness. It is an empty blood ritual that has no connection to people's "sins". It achieves nothing. My wrongdoings are my own. Jesus can no more take responsibility for my wrongdoing than he can take credit for my achievements.
If God wants to forgive us for the imagined "sins" that apparently so upset him, all he need do is forgive us. But, no, he has to force us to jump through these bizarre hoops.
The rules aren't either arbitrary or obscure. Everyone ever born has a conscience (a knowledge of good and evil).
Except for sociopaths And you apparently.
And everyone ever born has access to the exact same set of rules.
This is a straightforward lie. Millions have been born and died without ever having seen a Bible.
What basis is there for supposing punishment being carried out in any other currency?
I dunno... mercy? Another unfamiliar concept I'm guessing.
You would agree that your belief wouldn't alter things if they are indeed true?
Regardless of whether he is real or not, I can assure you that desire to separate myself from God does not motivate me at all. Outside of discussions like these, I never give him much thought.
Ask yourself if you are motivated by a desire to be separated from Brahma and you might get the idea.
Did you notice my saying "in so far as it is commandeered.." If you take the arguments as they are applied to the Jewish god in the film and criticise the biblical God with same then you're at crossed purposes.
You're mixing up your gods.
You are the one who started this discussion by suggesting that Jews should turn to the NT. Mixing up the two versions of God (the same God of course) was your game. I have been trying to point out to you how offensive this is throughout.
To suggest that Jews who are being slaughtered by Christians just need a bit more Christianity is spectacularly callous and insulting.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by iano, posted 01-18-2011 5:25 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by iano, posted 01-19-2011 5:40 PM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 96 of 114 (601304)
01-19-2011 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by iano
01-19-2011 5:40 PM


Re: Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
This is a very longwinded way of re-stating the basis for your holding the account anti-semetic. You don't believe it - or whole swathes of the gospel accounts - are an accurate historical statement of what occurred. Ergo - anti-semetic.
A total failure to read and understand. The second passage I quoted, 1 Thess 2:14-16, is not an account of an event, historical or otherwise. It is simply an accusation that the Jews killed Christ, followed by some more random anti-Semitic hate-speech.
This is Paul's opinion, not a recounting of events (talk about your original self-hating Jew). Your previous defence cannot apply here, unless you yourself are of the opinion that the Jews "killed the Lord Jesus" and regard the Blood Libel as historical fact.
Is that what you think? I would not put it past you.
I, on the other hand, do believe it's an accurate account of what took place.
Uh huh. Just as you believe that the contradictory accounts are accurate. I get it.
On second thoughts, let's not bother. A brief glance down the rest of your post gives a sense of the spirit of the discussion as you'd seem to want to partake of it.
Dude, you compared me to fucking Hitler!
Complain abut tone all you like, but it is pathetic for you to accuse another person of being morally comparable to Hitler, and then whine about them lowering the tone.
Your habit of saying appalling and outrageous things, in a bland tone, and then acting surprised when people are appalled and outraged is puerile.
Oh, and, just a hint for future movie review purposes; you might try actually watching the film before criticising it.
Mutate and Survive

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by iano, posted 01-19-2011 5:40 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by iano, posted 01-20-2011 3:08 AM Granny Magda has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 106 of 114 (601452)
01-20-2011 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by iano
01-20-2011 3:08 AM


Re: Praise Be Unto His Child Murdering Glory
IF the Jews killed Christ (per gospel account)
That is an inaccurate account of what appears in the Gospels, where Romans kill Christ, with a greater or lesser degree of encouragement form Jews (depending on the book). You even lie about the content of the Bible.
Besides, it is fatuous to present the Gospels as a factual account when they disagree wildly over this very incident.
You're back to belief vs. unbelief regarding the historicity of the account. Paul vs. you this time.
No we are not. Paul includes comment in his letter, that goes beyond any historical account.
Assuming Paul is basing his writing on fact, where's the hate-speech?
Are you deliberately trying to get my goat? Because I had not taken you for a stupid man. Evil or sociopathic perhaps, but not stupid.
But okay, if that's how you want it, welcome to Hate Speech For Dummies;
quote:
2:14 For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:
"The Jews". Here is perhaps the biggest problem. Paul talks about "the Jews" as if they were some sort of monolithic entity, all identical in their evil and depravity. This is patent anti-Semitism.
Hate speech is any speech that disparages a person or group on the basis of their race, ethnicity, etc. This way of referring to Jews as a homogeneous group of evildoers very clearly constitutes hate speech.
Jews are not some homogeneous evil cult. Jews are people, individuals, with opinions and thoughts of their own. Paul is trying to dehumanise them here, by referring to Jews en masse. This is a typical first step in any hate campaign. It is, for example, exactly the kind of language that Hitler used to dehumanise Jews in his time. It encourages people to view Jews as a hostile outsider, rather than as individuals. This is the first step in persecution.
Whatever foolishness you believe about the execution of Jesus, you must accept that "the Jews" are not responsible for his death. Some Jews might have been. Certain individual members of the Sanhedrin would bear responsibility (although they still did not kill him), certain individuals from amongst the crowd could be said to bear responsibility (although they did not kill him either), but to blame "the Jews" as a whole is false and hateful.
Even by the time Paul was writing, many of those who can even be suggested to have born responsibility would have died, yet Paul refers to "the Jews" in the present tense and blames them. None of those present at the trial would have been in Thessalonica, yet Paul writes as though there is no distinction between Jews who were there at the death of Christ and Jews who lived hundreds of miles away or had not even been born. This is hate speech.
Further, Paul could easily be damning the Romans in this way, since it would have been Roman soldiers and leaders who bore the most direct blame for Jesus' death, but he does not. Not politically expedient I suppose. This biased choice of target is again indicative of hate speech.
I ought not to have to explain to an adult living in a modern cosmopolitan nation, why it is wrong to judge all members of a religion or ethnic group by the actions of a historical subset of that group. It is called "prejudice". It is the backbone of racism, anti-Semitism and all other forms of prejudice. Prejudice is wrong iano. Of course, given your approval for collective punishment , I can see how this insight might have eluded you.
quote:
2:15 Who both killed the Lord Jesus,
That is an inaccurate portrayal of the Gospel accounts, nor did all Jews kill Christ, at most, only a handful can legitimately be blamed.
quote:
and their own prophets,
Not sure what he's referring to here, but again, the same principle applies. He cannot blame all the Jews, only a handful at most, but he just smears all Jews with the crime of killing their prophets, as though they were all in on it. that is hate speech.
quote:
and have persecuted us
Selective bias. Paul attempts to make much of this, even though he could easily note that one of those responsible for this persecution was himself. Again though, not all Jews can be blamed for the actions of a subset. That is hate speech.
quote:
and they please not God, and are contrary to all men
Again, we see Paul damn an entire religious/ethnic group.
This is what I mean by comment. There is nothing historical here, This is written in the present tense.
The phrase "contrary to all men" is particularly telling. It is a textbook example of the dehumanisation of the hated outsider, a standard tactic in racial hatred and other forms of prejudice.
quote:
2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always
Jews are all treated as being sinners to the maximum possible degree. All this because a tiny subsection of Jews, in another place and time, are accused of doing wrong. This is an especially clear case of anti-Semitism. Jews who had not even been born when Jesus was killed can bear no responsibility, but Paul tars all Jews with the "sinner" brush, even to the extent that Jews are considered sinners to the maximum degree.
quote:
for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
And we finish off with a non-specific threat. Jews apparently receive the uttermost wrath. Not murderers, or rapists, not those few actually responsible for the death of Christ, but Jews.
Any Jew reading that, especially one in a Nazi concentration camp, would be rightly appalled. It is only to easy to see why the God of the NT isn't the salve you seem to think it is; the NT portrays wrath against Jews in a favourable light. Far from being a comfort to Jews in their suffering, this filth portrays their suffering as being in accordance with God's plans.
Mutate and Survive
Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.
Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by iano, posted 01-20-2011 3:08 AM iano has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024