It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel..Favored by the world???

page: 8
5
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I never said "Jew", but Judaism..

Anyways. I know youre enjoying yourself but i have to go to bed.




posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


You talk as if youve read the Talmud, or can read Hebrew or Aramaic.

And as for me reading Torah 25+ times.. Most religious jews have read Torah many times more than I have. In the beginning its simply learning the language and the narratives. After the 10th time or so you enter the Remez, Derush and Sod of PaRDeS... The Kabbalah of the Torah.

A Torah sage like yourself should know that.
edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
Whats weird is that of all of G-ds creations, only human beings have foreskins.


Actually, every mammal has a foreskin, with the exception of monotremes (the platypus and echidna; they have cloacas and function more like birds). Humans, and other primates just happen to have rather small ones; most other mammals have a foreskin in the form of a sheath. All the higher primates (that is, the great apes and both old and new world monkeys) have foreskins that are identical to those of a human.

But we're moving afield into zoology.


Kabbalistically this signifies a husk or insensitivity to the spiritual and divine. Removing it desensitizes you to the physical and allows one to hone and sensitize himself to the spiritual. Pretty simple. pretty reasonable.


And when it comes down to it you're still lopping off a part of a penis, aren't you? You can come up with all the religious reasons for the practice you want. The Shia have their reasons for mortifying their flesh just as you have yours.


Conversely, you have got to have some serious issues with logic if you think removing the foreskin at 8 days is remotely alike to slashing your head and smearing the blood over your face and body.


Yes, you do.

The latter is harmless; minor chanse of infection from the cut to your scalp. It sure looks dramatic, but it's a nick to the scalp, nothing more. Bleeds profusely and brightly, then heals u[ in two days or so, good as new.

On the other hand, conducting surgery on the penis of a baby can have significant health repercussions; infection, lasting nerve or blood vessel damage, and the plain fact that you're conducting cosmetic surgery on a newborn.


That is entirely barabaric,


Not as barbaric as demanding their deaths. if I had a choice to hang out with some wacky dudes bleeding from the forehead, or another wacky dude demanding they all be exterminated? I'd go with the former.


And no. Buddy. It is an ancient practice of the ancient tribes of the middle east. A 4th century midrash comments on this practice as being popular amongst the children of Ishmael (later known as muslims)


Got a source for me? And no, "children of Ishmael" would be Arabs, according to the source. In the 4th century, most Arabs were - get this - Jewish.


Youire the sick and demented one if thats the case..


because I don't demand people's deaths? If that's the case, I'll happily be "sick and demented"


now...manipulate away... I think you might do this professionally for a living!


Nope. I care for the elderly for a living. Historical study and political debate are just hobbies.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 



Lets just agree to disagree.

Now get out of my thread.

Go peddle your theories somewhere else


Gawd, that's the biggest cop out yet on ATS.

I can't debate you so get out of my thread??
Man you are pathetic..

BTW, I saw no theories, just facts that YOU had no answer for..
Not sure about foreskin, I think you just lost a few a bit lower..

edit on 15-1-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 





Actually, every mammal has a foreskin, with the exception of monotremes (the platypus and echidna; they have cloacas and function more like birds). Humans, and other primates just happen to have rather small ones; most other mammals have a foreskin in the form of a sheath. All the higher primates (that is, the great apes and both old and new world monkeys) have foreskins that are identical to those of a human.


Nice try.




Homo sapiens may be the only species that has a foreskin. Farm animals have prepuces [15]. There are no published statements on non-human primates that allow classification. Personal communication indicates that many if not all Macaque species of monkeys do not have foreskins [16]. There is a prosimian species described as having an "...ample prepuce which narrows over the apex glandis in singularly human fashion' [17] but the size of the flaccid penis looks small and seems unlikely to remain covered during an erection. The flaccid human penis is said to be uniquely large in relative size [7]. Also Hafez [18] says, `Man is exceptional in attachment of the prepuce very close to the glans.' Both features may have been important in the evolution of the foreskin.


A prepuce or 'sheath' as you called it, is also not a foreskin



Current dictionaries use the term foreskin and prepuce interchangeably. It is now possible to make a clear distinction between them. According to Roberts [15], `the prepuce, or sheath, is a double invagination of skin which contains and covers the free portion of the penis when not erect and covers the body of the penis behind the glans when the penis is erect.' A foreskin is a double invagination of skin that covers the glans when the penis is erect and is retracted over the body of the glans with intromission.


www.cirp.org...

Its also healthier and more hygenic to get circumsized. Which is why this "barbaric" practice is so popular in the West.

You are far too unreasonable a person to talk with. Cutting your face and running about in a frenzy is done for psycho-spiritual reasons. Same thing with self mortification in Christianity. They both got these practices from the pagans. And no, clearly slashing your head and letting the blood run is far more eccentric and strange than the the rite of circumcision, which has deep and meaningful spiritual significance. Not this decadent blood drenched nonsense.
edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 



Its also healthier and more hygenic to get circumsized.


Many many doctors would disagree with you....
Funny, our family doctor is jewish and he disagrees with you...

But is pertinent to note that that is the only thing you can argue after fox just destroyed your whole post.

edit on 15-1-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


And how many of those US resolutions has Israel actually followed, i'll save you the trouble, Not many.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 04:46 AM
link   
I am not sure what the point of the OPs thread is...I have Read Through it and i am confused....is this to say that Israel is a not getting what it deserves by the UN...


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992.

Note that Israel is in VIOLATION of many of these Resolutions.
Resolution 106: "...condemns Israel for Gaza raid"
Resolution 111: "...condemns Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"
Resolution 127: "...recommends Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"
Resolution 162: "...urges Israel to comply with UN decisions"
Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations by Israel in its attack on Syria"
Resolution 228: "...censures Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"
Resolution 237: "...urges Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"
Resolution 248: "...condemns Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"
Resolution 250: "...calls on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"
Resolution 251: "...deeply deplores Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"
Resolution 252: "...declares invalid Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"
Resolution 256: "...condemns Israeli raids on Jordan as flagrant violation"
Resolution 259: "...deplores Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"
Resolution 262: "...condemns Israel for attack on Beirut airport"
Resolution 265: "...condemns Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"
Resolution 267: "...censures Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 270: "...condemns Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"
Resolution 271: "...condemns Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"
Resolution 279: "...demands withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 280: "...condemns Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 285: "...demands immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"
Resolution 298: "...deplores Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 313: "...demands that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 316: "...condemns Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 317: "...deplores Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"
Resolution 332: "...condemns Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 337: "...condemns Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"
Resolution 347: "...condemns Israeli attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 425: "...calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 427: "...calls on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon"
Resolution 444: "...deplores Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"
Resolution 446: "...determines that Israeli settlements are a serious obstruction to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 450: "...calls on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"
Resolution 452: "...calls on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"
Resolution 465: "...deplores Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"
Resolution 467: "...strongly deplores Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"
Resolution 468: "...calls on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"
Resolution 469: "...strongly deplores Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians"
Resolution 471: "...expresses deep concern at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 476: "...reiterates that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are null and void"
Resolution 478: "...censures (Israel) in the strongest terms for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'"
Resolution 484: "...declares it imperative that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"
Resolution 487: "...strongly condemns Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"
Resolution 497: "...decides that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is null and void and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"
Resolution 498: "...calls on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"
Resolution 501: "...calls on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"
Resolution 509: "...demands that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"
Resolution 515: "...demands that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"
Resolution 517: "...censures Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 518: "...demands that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"
Resolution 520: "...condemns Israel's attack into West Beirut"
Resolution 573: "...condemns Israel vigorously for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters"
Resolution 587: "...takes note of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"
Resolution 592: "...strongly deplores the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"
Resolution 605: "...strongly deplores Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians"
Resolution 607: "...calls on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 608: "...deeply regrets that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 636: "...deeply regrets Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 641: "...deplores Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians"
Resolution 672: "...condemns Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount"
Resolution 673: "...deplores Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations"
Resolution 681: "...deplores Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians"
Resolution 694: "...deplores Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return"
Resolution 726: "...strongly condemns Israel's deportation of Palestinians"
Resolution 799: "...strongly condemns Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return."


source

don't worry Israel is being backed up by the US on most of these so the balance of life continues.

Does Israel get a bad rap...as well it should in my eyes....the State of Rothschilds(Israel) has been a farce and a political tactic in the world since it's inception....IT has been a blithe on this planet and it was set up to be exactly that.
Do i have a problem with jews...not at all....but i do have a problem with a political state being set up as a piece to keep the world in a state of crisis for ove 50 yaers...it is wrong.
Many Orthodox jews don't believe that a homeland is at all necessary for the survival of Jews...it was a Zionist Creation...not a jewish one...it was a creation of the Rothschilds.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 




I agree...But does that mean we simply ignore the wrongs that are known because we know there are others being done that go unpunished??

No, we're just discussing the topic, which is whether or not Israel gets favored by the world.
But if we're looking at whether or not this has any effect or influence on what our opinions *should* be in regards to the middle east, well, then, I think this has a few consequences:

1) The US can completely ignore the UN and veto it on anything, as by dealing only with Israel it stopped being relevant to the rest of the world.
2) In not seeing in what ways other nations deal with terrorism, insurgencies, and minorities Israel seems like the most inhumane nation of earth (Egypt- Poison gas in Gaza smuggling tunnles, Turkey- Genocide of the Kurdish people, China- Inhumane acts against Tibet, America/EU/Australia- Torturing of prisoners in Iraq, shoot first ask questions later behavior in Afghanistan, civilian death toll off the roof, Somalia, Eritrea- People are being butchered like animals, etc).
3) In not seeing how different nations deal with their conflicts people do not understand the complexities of fighting in an urban environment, against a foe that doesn't wear uniform to distinguish itself from the civilian population. I think the main problem is people think all the civilian kills in Gaza are due to soldiers being evil, maybe when they see how other armies get 10 times the amount of civilian casualties in similar situations they'd see Israel in a different light.

The war in Gaza is atrocious, and some of the things Israel did are extremely bad, sometimes downright evil, but not only does it take two to tango, I also think regardless of its enemies, Israel is perceived as much more evil than it actually is because people don't understand what war is, how it's fought, and why.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Eliad
 


Personally I think people understand a bit far to well the Agenda and the goals of Israel far too much and how the filthy rich banking family of the Rothschilds set this whole hting into play and hide behind the religion of Judaism to promote the Zionist Agenda of expansion throughout the middle East and Yes people realize that there are many horrible nations doing horrible things to the people of this planet...but does that make it any better for Israel to get away with murder...to be able to ignore UN resolutions to have the Zionist infiltrated US goverment there to veto these resolutions...to know how the Zionist's have also infiltrated the foriegn relations council and use all these things to their advantage....lets not forget who formed Israel....through the Rothshilds with the backing of the British.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by plube
 


Friend, its been 60 years and Israel has only taken to itself this tiny piece of land.

It's given back the Sinai which is three times its size, and during its wars it has gotten as close as a few dozen KM from Damascus, Cairo and Beirut, lands which it could have easily claimed for itself, as Arab armies were defeated and exhausted.

It did not.

So what basis does your claim have? The tiny portion of the Gaza strip and West bank which it has tried to negotiate back in 67' only to be refused by Arab nations? The Golan heights which is strategically invaluable?

Israel is never going to grow any bigger than it is right now.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


If you had read your bible,

Ishmael was the son of Hagar - the Egyptian. The word Islam itself is related to the Hebrew Ishmael - same 3 basic consonants. Shin (which also can be pronounced as a Sin), Lamed, Mem.

It refers to Muslims.

Just like Esau refers to Christians "Esau..he is Edom".. and Edom is Rome.

Also, if 4th century Arabs were Jews (an idiotic thing to say) than why would the Midrash refer to another group as Ishmalites?
edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


This is what i mean when i said moral relativism.

You equate this barabatic - completely irrational pagan rite (which is indicative of their war loving culture. what do you expect from a people that have been on military campaigns for 1400 years... Their bloody past is a testamant to this thesis. The Egyptian invasion of Yemen left 250,000 dead. The Algerian civil war left 1,000,000 dead. the Lebanese civil war left 100,000 dead. the Libyan dispute with chad left 100,000 dead. The Iran-Iraq war left 1,000,000 dead. Iraqs invasion of Kuwait and the ensuing gulf war left 100,000 dead. the number dead from sectarian civil war in Sudan has left atleast 2,000,000 dead....And, you compare Islam, to Judaism? You would choose sides with these people...even though they too, atleast most of them, practice circumcision? It sounds like you simply hate Judaism.)

You see only gray..and when it suits your mood, you make it white or black...

Heres what paul eidelberg has to say about Hobbes and his 'the thoughts are tools for achieving that which is desired" idea.

"We must now return to Hobbes. Consider again his statement "the thoughts are to the desires, as scouts and spies, to range abroad and find the way to the things desired". But surely this applies to Hobbes own thoughts, unless he can show - which he does not - that his thoughts are exempt from his own conclusions! Hobbes' thoughts are nothing but the instrument of his own desires. Of mans desires he mentions "the desire of power, of riches, of knowledge and of honor. All of which may be reduced to the first, that is, desire for power" For riches, knowledge, honor, are but several sorts of power". It follows that his leviathan is a manifestation of Hobbes desire for power, or what Nietzsche termed "a species of autobiography". But this means that the doctrine of moral relativism, as set forth in the Leviathan, has no objective validity! Yet this doctrine, as presented in that work, dominates the mentality of the modern day world. In other words, modernity is largely the manifestation of the will to power of Thomas Hobbes, who more or less elaborated his thoughts, and therefore advanced the the world historical project of Machiavelli"

edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


How many dead did the Bolshevik revolution and communist rule thereafter account for?




edit on 15-1-2011 by mayabong because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


I dont know. Why are you mentioning that?

Hundreds of thousands of religious Jews were shipped off to Siberia. The idea that the Jew were behind the bolshevik revolutiion simply doesnt make sense in light of that fact. All were equally oppressed. Anyone who thought differently; who were religious - christian, muslim, or jewish, were either killed or sent off to siberia for slave labor.

Anti-Jewish pograms in Russian Empire and Soviet Union
Refusniks - Jews proscribed by the soviets to emigrate to Israel
edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)


edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
question to dontreally:

I dont mean to interrupt, but I have been following this thread. I noticed that you say you are acquainted with Jewish holy texts. So I'd like a religious perspective on my following questions.

1. Would you say that the formation of the modern state of Israel was "religious" in nature, in the way christian supporters of zionism interpret the event... that the formation of Israel was "prophecy" taking place.

2. If modern jews under the "zionist" label are entitled to that piece of land in the middle east because God gave it to the ancient Israelites, then why is it that zionism was founded by an irreligious, if not outright atheist (correct me if I an wrong) jew Theodr Herzl?

3. What part of the Basel program(first zionist congress) seems "religious" and "prophetic" to you?



Zionism seeks to establish a home for the Jewish people in Eretz­Israel secured under public law. The Congress contemplates the following means to the attainment of this end:

1. The promotion by appropriate means of the settlement in Eretz-Israel of Jewish farmers, artisans, and manufacturers.
2. The organization and uniting of the whole of Jewry by means of appropriate institutions, both local and international, in accordance with the laws of each country.
3. The strengthening and fostering of Jewish national sentiment and national consciousness.
4. Preparatory steps toward obtaining the consent of governments, where necessary, in order to reach the goals of Zionism.


source : www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...&_Basel_Program.html


4. If there is nothing "religious" or "prophetic" about the formnation of the modern day state of Israel, then are christian supporters of zionism, simply dead-wrong or misguided? I mean, why the blind support for Israel or zionism that has its origins in irreligious or atheist jews?

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 





Actually, every mammal has a foreskin, with the exception of monotremes (the platypus and echidna; they have cloacas and function more like birds). Humans, and other primates just happen to have rather small ones; most other mammals have a foreskin in the form of a sheath. All the higher primates (that is, the great apes and both old and new world monkeys) have foreskins that are identical to those of a human.


Nice try.




Homo sapiens may be the only species that has a foreskin. Farm animals have prepuces [15]. There are no published statements on non-human primates that allow classification. Personal communication indicates that many if not all Macaque species of monkeys do not have foreskins [16]. There is a prosimian species described as having an "...ample prepuce which narrows over the apex glandis in singularly human fashion' [17] but the size of the flaccid penis looks small and seems unlikely to remain covered during an erection. The flaccid human penis is said to be uniquely large in relative size [7]. Also Hafez [18] says, `Man is exceptional in attachment of the prepuce very close to the glans.' Both features may have been important in the evolution of the foreskin.


A prepuce or 'sheath' as you called it, is also not a foreskin



Current dictionaries use the term foreskin and prepuce interchangeably. It is now possible to make a clear distinction between them. According to Roberts [15], `the prepuce, or sheath, is a double invagination of skin which contains and covers the free portion of the penis when not erect and covers the body of the penis behind the glans when the penis is erect.' A foreskin is a double invagination of skin that covers the glans when the penis is erect and is retracted over the body of the glans with intromission.


www.cirp.org...


All this basically says that a human's prepuce is different from a dog's, which is different from a bulls, which is differing from a wallaby's. The structure is functionally identical, is formed by the same cells, via the same process.

And yes, humans do have unusually large penises relative to body size. Your mileage may vary, of course.


Its also healthier and more hygenic to get circumsized. Which is why this "barbaric" practice is so popular in the West.


No, it's popular in the united states. It is only healthier and more hygenic if the parents are too squeamish to actually clean their own child. It comes at risk of damage to the organ, blood vessels, and infection at the incision. All for what amounts to an unconsensual bit of cosmetic surgery.

If you want to slice your tip off as a consenting adult, by all means, it's your john thomas. When you do it to a baby, and do so in the claim that god tells you to? That's strange, at the very least.


You are far too unreasonable a person to talk with.


Well, I'm not the one claiming some sort of authority as to who is and is not a Jew. Nor am I demonizing a huge chunk of the human species for being a different religion from myself. Nor do I believe that a book about magical sky ponies telling people to massacre their neighbors is an excellent guide to morality.

Your standards of reasonableness seem to hinge on whether a person agrees with you or not.


Cutting your face and running about in a frenzy is done for psycho-spiritual reasons. Same thing with self mortification in Christianity. They both got these practices from the pagans.


You have not explained which pagans they got these traditions from or any sources about those pagans and their practices. You mumbled something about the Canaanites, but by the time Imam Ali was killed, the Canaanite religion had been extinct for over a thousand years, long since washed away by Greek Hellenism. And the Shia were in Mesopotamia. At the tiume Islam entered Mesopotamia, there were three religions - Chaldean Christianity, Baghdadi Judaism, and some remnants of Zoroastrianism; none qualify as "pagan." The practice doesn't predate the Shia, else Sunni would also practice it.

Both Christian mortification and the Shia mourning of Ali were independently derived. The point is to come closer in relation to Jesus / Ali, to understand his suffering, and to give atonement for your own crimes against the martyr.

It's actually quite different from practices such as tantra, the sun dance, or sibylline flagellation, which were indeed "psycho-spiritual" in that their intent was to engender an altered state of awareness upon the practitioner.


And no, clearly slashing your head and letting the blood run is far more eccentric and strange than the the rite of circumcision, which has deep and meaningful spiritual significance.


"Our beliefs have meaning, their beliefs are false." Words spoken by every torch-wielding mob intent upon a synagogue. GOod work, man, you're identifying with the oppressor.

As I've said, from my perspective, all you Abrahamists are pretty wacky. Still, you have yet to convince me that Shia cutting themselves is any stranger than Jews cutting their kids.

You're Haredi, correct? Isn't the tradition then to suck the wound after circumcising the penis? Seems to be this would be a very good way to cause an infection; human mouths are a kittle on the gross side.


Not this decadent blood drenched nonsense.
edit on 15-1-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)


Please. a cut on the scalp is hardly "blood drenched." You should read up on how the Romans practiced Mithraism.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

Just like to preface this by saying these are just my opinions. Im not a Jew, though i am quite acquainted with Jewish theology.




1) Would you say that the formation of the modern state of Israel was "religious" in nature, in the way christian supporters of zionism interpret the event... that the formation of Israel was "prophecy" taking place
.

Hell No. The state was founded by secularists. Theodore Herzl was as far as possible from being a religious Jew.

In the beginning, around the mid to late 19th century, most orthodox Jews flat out rejected the Zionists and thus their desire to create a secular state. Than came Abraham Isaac kook who explained that the restoration of Israel would occur THROUGH the secularists. There are many verses from the Tanakh to justify this ie; "the wicked shall prepare, but the righteous shall wear".

Heres an amazing quote from a book i was reading discussing the halachic (legal) issues of the Jews return to Israel. There are still some orthodox Jews - a vast minority, who still feel that the state is destined to fail. They cite the '3 oaths' mentioned in the talmud. This basically demands that all Jews while living in the Diaspora not make an attempt to raid the land of Israel and take it over (from the christians/muslims)

"but what is utterly astonishing and incredible is that in psalm 69:36, King David predicted the beginning of the redemption in the special sequence in which it has actually occured! This psalm, which is almost a condensation of the book of lamentations, describes the tribulations the Jews will have in exile. It begins: Save me, O G-d, for the waters are come into my soul. I sink in a deep mire, where there is no standing. I am come into deep waters and the flood overwhelms me. I am weary with my crying; my throat is dried. My eyes fail while i wait for my Go" Then, after elaborating on the suffering of the Jews in exile, King David assures them that, in the end, " God will help Zion, and he will rebuild the cities of Judah, and tehy shall live there (YESHIVA) and conquer it (YERUSHA)!!! Everywhere else in the Bible of Israel the word yerusha is written first, whereas the word yeshiva always occurs second. But here, in his prophecy of the future redemption, King David first mentions yeshiva - living in the land of Israel -- and only second does he mention yerusha - conquering the land. This is the only place in the bible where the order is reversed!"

In other words, the 3 oaths are invalid and null and void because the Jews first got permission to live in Israel - from the league of nations, and only THEN conquered it after having already been living in it.. Predicting the order of their final redemption and validating the prophetic words of King David.

Undoubtedly we are living in midst of messianic times. Theres a reason why the Temple Institute is building a mock temple just outside Jerusalem. Why theyve built the golden menorah for the temple, the priestly garments, ladles, shovels, harps, trumpets, alters etc... preparing for the day of Moshiachs arrival. and Israels 70% Haredi 2nd graders augur that day.

I thank G-d that there are Evangelicals and baptists who stand by with Israel in these times.




2. If modern jews under the "zionist" label are entitled to that piece of land in the middle east because God gave it to the ancient Israelites, then why is it that zionism was founded by an irreligious, if not outright atheist (correct me if I an wrong) jew Theodr Herzl?


Thats a deep theological question. There are many answers but the simple one is; Teshuva. G-d wants people to RETURN to him. And if a secular state with secular Jews can come to the realization that they cannot continue to exist without G-d.. .then, then they will return, the world will se wonders and G-d will be greatly glorified because of it.




3. What part of the Basel program(first zionist congress) seems "religious" and "prophetic" to you?

The secularists serve their western pagan sponsors. The current Israel is meant to be a reversal, and mockery of the original one. Hence a "david" (ben gurion) founded Israel. As if he was the new secular king of the Jews.




4. If there is nothing "religious" or "prophetic" about the formnation of the modern day state of Israel, then are christian supporters of zionism, simply dead-wrong or misguided? I mean, why the blind support for Israel or zionism that has its origins in irreligious or atheist jews?


I think G-d has guided those men. Its definitely in their interest that christians stand by Israel.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 





You're Haredi, correct? Isn't the tradition then to suck the wound after circumcising the penis? Seems to be this would be a very good way to cause an infection; human mouths are a kittle on the gross side.


Wait what? they suck the bloody kid penis? maybe i'm reading this wrong. lol



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 





It's actually quite different from practices such as tantra, the sun dance, or sibylline flagellation, which were indeed "psycho-spiritual" in that their intent was to engender an altered state of awareness upon the practitioner.


So you dont think cutting yourself induces a change in consciousness?

I can assure you, it does.

That was the entire basis in this ancient pagan practice. I dont have to specify WHICH group did it, because it was universal. Any method that can alter ones consciousness had been experimented with and utliized by the ancient cultists. Sex was another one. As was eating the raw flesh or blood; whether of an animal or in some sick cases, a human being; as the rites of dionysus, bacchus, sabazios, osiris in Egypt and many others etc show. I also believe this is quite popular in Hinduism with 'Kali' the goddess of death.




"Our beliefs have meaning, their beliefs are false.""


Lets get a consensus from all REASONABLE men. Lets first show them the practice, and than explain the symbolic significance of it. Circumcision is done on the organ of the body assiocated with life - the phallus in kabbalah is Yesod, which means 'foundation'. it establishes ones relationship with reality. All ones vitality passes through it; whether psychologically, or physically (in coitus). Circumcizing it signifies removing a thick, desensitizing husk which spiritually speaking means removing the husk of the heart; of the emotions. In Kabbalah, Yesod is the lowest extemity of the 6 emotive sefirot. It therefore clarifies emotion and refines it for more spiritual purposes. Its a very noble and dignified practice. The fact that that it seeks to BETTER our spiritual condition, and is thoughtful, and Morally responsible should warrant the admiration of all thoughtful men; Jewish or not. Also, this is done among muslims aswell; partly. In the Jewish rite the mucus membrane that covers the corona is also removed. This signifies the subtleties of emotion. The main foreskin is the blatant, obvious emotional characteristics that need to be corrected. The less obvious mucus membrane are those subtle emotional aspects that need rectification.

Now i dont even think i need to comprare this beautiful and divine practice with slashing your forehead and running around frenzied. Whatever reason that can be given for it will still pale in decency in comparison.




You're Haredi, correct? Isn't the tradition then to suck the wound after circumcising the penis? Seems to be this would be a very good way to cause an infection; human mouths are a kittle on the gross side.


No.. Not Haredi. Have you heard of Bnei Noach? Im basically a gentile with an admiration for Judaism.

Yes. thats a practice. its done to help stop the bleeding.

To even think of anything perverse about it just reveals your own sordid mind. Its an 8 day old baby. The parents and many other friends and family are around. Its done for hygenic reasons. Thats all.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join