Messianic Jews say they are persecute...

Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

There are 71944 comments on the Newsday story from Jun 21, 2008, titled Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel. In it, Newsday reports that:

Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67140 Feb 8, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
In the past, using the yogic force, I have also cured cancer, AIDS, typhoid, pneumonia, hepatitis, etc,.....Genetic diseases take a longer time to cure using the force - at least with me this is the case. Medical doctors will not understand all this...
chuckle
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67141 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is your opportunity to earn that FIRST gold star.
Had you actually read the posts, you would have noted that I was arguing against theism. As I normally do.
Now, all I need from you is an acknowledgement that you were wrong, and I can go ahead and AWARD you your very FIRST gold star.
If you believe that a deity exists, you are a theist; otherwise you're an atheist.

According to CoR (and others), you can be gnostic or agnostic version of either.

I wouldn't argue those categories. I would fall into the agnostic atheist group if I correctly recall the categories.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67142 Feb 8, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
If you believe that a deity exists, you are a theist; otherwise you're an atheist.
According to CoR (and others), you can be gnostic or agnostic version of either.
I wouldn't argue those categories. I would fall into the agnostic atheist group if I correctly recall the categories.
That definition suffers from the bias of stressing "belief". My religion stresses behavior over belief (as we all know...)

So I would argue that the typology, though logical, isnt very relevant once you get out of Christianity.

As for how I practice my religion,(i.e how I behave), I definitely dont act as if there is a deity as described below. However, I would not self-identify as an atheist, as that term has no meaning in my practice, no more than worrying about whether Jesus exists. Its the concern of to the intellectuals, and to the Christians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity
Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. Some faiths and traditions consider it blasphemous to imagine or depict the deity as having any concrete form. Deities are often thought to be immortal, and are commonly assumed to have personalities and to possess consciousness, intellects, desires, and emotions comparable but usually superior to those of humans. A male deity is a god, while a female deity is a goddess.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67143 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
That definition suffers from the bias of stressing "belief". My religion stresses behavior over belief (as we all know...)
So I would argue that the typology, though logical, isnt very relevant once you get out of Christianity.
As for how I practice my religion,(i.e how I behave), I definitely dont act as if there is a deity as described below. However, I would not self-identify as an atheist, as that term has no meaning in my practice, no more than worrying about whether Jesus exists. Its the concern of to the intellectuals, and to the Christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity
Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. Some faiths and traditions consider it blasphemous to imagine or depict the deity as having any concrete form. Deities are often thought to be immortal, and are commonly assumed to have personalities and to possess consciousness, intellects, desires, and emotions comparable but usually superior to those of humans. A male deity is a god, while a female deity is a goddess.
Ok but that's not what the "category" folks would say.

https://www.google.com/search...

They'd say "If the theism/deity switch" isn't turned to the ON position, then by default it is in the OFF position (think binary) and you are in fact an atheist.

I'd say it might be more intellectually honest to go ahead and accept that label.

I too resisted it for decades, claiming to be an agnostic until I did a better reading of the definitions.

The term doesn't have to have any meaning in your practice for it to apply.

And all this makes me wonder what the hell we were arguing over???
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67144 Feb 8, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
The yogic force is working wonders in the boy.
In the past, using the yogic force, I have also cured cancer, AIDS, typhoid, pneumonia, hepatitis, etc, but the cures effected by using the yogic force involves expenditure of higher frequency energy and the yogi is at the same time invaded by the disordered energy of the patient as the cure, which involves an exchange of energies between yogi and patient that occurs after establishing direct contact with the patient's energy field - gets underway. It takes not more than a few minutes to cure the above mentioned diseases. Genetic diseases take a longer time to cure using the force - at least with me this is the case. Medical doctors will not understand all this. The yogic force can be used to heal as well as to kill. These days, I don't involve myself in these dangerous cures using yogic force. I am only helping the mentally challenged boy out of compassion. The results are good...
I think I saw this happen in a good movie:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green_Mile_ (film)

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67145 Feb 8, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok but that's not what the "category" folks would say.
https://www.google.com/search...
They'd say "If the theism/deity switch" isn't turned to the ON position, then by default it is in the OFF position (think binary) and you are in fact an atheist.
I'd say it might be more intellectually honest to go ahead and accept that label.
I too resisted it for decades, claiming to be an agnostic until I did a better reading of the definitions.
The term doesn't have to have any meaning in your practice for it to apply.
And all this makes me wonder what the hell we were arguing over???
Well, I told you a while ago that I wasnt trying to convince you of a position (i.e. argue) but instead bring to the table another perspective

Sure, the atheists can put a label on me. But, really, is that any different in hubris than a fundamentalist Christian calling me a sinner? Or a radical Muslim calling me an infidel? Both of those are meaningful categories from within their system, but meaningless from mine/ours.

That all said, parsing aside, in reality I have no problem being labeled an agnostic. But not an atheist. COR might be correct as to the technical definition, but in common society atheism has a lot of baggage that I definitely dont share.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67146 Feb 8, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok but that's not what the "category" folks would say.
https://www.google.com/search...
Lol.,,,,that pretty much defines it, doesnt it?

I still reserve the right to reject that typology though.

To be more succinct, I dont BELIEVE in God, I ACT as if there is God. Whether I perceive it or not at the moment is moot.

That, in essence, is the difference between the Hebrew (Jewish) concept of "emunah" (faithfulness - a practice) and the English concept of faith (a static intellectual belief).

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#67147 Feb 8, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
The yogic force is working wonders in the boy.
In the past, using the yogic force, I have also cured cancer, AIDS, typhoid, pneumonia, hepatitis, etc,
You made me spray my champagne with this BS.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67148 Feb 8, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
You made me spray my champagne with this BS.
Cancer, Aids, I can understand

But typhoid? Who brags about curing typhoid?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#67149 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I told you a while ago that I wasnt trying to convince you of a position (i.e. argue) but instead bring to the table another perspective
Sure, the atheists can put a label on me. But, really, is that any different in hubris than a fundamentalist Christian calling me a sinner? Or a radical Muslim calling me an infidel? Both of those are meaningful categories from within their system, but meaningless from mine/ours.
That all said, parsing aside, in reality I have no problem being labeled an agnostic. But not an atheist. COR might be correct as to the technical definition, but in common society atheism has a lot of baggage that I definitely dont share.
Is it because you associate the word "atheist" with activist ("new") atheists? Prior to atheists becoming so vocal (a fairly recent phenomenon ), what baggage do you associate with them? The reason I ask is that I've never met two atheists that can agree on much of anything other than a disbelief in a deity.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#67150 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Cancer, Aids, I can understand
But typhoid? Who brags about curing typhoid?
Typhoid is a big deal in India. At least, it was until Joel cured it.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67151 Feb 8, 2014
Religion is dead and is based on falsehood. God or Gods don't exist as objective realities.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67152 Feb 8, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it because you associate the word "atheist" with activist ("new") atheists? Prior to atheists becoming so vocal (a fairly recent phenomenon ), what baggage do you associate with them? The reason I ask is that I've never met two atheists that can agree on much of anything other than a disbelief in a deity.
Nah.

To be an atheist implies to ACTIVELY disbelieve. What proportion of time does one have to spend disbelieving to be worthy of the label? You have to spend a lot of time focused on this issue, disbelieving. To me, that takes a certain type of person, a "militant" thinker. The flip of a "militant" believer I guess. To me its different side of the same coin. Both the believers and the atheists seem to be possessed with the issue of God, while I, as a behaviorist, tend to skirt the issue of belief - seeing it as irrelevant at best, and an obstruction to my religious practice at worst.

I have atheist thoughts from time to time,(anyone, religious or otherwise who doesnt, probably isnt being honest with themselves) but I would hate to be captured as a position within a label.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67153 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I told you a while ago that I wasnt trying to convince you of a position (i.e. argue) but instead bring to the table another perspective
Sure, the atheists can put a label on me. But, really, is that any different in hubris than a fundamentalist Christian calling me a sinner? Or a radical Muslim calling me an infidel? Both of those are meaningful categories from within their system, but meaningless from mine/ours.
That all said, parsing aside, in reality I have no problem being labeled an agnostic. But not an atheist. COR might be correct as to the technical definition, but in common society atheism has a lot of baggage that I definitely dont share.
So you're saying one has no right to quibble with a label that one has put on himself? That it is only the self who can properly label what he is? That to do so would be hubris?

Does that hold for Messianic Jews as well? Is it ok for them to call themselves Jews? Jews for Jesus etc.

How about Huggy? What's he? Who knows?

What baggage do atheists have - they just don't believe in god - so what?

I would think Jews/Christians/Muslims have a hell of lot more baggage.

I was an agnostic too for many years, until I got off the fence.

Baby steps.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67154 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol.,,,,that pretty much defines it, doesnt it?
I still reserve the right to reject that typology though.
To be more succinct, I dont BELIEVE in God, I ACT as if there is God. Whether I perceive it or not at the moment is moot.
That, in essence, is the difference between the Hebrew (Jewish) concept of "emunah" (faithfulness - a practice) and the English concept of faith (a static intellectual belief).
In any case it sounds as though you have the bases covered.

Just in case it's all true.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67155 Feb 8, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Nah.
To be an atheist implies to ACTIVELY disbelieve. What proportion of time does one have to spend disbelieving to be worthy of the label? You have to spend a lot of time focused on this issue, disbelieving. To me, that takes a certain type of person, a "militant" thinker. The flip of a "militant" believer I guess. To me its different side of the same coin. Both the believers and the atheists seem to be possessed with the issue of God, while I, as a behaviorist, tend to skirt the issue of belief - seeing it as irrelevant at best, and an obstruction to my religious practice at worst.
I have atheist thoughts from time to time,(anyone, religious or otherwise who doesnt, probably isnt being honest with themselves) but I would hate to be captured as a position within a label.
I see what you're saying. Like the slut and the prude both being preoccupied with sex. Two sides of the same coin.

But I don't see it that way at all.

The theist believes while the atheist does not.

I see it very simply as the absence of belief. It takes ZERO time to not believe something.

I spend NO TIME being an atheist. I promise you.

What would make you think it takes time to not believe something? This idea boggles my mind.

On the contrary, all that fence sitting and pondering your existence would seem to take quite a bit of time and energy. How much time do you spend with all that?

Call me a pragmatist, an atheist, an agnostic. All ok with me.

And I do practice being a good and decent person. The Golden Rule and so on. That's the best any of us can do.

Though I don't claim to have cured typhoid, AIDS or pneumonia.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67156 Feb 8, 2014
WHY IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD TO EXIST AS OBJECTIVE REALITY

God, say believers, exists as objective reality at some deeper level of existence and is, in fact, they aver, the source of reality.

On being asked about the basis or about the nature of this God, believers would say he is spirit or is the universe from a pantheistic perspective or with eastern mystical types God is pure consciousness.

None of these claims stand the test of reason as seen below.

1) What is spirit? No one can precisely define spirit in terms of stuff (substance) and there's no evidence to support the existence of a substance called spirit who creates energy, matter and consciousness to form the universe, unless by spirit is meant a specific degree of consciousness which then brings the term spirit into the realm of energy/matter since consciousness is an epiphenomenon of energy/matter in different states of organized activity..

2) God cannot be pure consciousness since consciousness itself does not have an objective existence it being devoid of substance and energy. Consciousness, as stated above, is an activity of energy/matter. The more organized a material system is the more is the consciousness expressed in it with the human brain manifesting the highest degree of consciousness on account of its complex neuronal connectivity. So, pure consciousness as objective reality does not exist and so a God whose nature is pure consciousness is falsehood.

3) To equate God with the universe, as the pantheist does, is sheer stupidity since the universe is simply a concentrate of energy/matter in different modes of vibration. Besides, if God is the universe then this God is transient and imperfect like the universe.

CONCLUSION: God as objective reality does not exist. God is simply a human psychological construct that has taken deep root in the subconscious of the collectivity who subscribe to this idea of a God. Believers are a deluded lot who live in a world of make-belief and unknown to them their own subconscious beliefs and images of God keep subtly manipulating their behavior and worldview.

“Act Interdimensional ly”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#67157 Feb 8, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>...I see it very simply as the absence of belief. It takes ZERO time to not believe something...
I'd like to think you spent more than 'zero time' considering the issue before dedicating yourself to a conviction. I certainly hope you're not one of those 'Dawkins said it, I believe it, end of story' kind of folks.

I observe that even if you spent very little time to arrive at your position; you do seem to dedicate a lot of your time to selling that position to others.

Personally, I find proselytism, even proselytism of the lack of belief rather boorish and ultimately offensive when it won't let up even when there is no receptive audience.

Just sayin'.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67158 Feb 8, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>

You made me spray my champagne with this BS.
Do you like Moet and Chandon?

Which wine glasses should champagne be served in?

“Act Interdimensional ly”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#67160 Feb 8, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>Do you like Moet and Chandon?

Which wine glasses should champagne be served in?
'Star Wars' commemorative Big Gulp cups

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cliff Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A local intstitution 14 hr guest 2
Grant Co.---rotten corner of NM (Sep '11) Wed Kohlikohn 51
Federal law enforcement agencies conduct meth s... Aug '15 dmac2030 4
News Yankie Street whitewater Jul '15 Msgtdon 1
News Luna County enters Joint Powers Agreement for C... Jul '15 American Citizen 4
News Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument may rais... (Jan '15) Jan '15 msgtdon 1
News Community education classes continue in April (Apr '14) Apr '14 Jackie 3
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Cliff Mortgages