Messianic Jews say they are persecute...

Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

There are 72043 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

#67176 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
The boundaries between Christianity and Jews is pretty clear cut to most - therefore I would think that for me to say that Jews can reject labels that have meaning only within the internal Christian system is a valid point. Note with the sinner example, I didnt get into self identification.

What I was advancing is the notion that these theistic labels really are rooted in the Christian or Western philosophical system, which is preoccupied with a higher status of belief than the Jewish system, which does not share the importance of these concepts at the same level.(Example given of "emunah" vs "faith')

The Messianic Christianity issue is all who gets the right to self-identify and what to do when that conflicts with socially accepted definitions. Different issue. My position on that is that I dont care on the INDIVIDUAL level WHAT a Messianics call themself (I am not going to tell people what to think about themselves personally- for that would be fascist) but IF they call themselves Jews to the outside world and advertise to the OUTSIDE as if they are Jews, then they should be prepared for pushback by those who hold the keys to that definition. Plus, most Christians (other than Messianics)would probably side with the Jews on the question of definition anyway.

You dont act atheist, you act agnostic. IMO of course.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67177 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
In any case it sounds as though you have the bases covered.
Just in case it's all true.
Thank you for the judgement. It means SO MUCH to me

(friendly sarcasm intended)

:)

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67178 Feb 9, 2014
I see see JOEL has floundered a perfectly good opportunity to earn a GOLD star.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67179 Feb 9, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
WHY IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD TO EXIST AS OBJECTIVE REALITY

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.
Idiot, I never argued strict pantheism. I gave my caveats, and why.

And by the way, who ever said that God has to be perfect? Absolute, yes, but perfect? Where did that baggage come from?
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67180 Feb 9, 2014
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
The key word here being "before." Which is not to say I've never reconsidered my position. Unlike some of us who were born into a faith, I needed a reason to believe, not a reason to not believe.

And if I weren't buying want generations of my own family was selling me, why the hell would I buy what some Brit was selling. I was agnostic for 30+ years before I ever heard of Dawkins/Hitchins/Bill Maher etc.

When a was teenager I asked my mother, "How do you know all this [Catholicism/Christianity] is true?" She responded, "Faith." I think that's about when I got off the train.
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Not at all. I ask questions of believers. Conversations.

I make no secret of the fact that religion and its adherents fascinate me.

That billions of people around the world hold beliefs without a shred of evidence....not to mention all the strife.....well I think its goddman interesting.
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
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'.
BS - no proselytizing.

And look, I just found out Frijoles is an atheist who calls himself an agnostic. That's what I was for years!

Now, how's your Adam-12 going?

"See the man at 1523 Lester Street."
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67181 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
But I dont see you as an atheist, I see you as an agnostic.
(open for argument I know)
Very open. It depends what set of definitions are being used.

I don't state there is no god. I state I don't believe in god.
And that it's unknown and unknowable.

Do you agree?
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
I spend little time on the fence worrying. Remember, I was the one a while ago who told you to stop thinking and more time experiencing.
On thinking vs experiencing....

What do you call it when you pray or meditate?

Isn't that thinking? or might you say feeling?
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67182 Feb 9, 2014
Rick Moss wrote:
<quoted text>
'Star Wars' commemorative Big Gulp cups
Have fun at Comic Con - when is it?

Too bad about Leonard Nimoy's recent diagnosis/announcement.

He didn't look or sound too good in the recent Start Trek movie. So it didn't surprise me much.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67183 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Its not that he is selling a position as much as he may be (indirectly) selling that fact that every one HAS a position.
But ultimately FR doesnt really advocate a position, he questions in order to understand your position.
Thanks very much.

I this stems from admitted intense curiosity on the subject.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67184 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Very open. It depends what set of definitions are being used.
I don't state there is no god. I state I don't believe in god.
And that it's unknown and unknowable.
Do you agree?
Thats been my position.
former res wrote:
<quoted text><quoted text>
On thinking vs experiencing....
What do you call it when you pray or meditate?
Isn't that thinking? or might you say feeling?
I call it (a) practice. Practice (of) connecting.

Ideally, I try integrate a variety of cognitive modes. You might be correct that all cognitive modes are thought, but I differentiate between thinking, visualizing (seeing), emoting (which includes experiencing awe), movement, etc --- all modes of cognition



“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67185 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks very much.
I this stems from admitted intense curiosity on the subject.
I spent about a decade trying to figure out what "holy" meant from my religion.

So simple, so oft used, and yet so complicated to really grasp

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67186 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
The key word here being "before." Which is not to say I've never reconsidered my position. Unlike some of us who were born into a faith, I needed a reason to believe, not a reason to not believe.
And if I weren't buying want generations of my own family was selling me, why the hell would I buy what some Brit was selling.
See how much easier it would of been if you were born Jewish? You wouldnt have to worry about faith, only faithfulness.

I dont need a reason to believe, rather I pursue my life in search of the experience of the belief. While searching for the language to express my experience, whatever it may be.

Do you see the difference? In the former one is trying to fit into a box. In the latter, one is creating the box to BEST (but imperfectly) express what you are already perceiving, which is by definition ALWAYS a work in progress.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67187 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The boundaries between Christianity and Jews is pretty clear cut to most - therefore I would think that for me to say that Jews can reject labels that have meaning only within the internal Christian system is a valid point. Note with the sinner example, I didnt get into self identification.
Well this all depends of you POV I suppose.

What's clear cut to you may be a grey area to another. And vice versa. But I agree that you have the right self identify as you see fit. But perhaps so do others as well. You obviously don't have to like it or agree.
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
What I was advancing is the notion that these theistic labels really are rooted in the Christian or Western philosophical system, which is preoccupied with a higher status of belief than the Jewish system, which does not share the importance of these concepts at the same level.(Example given of "emunah" vs "faith')
Fair enough.
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The Messianic Christianity issue is all who gets the right to self-identify and what to do when that conflicts with socially accepted definitions. Different issue. My position on that is that I dont care on the INDIVIDUAL level WHAT a Messianics call themself (I am not going to tell people what to think about themselves personally- for that would be fascist) but IF they call themselves Jews to the outside world and advertise to the OUTSIDE as if they are Jews, then they should be prepared for pushback by those who hold the keys to that definition. Plus, most Christians (other than Messianics)would probably side with the Jews on the question of definition anyway.
I do also, as I've said on here many times: "If you believe in JC, you ain't Jewish" or something to that effect.

I was only commenting on your "hubris" comment.

Does your position being valid to you (and others like me0 NOT make it hubris to tell others what they are or aren't? Just askin.

And I'm not quite sure what this means: "...those who hold the keys to that definition"
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
You dont act atheist, you act agnostic. IMO of course.
And I always felt like one. So I'll ask you the question (credit to CoR):

Are you atheist or agnostic on the Easter Bunny?

Do you have anymore evidence for the existence of God/a deity than you do for the Easter Bunny?

This is part of what made me re-evaluate my position.

But my response was also that this was too important to get wrong and also that I held out hope and would love to be proved wrong. Plus I often enjoy to church , sense of commintiy. the music etc.

“Act Interdimensional ly”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#67188 Feb 9, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Have fun at Comic Con - when is it?
Too bad about Leonard Nimoy's recent diagnosis/announcement.
He didn't look or sound too good in the recent Start Trek movie. So it didn't surprise me much.
Comic Con San Diego (the original, not the clone Cons) is in last week of July this year. My daughter and I go every year for the past few years-- it is the Geek Haj. In the past couple of years tickets are getting harder and harder to get and while it used to be almost a certainty you could get tickets if you attended in the previous year, that is no longer the case. Many of last years attendees complained about not being able to get tickets this year -- even for single days.

So, my daughter and I get some friends and we all try to get online together and the first one in buys the tickets. This year, it was my daughter who got in first (at 4AM Australia Time).

Because I love working with models and electronics, We typically do costumes on one of the days. Last year I made a working laser pistol and communicator from the "Star Trek" pilot (in the pilot they didn't have the phaser or black communicator) for a Christopher Pike (Jefferey Hunter) costume. It involved making a wood/foam model, making a mold of that from silicone, casting in polyurethane and acrylic then adding the metal bits I made with a mini lathe and the electronics -- laser diodes and sound modules. This year I'm working on a talking Tom Servo for a Joel MST3K costume.

I heard Mr. Nimoy was doing "OK" -- his words -- and we can take heart in the knowledge that Vulcans live an average of 200 years. Spock isn't even middle-aged yet.

JOEL COOL DUDE

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67189 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
I see see JOEL has floundered a perfectly good opportunity to earn a GOLD star.
Shouldn't the word be "squandered" instead of "floundered" in the sentence above, dearest Papa?

And, English is supposedly your first language.

Chill.

JOEL COOL DUDE

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67190 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Idiot, I never argued strict pantheism. I gave my caveats, and why.
Idiot?

You're my Papa.

That makes you a bigger idiot.

Your pantheist argument to buttress your religious blather does not cut ice since the universe is transient, imperfect and largely insistent (since sentience arises only in well organized molecular systems like the human brain though a semblance of consciousness may arise in rudimentary structures. So, if your God, or if your idea of religiosity, is the universe then I wonder how your God can feel, think, plan, know, command, reward, punish, judge and possess a heightened consciousness.

LOL.

JOEL COOL DUDE

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67191 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

And by the way, who ever said that God has to be perfect?

Absolute, yes, but perfect?
Here, you've contradicted yourself by stating on the one hand that your God need not be perfect and then on the other hand you say that your God is absolute.

Absolute means something that is in a state of perfect equilibrium or which is invariant in nature, while a God who has shortcomings can thus not be absolute at the same time, right?

Either say that your God (whatever the term God means to you) is either imperfect or evolutionary or absolute.

Mumbo jumbo.
Use only one term to describe your God.
JOEL

Mumbai, India

#67192 Feb 9, 2014
typo

since the universe is transient, imperfect and largely INSENTIENT

JOEL COOL DUDE

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67193 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Sure, science can tell us something about HOW the religious impulse functions.

But it has nothing to offer regarding the EXPRESSION of the religious impulse.
1) Science can tell us about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

1) Religion can not tell us anything about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

2) Science cannot tell us anything about subjectivity since each individual is unique in many ways and the human experience can only be understood by the experiencor (human subject).

2) Religion, too, is clueless about the subjective side of human experience but unlike science that does not lecture to us on how to live life and what to experience, religion arrogantly and ignorantly attempts to generalize human subjective states and makes everyone conform to one kind of reflexes, to uniform behavior and to a common code of values without understanding that subjective experiences and individuality cannot be generalized nor can people be made to conform to crude dictates of a general kind. At some point, humans will rebel and make every attempt to express their innate individuality that's free of dogmas, set rules and juvenile attempts at forcing everyone to conform and this is why every religion has numerous sects with each sect attempting to define its own set of generalizations and rules of human conformity. This breakup of religion into sects is yet another attempt at dogmatizing.

JOEL COOL DUDE

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67194 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Yes, I believe evolution can explain HOW the species has differentiated, but it offers nothing as to a purpose of why we are here in the first place other than (religious?) speculation and perhaps an internal reframing of the issue to meet its vocabulary.
What?

Purpose of life?

Why should there be any common purpose of life when motive and aim are purely subjective states with each human being having his own motives and aim(s) which may differ from that of others?

It goes without saying that happiness is the only common human aim and then too what makes one happy may not make another person happy. Here, too, happiness is quite a personal thing with no rigid definitions or no fixed rules.

Why are we here?

Why are we here is an illogical question - we're here because this is how nature works.

If you can prove that teleology is inherent in nature then only can you talk about the "why" at the universal and at the individual levels, otherwise it's an illogical question.

The why questions usually end up in a head-breaking infinite regress...
JOEL

Mumbai, India

#67195 Feb 9, 2014
FRIJOLES: Sure, science can tell us something about HOW the religious impulse functions. But it has nothing to offer regarding the EXPRESSION of the religious impulse.

JOEL: 1) Science can tell us about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

1) Religion can not tell us anything about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

2) Science cannot tell us anything about subjectivity since each individual is unique in many ways and the human experience can only be understood by the experiencor (human subject).

2) Religion, too, is clueless about the subjective side of human experience but unlike science that does not lecture to us on how to live life and what to experience, religion arrogantly and ignorantly attempts to generalize human subjective states and makes everyone conform to one kind of reflexes, to uniform behavior and to a common code of values without understanding that subjective experiences and individuality cannot be generalized nor can people be made to conform to crude dictates of a general kind. At some point, humans will rebel and make every attempt to express their innate individuality that's free of dogmas, set rules and juvenile attempts at forcing everyone to conform and this is why every religion has numerous sects with each sect attempting to define its own set of generalizations and rules of human conformity. This breakup of religion into sects is yet another attempt at dogmatizing.

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.

Pinos Altos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Deming MainStreet puts focus on economic develo... (Jan '10) Nov 15 Jackie 53
News Reward offered in rash of burglaries (Sep '09) Nov 15 nairy 41
News Their view: No clear gain in dispute over Falkl... (Mar '10) Sep '16 Tony 627
News Santa Clara mayor Imelda Lopez resigns (Jul '09) Sep '16 Youwishusetobethere 4
News Southwest Print Fiesta will be held on Labor Da... Aug '16 just asking 1
News Luna County enters Joint Powers Agreement for C... (Jun '15) Aug '16 save the water 5
News Hearse from Pinos Altos Hearst Church moved to ... (Aug '12) Aug '12 Lorina 2

Pinos Altos Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pinos Altos Mortgages