An answer to Western "peaceniks" on Israel

Post Reply New Topic

Do we honestly think that ancient texts have anything to do with the current violence? It's an ethnic conflict.

Open ended in the sense that a non believer can be anyone at any time....you could use the original religious text to promote and justify violence in today's world, and you wouldn't have to update the interpretation, nor would you have to go very far. They would have to redefine what a non believer is, how that person would function under Sharia law, and what methods are used in conversion, and ultimately find a way to religiously justify respect for a person's personal liberty.

There's nothing fundamental in Judaism, as far as I know, that talks about converting by the sword, nor is there a whole lotta glory in death. Jews focus on the now like Christians and Muslims focus on the later. Now and Later, delicious candy btw.

I'm being the Moral relevance police more than I'm apologizing for Judaism in this thread. Too many people lump the Abrahamic religions into one ball, without realizing the differences....

I'm sorry I think it I you are being quite simplistic.

Sound like more an apologist than following you own advice.

The conversion attitude or lack of it, is down to the same point that was made before.

Having has many Jews as as clients the reality is people will be people. Most are perfectly nice, but that is not to say some of the view aren't disturbing in some cases. Personalty I think it is animal behavior not religion that drives conflict, however so far as having something justify actions all three of them are not short of material, in fact the Old testament, is a good choice.

Being moral police with Abrahamic religion, you have to set the bar pretty low down, as it is.



Regarding Islam, I view it as a culture, which received titbits of another culture on the grapevine, through the trade routes. It something quite remote, and they sort of rehashed Old Testament, and then made it more Meccan. The Jesus movement is kind of an after thought in Islam, it needed to be in there otherwise it wouldn't make any sense, but the story is definitely at odds. I'm not saying there was a truer account, I'm saying certain cultural things were corroborated about early Christianity by a broad spectrum of witnesses, which did not match up with the Koran, there is also almost zero contemporary corroboration for the life of Mohamed.

From that perspective it is very easy to then say that they are the one that are following the immutable word of God, and other other faith have changed their story, because there are no record to dispute. Being after the fact, they managed to develop very quickly, in a way that Judaism took centuries to develop.

Problem with the Religion of Peace is that the religion is still ideologically stuck in the 7th century, and the purified adherents of it are still stuck there. Those with any nous have tried to move on as best they can (and I praise the work some of the immensely brave souls are doing inside Islam), but the fact of it is that the Qu'ran says that the word of Allah is eternal. There's not much to argue with there.

No but the same concept has been said of Judaism and Christianity.

The difference is both of these have been through Reformations. Reformations do not remove Conservatives, bu they do make more liberal views more viable.

Islam is due one, but as always they tend to be quite bloody.

From their point-of-view, the west is Israel's greatest ally. Lending money, and then forgiving those loans. Also doing business with them, despite many of Israel's non-humanitarian methods have been exposed; or border-treaties being respected.

I don't have any illusions that the current situation ever can be peaceful. The Israelis need to deport the palistinians and pay them generous reparations.

I (USA) would support a generous tax increase if the Israelis pledged to do this with our money.