Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 158
  1. #46
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Now the above village atheist is getting desperate. An interpretation that a shout of "fire" means that there really is a fire is a reasonable interpretation. So yes, if there was no real fire, then the shouter really is responsible for the riot, whether negligence or malice. Also, the hearers have good reason to believe that no one would shout it without good reason, i.e. a credible source.

    But it is a totally unreasonable interpretation that "his blood be on us and our children" is a binding command, coming as it does from a demonstrably unreliable source: the mob who bayed for Jesus' crucifixion. It is also an unreasonable understanding that this has anything to do with all Jews throughout eternity, since this has nothing to do with the meaning of the words. After all, they were recorded by Jews, and the entire New Testament was written by Jews, and elsewhere explicitly condemns antisemitism, so obviously there is no intent to impute racial guilt on Jews, any more than there is on Italians although Jesus was sentenced by a Roman governor and killed on a Roman cross by Roman soldiers.

    Not at all: God truthfully recorded a statement; any deaths are solely the fault of the sinfully unreasonable twisting of that statement and its utterers. But evidently the above thinks we should not record any historical action if it might be twisted later.
    That "unreasonable" interpretation you refer to was actually considered quite reasonable by many early Christians. For example, this is Augustine, who was relatively 'progressive':
    That is, It is not as you say, not by bodily death shall the ungodly race of carnal Jews perish. For whoever destroys them in this way shall suffer sevenfold vengeance, that is, shall bring upon himself the sevenfold penalty under which the Jews lie for the crucifixion of Christ. So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.[5]
    Did Augustine 'sinfully twist' God's words?

    Surely an omniscient being could predict that an unreasonable interpretation would be placed on the words, leading to millions of Jews being killed? When assigning responsibility, the question is not whether the interpretation is reasonable; it is whether it is foreseeable.

  2. #47
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Easter and Good Friday: questions and answers
    Does Easter have a pagan derivation? Was Jesus really crucified on a Friday?
    Jonathan Sarfati, 5 April 2008

    Summary:
    The word ‘Easter’ has nothing to do with paganism; rather, it was the word for ‘Passover’ in English from the time of the Anglo-Saxons to Tyndale, and is similar to the old German word.
    Jesus really was crucified on Good Friday; claims about Thursday or Wednesday crucifixions misunderstand the Jewish way of counting days, where a part of a day was counted as a whole, much like modern hotels today.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  3. #48
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Easter and Good Friday: questions and answers
    Does Easter have a pagan derivation? Was Jesus really crucified on a Friday?
    Jonathan Sarfati, 5 April 2008

    Summary:
    The word ‘Easter’ has nothing to do with paganism; rather, it was the word for ‘Passover’ in English from the time of the Anglo-Saxons to Tyndale, and is similar to the old German word.
    Jesus really was crucified on Good Friday; claims about Thursday or Wednesday crucifixions misunderstand the Jewish way of counting days, where a part of a day was counted as a whole, much like modern hotels today.
    Of course easter bunnies and easter eggs are not pagan fertility symbols. Afterall what do rabbits and eggs have to do with fertility and why would there be a fertility festival in the Northern Hemisphere spring? It all goes back to Luther's translation of the bible into German. Thanks for the clarification Craper-fan.

    Ultimately Easter is of pagan origin since the Israelites came up with the Moses/Passover narrative during the period of Babylonian enslavement and borrowed liberally from the Babylonian mythos.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  4. #49
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,989
    Posts moved

    Numerous off-topic, silly or confused posts from this thread have been moved here in the interests of maintaining serious discussion on the current thread:

    http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....C-historical-)

  5. #50
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    Of course easter bunnies and easter eggs are not pagan fertility symbols. Afterall what do rabbits and eggs have to do with fertility and why would there be a fertility festival in the Northern Hemisphere spring? It all goes back to Luther's translation of the bible into German. Thanks for the clarification Craper-fan.
    I wasn't talking about the bunnies and eggs, that I don't care much for either way, but about the term "Easter". Try reading before spouting off for a change. e.g. I discuss Luther's translation which included terms like Osterfest and Osterlamm for Passover feast and lamb.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    Ultimately Easter is of pagan origin since the Israelites came up with the Moses/Passover narrative during the period of Babylonian enslavement and borrowed liberally from the Babylonian mythos.
    More nonsense of course. The internal evidence of Exodus shows it was written for people just coming out of Egypt and unfamiliar with the land of Israel.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  6. #51
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    I wasn't talking about the bunnies and eggs, that I don't care much for either way, but about the term "Easter". Try reading before spouting off for a change. e.g. I discuss Luther's translation which included terms like Osterfest and Osterlamm for Passover feast and lamb.


    More nonsense of course. The internal evidence of Exodus shows it was written for people just coming out of Egypt and unfamiliar with the land of Israel.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_history

    However, archaeology reveals a different story of the origins of the Jewish people: they did not necessarily leave the Levant. The archaeological evidence of the largely indigenous origins of Israel in Canaan, not Egypt, is "overwhelming" and leaves "no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness", according to Biblical minimalists.[5] Many archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[5] A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has arguably found no evidence that can be directly related to the Exodus narrative of an Egyptian captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness, leading to the suggestion that Iron Age Israel—the kingdoms of Judah and Israel—has its origins in Canaan, not Egypt:[6][7] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite. Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether this can be taken as an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[8]

    Now Jono, historically speaking such claims re the Exodus cannot be made
    Last edited by antichrist; 05-04-2015 at 06:18 PM.
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  7. #52
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    That "unreasonable" interpretation you refer to was actually considered quite reasonable by many early Christians. For example, this is Augustine, who was relatively 'progressive':
    That is, It is not as you say, not by bodily death shall the ungodly race of carnal Jews perish. For whoever destroys them in this way shall suffer sevenfold vengeance, that is, shall bring upon himself the sevenfold penalty under which the Jews lie for the crucifixion of Christ. So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.[5]
    Did Augustine 'sinfully twist' God's words?
    What you quoted doesn't even refer to "his blood be on us ...", so where is the twisting? Indeed, what you quoted even forbade killing Jews on pain of death. And the article you quoted says:

    As I say in my apologia, it’s hard to read much of the material that follows from our perspective in the 21st century, but it’s important to recall how radically progressive were Augustine’s views on Judaism. They even earned him a sharp rebuke from St. Jerome, which Augustine batted away with his usual skill. His position is that the Jews are under a divine order of physical protection, and that not only must they be protected, but they must be allowed to worship as Jews. As we will see, his reason for this view is demeaning for Jews, but it also informed centuries of theology and countless orders of protection for Jews living in Christian lands. When Jews were persecuted at the hands of Christians, it was in direct defiance of this doctrine, and when they were protected, it was because of its influence.

    From our position in the 21st century, it is important to distinguish between the modern, genocidal experience of anti-Semitism and the contra Iudaeos tradition of the early Church. Anti-Semitism is hatred of Jews as Jews, and is rooted in racism. The contra Iudaeos tradition is a dispute with Judaism as a religion in same way the Church Fathers disputed pagans, Manicheans, Donatists, and other heretics. That the early Christian anti-Jewish polemic did the intellectual spadework for later persecution of the Jews is undeniable, but at its heart the first centuries of Jewish-Christian relations were based on intellectual and theological dispute among people who sprang from the same religious soil. It was not a product of blind racial hatred. Indeed, it could not have been, since the Jewishness of Jesus and his apostles was understood by all the Church fathers.

    Although this appears to be a clear example of the blood libel that held the Jews collectively guilty for the murder of God, we shall see that Augustine’s position is not nearly that simple.

    “God’s hardening of Israel was strategic, not punitive. And it was only temporary. As history rushes to its conclusion, and as the ‘full number’ of Gentiles comes to Christ, God will cease hardening ‘part of Israel. . . . And so all Israel will be saved’ (Romans 11:26). In the end, God has mercy on all (Romans 11:32).”

    If you insist on your atheistic apologetics, at least read your own sources.

    [rest of post moved - mod]
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 07-04-2015 at 08:08 PM.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  8. #53
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    What you quoted doesn't even refer to "his blood be on us ...", so where is the twisting?
    You said previously:
    "It is also an unreasonable understanding that this has anything to do with all Jews throughout eternity, since this has nothing to do with the meaning of the words."

    Do you agree that Augustine believed that the Jews were collectively responsible for the death of Jesus, and would be punished for this "throughout eternity", as he says in the quoted passage:
    So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.
    If he did, then he is in agreement with what you claim is an "unreasonable" interpretation of Matthew. I didn't say that his belief was based on that specific passage - although it presumably is. So is that belief a 'sinful twisting' of what was written in the Bible (not necessarily in Matthew)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    The people who would twist it so ludicrously were predisposed against the Jews anyway. ... But then evolutionists squawk pitieously about how racist and eugenicist views should not be blamed on Darwin ...
    But Darwin, who was not omniscient, could not have forseen how his theory would be abused. An omniscient being should have predicted how that passage would be 'misinterpreted', and taken steps to avoid it.

    [rest of post moved - mod]
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 07-04-2015 at 08:09 PM.

  9. #54
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,503
    Dear Tony Dowden, thanks for the lovely Easter egg! I wish you and your family a very Happy Easter!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

  10. #55
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Elliott Renzies View Post
    Dear Tony Dowden, thanks for the lovely Easter egg! I wish you and your family a very Happy Easter!
    Ditto ↑↑

    Despite RW's claims, Easter eggs are not pagan, but are a much more recent tradition, coming from abstaining from eggs at Lent, and to avoid wasting them, they were boiled. Later on, German Lutherans coloured these eggs. When such people came to America, they brought their Easter (and Christmas) traditions with them. Americans, who had been restricted by Puritanism, saw these hardworking and devout immigrants enjoying themselves at these Christian festivals, and took them up. The Eastern Orthodox still dye their eggs a deep red, to symbolize Christ's blood, using red onions,
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  11. #56
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    You said previously:
    "It is also an unreasonable understanding that this has anything to do with all Jews throughout eternity, since this has nothing to do with the meaning of the words."

    Do you agree that Augustine believed that the Jews were collectively responsible for the death of Jesus, and would be punished for this "throughout eternity", as he says in the quoted passage:
    So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.
    If he did, then he is in agreement with what you claim is an "unreasonable" interpretation of Matthew. I didn't say that his belief was based on that specific passage - although it presumably is. So is that belief a 'sinful twisting' of what was written in the Bible (not necessarily in Matthew)?
    It ‘presumably’ is? Yet it is not stated in the article, from which you cherry-pick. Note also, any punishment would be for what the current Jews did about Christ, not what their ancestors would do. Augustine was perfectly aware that Jesus and the NT writers were Jewish, and of Jews who had become believers in Jesus since then, so there was no ongoing racial guilt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    But Darwin, who was not omniscient, could not have forseen how his theory would be abused. An omniscient being should have predicted how that passage would be 'misinterpreted', and taken steps to avoid it.
    Yes, He could have given any antisemites a splitting headache whenever they misintepreted Scripture. But then your ilk would whinge about that too. But in the real world, we don't withhold the truth just because some will twist it.

    [rest of post moved - mod]
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 07-04-2015 at 08:10 PM.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  12. #57
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Despite RW's claims, Easter eggs are not pagan, but are a much more recent tradition, coming from abstaining from eggs at Lent, and to avoid wasting them, they were boiled. Later on, German Lutherans coloured these eggs. When such people came to America, they brought their Easter (and Christmas) traditions with them. Americans, who had been restricted by Puritanism, saw these hardworking and devout immigrants enjoying themselves at these Christian festivals, and took them up. The Eastern Orthodox still dye their eggs a deep red, to symbolize Christ's blood, using red onions,
    Decorating eggs predates Christianity. Of course when Christians usurped the pagan fertility festivals they attached their own symbology to the traditions that is how syncretism works.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  13. #58
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Ditto ↑↑

    Despite RW's claims, Easter eggs are not pagan, but are a much more recent tradition, coming from abstaining from eggs at Lent, and to avoid wasting them, they were boiled. Later on, German Lutherans coloured these eggs. When such people came to America, they brought their Easter (and Christmas) traditions with them. Americans, who had been restricted by Puritanism, saw these hardworking and devout immigrants enjoying themselves at these Christian festivals, and took them up. The Eastern Orthodox still dye their eggs a deep red, to symbolize Christ's blood, using red onions,
    Doubling up on those eggs after lent they would be getting a good dose of cholesterol - now if only those hens get clucky at the approp time and just sit on them
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  14. #59
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Note also, any punishment would be for what the current Jews did about Christ, not what their ancestors would do. Augustine was perfectly aware that Jesus and the NT writers were Jewish, and of Jews who had become believers in Jesus since then, so there was no ongoing racial guilt.
    Which is not quite what he says:
    So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.

    He refers to the "subjection merited by those [the Jews] who ... put the Lord to death". So he believes that the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. He also states that this subjection will continue "to the end of the seven days of time", implying that it will be imposed on Jews who were not born when Jesus died. These Jews would be punished for what their predecessors did.

    So Augustine believed in an ongoing guilt. I agree that it wasn't racial, but directed towards Jews who followed the Jewish religion - although I don't see how that is much better than racial guilt. He is not saying that Jews are being punished just because they don't believe in God; he is saying that they are being punished also for what happened to Jesus.

    Of course, there is no point in discussing the source of Augustine's belief, if you don't agree that he actually has it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Yes, He could have given any antisemites a splitting headache whenever they misintepreted Scripture. But then your ilk would whinge about that too. But in the real world, we don't withhold the truth just because some will twist it.
    Who would 'whinge' about anti-semites having a splitting headache? And we constantly withhold the truth to prevent it being twisted.

    [rest of post moved - mod]
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 07-04-2015 at 08:11 PM.

  15. #60
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Which is not quite what he says:
    So to the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.

    He refers to the "subjection merited by those [the Jews] who ... put the Lord to death". So he believes that the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. He also states that this subjection will continue "to the end of the seven days of time", implying that it will be imposed on Jews who were not born when Jesus died. These Jews would be punished for what their predecessors did.
    So where was his biblical justification? You have no proof that it was based on the text at hand, or on any other text for that matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    So Augustine believed in an ongoing guilt. I agree that it wasn't racial, but directed towards Jews who followed the Jewish religion - although I don't see how that is much better than racial guilt. He is not saying that Jews are being punished just because they don't believe in God; he is saying that they are being punished also for what happened to Jesus.

    Of course, there is no point in discussing the source of Augustine's belief, if you don't agree that he actually has it.
    But this is important since we were meant to be discussing the text of Scripture, not the views of a theologian of the Alexandrian school notable for allegorization. E.g. where is the biblical evidence of racial guilt against Jews but not against Italians, for example?

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Who would 'whinge' about anti-semites having a splitting headache?
    The anti-semites for one, e.g. Antichrist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    And we constantly withhold the truth to prevent it being twisted.
    Even so, the blame is on the twister, not the truth-teller.

    [rest of post moved - mod]
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 07-04-2015 at 08:12 PM.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. historical consistency sf. 2010 chess goals
    By Santa in forum Ratings Arena
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 27-11-2011, 07:51 PM
  2. Who do you say that Jesus is?
    By EGOR in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 21-09-2007, 03:57 PM
  3. Historical Reference Question: Smyslov v Polugaevsky
    By Phil Bourke in forum Chess Training
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 14-12-2005, 07:01 PM
  4. Sex Better Than Jesus
    By antichrist in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-07-2005, 05:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •