Good Lord.
Statements like this make me almost hope that the war /does/ drag out long enough that he can’t start a new one. :eek: 
:mad:
Actually, every major Jewish group at the time believed that the Torah was legally binding. The Pharasees just were willing to accept popular interpretations and logical extrapolations as a way to interpret the Torah, as opposed to, say, the Saducees, who apparently relied on textual literalism as a method of interpretation.
My money is on Cuba. Guantanamo is too small. We need the whole Island for the influx of desaparecidos.
Peace through Liberty
r~
So does that mean that Jews that wish to impose their Laws on others fit my definition of pharisee?
Peace through Liberty
r~
If true – and I hold that decisions taken from being misled are not truly voluntary in the sense you mean – that is still not valid, Lib.
None of us “deserves” anything, as you well know – what we have, what we get, is solely through mercy and grace.
As you would have it rendered unto you, render it therefor also unto others.
That statement leaves precious little room for “random death in the life-support system.” Is your universe really that well managed?
Well, Jews don’t, as a rule, seek to impose Jewish law on non-Jews. The Pharisees didn’t want to impose Jewish law on non-Jews either. The debate between the Pharisees and Saducees was over how Jewish law should be practiced by Jews.
From what I read, the Pharisees got a bad rap, due to post-Jesus tensions amongst the early Christians. Over the years, the term has come to mean people who are publicly and ostentatiously pious, and carries a hint of hypocrisy. When I use the term “Pharisee” it is this context that I mean, seeing no reason to worry about unjustly offending people who have been dead for a couple thousand years.
Really. Somehow, I had the impression that there were restrictions on the Sabbath and that advertisements were often censored.
The debate between jc and the Pharisees, (and most Religions) is whether God’s Law should or should not be imposed at all.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s
Render unto God, that which is God’s.
Translation:
[screed] God can enforce his own laws, Thank You. He does not need you to impose them. Period. Offer them, Do Not Impose Them. [/screed]
No, it is your neighbors that need protection. Protection from tyranny imposed in the name of God; protection from the State, protection from the Zealot.
Is that not exactly why the World is at War again? Religious based Tyranny?
Peace through Liberty
r~
Well, yeah, there’s a whole bunch of stuff, according to Judaism, that you’re not supposed to do on the Sabbath. As for advertisements, the Pharisees stopped really being a seperate movement in Judaism and became mainstream Judaism in the beginning of the second century. At that time, the content of advertisements wasn’t really a big issue.
And while I’m not a scholar of Christianity, it seems like Jesus’s debate with the Pharisees was largely to what extent laws of ritual cleanliness applied to everyday life. So, for example, they debated over handwashing before meals, over kashering of plates and utensils, and over whether or not eating treif food would make a person unclean.
And then some…
Apparently, we can all just get along.
Okay, I would accept the label “pharisees” for those people who like to pray loudly and publicly. For those who chose tyrany and call it liberty, I prefer “asshole”.
Granted, Jesus didn’t like them. But that chapter is more rhetoric, ad hominem, and hyperbole, than an actual statement of differences.(and he still manages to get digs in on them for their position about cleanliness laws).
ROTFLMAOPMPASTC!!!
By Og’s wrinkled nutsack, Brutus, that was just plain wonderful. I was laughing so hard, I had people coming into my office trying to do CPR on me because they thought I was choking to death!
Note to self - must stop reading SDMB at work.
OK, that was fucking funny.