Oh, and I mean to ask: Is English your native language?
Nope. YOUR true face has been revealed.
I think rather than the Sh’ma, he was talking about “Baruch atah adonai eloheinu melech haolam shelo asani goy” which sort of translates to “not made me a Gentile”, even though “one of the nations” is probably better. That goes along with the blessing that one has not been made a slave, or a woman. The blessing doesn’t neccesarily connote an attitude of natural superiority, though. Free men have more religious obligations than slaves, men more than women, and Jews more then Gentiles. The blessing is for the fact that you’re requirements are higher, and you’re held to a stricter standard.
There is nothing moderate about this thread. It is disgusting, hateful, neo-Nazi garbage without absolutely no redeeming social importance. Please see if it can be removed.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Baltazar *
Let me give you a clue or two, for free before you are banned for what you are.
(a) When pretending to be (i) either an adult or (ii) something more than a drooling sub-literate garden variety anti-semite you should take care to display a basic mastery of the English language. The proper adjective is Judiasm, which you can locate in the dictionary. Your misplaced use of the y here and in other places suggests illiteracy or childish command of English, or both. You will find that future, if futile forays will be met with less ridicule if you display such a mastery.
(b) In attempting to peddle anti-semitism one should take greater care to find citations to sites which are less obviously fetid (and poorly written) swamps of racism and neonazism. Again, this will allow you to at least not be ridiculed by thinking persons.
© When attempting to appear “neutral” observe the writing styles of non anti-semitic writers and attempt to copy, the above is so laughably obvious that it scarcely merits a comment. At the very least you might accidentally become literate.
Your obvious bigotry, however, in general is pedestrain and uninteresting, try taking it somewhere else.
I’m fully aware of this.
I didn’t search specific after this side. I came over it when I was searching for some issues about the Middle East. I don’t care much for the ordinary skinhead/nazi propaganda. That is the big shame really. Zionists are very eager to link Shahak to nazis and such groups.
My opinion is that people and especially politicans should be aware of what Shahak writes. People shouldn’t be to naive about Israel, Sionism and jewish religion (especially Americans shouldn’t be).
I have never meet any jews.
All right, time for me to jump into the fray as well.
Some of these I can answer without even going back to the Bais Midrash (we never hold world-conspiracy meetings on Fridays, too busy preparing for Sabbath). Others will have to wait until after the weekend, if this thread isn’t closed by then.
In true “golem” fashion (Pirkei Avoth reference), I’ll start by answering the last points first:
Yes, that’s right. We think we know the truth about these matters, and that people who worship other faiths don’t. Whoa, what a SHOCKER! We actually think that what we believe is correct! Like, maybe that’s why we believe in it?
At the very least, you might note that the prayer statements you quoted above don’t condemn those of other faiths as evil, but merely as “mistaken.”
Yes, we think that what we believe in is correct, and that those who disagree with us are not. And of course, we’re happy to be correct. If this is so terrible, then yes, we’re guilty of that.
The other things I intend to look up and see exactly what context your precious Shahak took the quotes out of. However, if you’ll forgive my repeating myself (which you should, considering that you posted this in three different forums), I am boggled why anyone would be surprised that people think those who don’t believe what they do are mistaken, or why it would be a bad thing for them to thank G-d for not being amongst the mistaken.
Bloody hell, you all understand of course that an evil computer djinn slipped Tamerlane in there and in fact the quote goes to our OP, such as he is.
And my grandfather was an 85-year old man who survived his mother’s abusive live-in boyfriend (of sorts), the death of his own father when he was 9, deaths of siblings before and after, two wars, and was poetry editor for the Washington Post in addition to working at the Library of Congress. His poetry and essays were published numerous times, as were his translations of French works, such as those by Andre Chouraqui. He also helped to found a church (which I still attend) and the school I went to from 1986 to 1995.
The fact that someone is old and has been through lots of bad things does not make them anyone to turn to for advice or knowledge. And the fact that Shahak was a chemistry professor has little, if anything, to do with his ability to interpret the Torah, Talmud, or any other historical document. And as Captain Amazing pointed out in the Pit thread, nobody worth their weight in salt in the academic world, from historians to scholars to renowned religious minds, has endorsed Shahak’s views.
When you say one thing and the world says another . . . you kinda gotta wonder.
andros: Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Collounsbury *
**
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Baltazar *
I haven’t said nothing about being neutral.
But I’m open for the fact that I must upgrade or change my views about jews. (I must however say that I have gotten less sympathy for them over the last 7-9 year or so)
Perhaps most of what Shahak’s writes are false ? But I don’t really think so. However, I do not buy everything he writes about this issues.
.
BALTAZAR –
Well, there’s your problem in a nutshell. But then, it’s much easier to ascribe to them all kinds of bigotry and evil if you’ve never actually met one, isn’t it?
I will NOT attack you because I haven’t yet seen evidence you truly are a trolling bigot as opposed to a person wishing, albeit inartfully, to discuss this book. The moment I see anything indicating you are the former, this conversation is over.
Couple of points:
-
The fact that Shahak is an Israeli and a Jew does not mean he is correct, or has any greater insight into Jewish beliefs and texts than any other Jew. The Neo-Nazis hanging out in Idaho are white, Christian (they claim), and from the American Pacific Northwest. That does not mean they are correct in their racist interpretation of Biblical texts.
-
The fact that you have have found a book making particular accusations or putting forth a certain theory does not mean the accusations are true or the theory correct. A book can act as a starting point for you to explore the theories therein (as it seems you have attempted to do with this thread), but then you cannot simply parrot “The book says this, the books says that; the author claims this, the author claims that.” You cannot point to the very thing you are investigating for proof of it’s own validity; a book is not self-proving.
-
The fact that you have found in this book a theory that fits with what you “suspected all along” should also make you very suspicious. What were your “suspicions” based on? Surely not interaction with Jewish people, since you now admit you’ve never so much as met one. Be aware and beware of your own emotionalism, because if you are truly attempting to find the truth of this or any other subject, it will only lead you astray.
-
If you are not religious, as you claim, then it should raise a red flag with you that you are relying solely on a site called “Bible Believers.” There is some inherent tension between fundamentalist Christians and Orthodox Jews, naturally arising from the belief by each that they are right and the other is wrong. Never get your information from a source that has an obvious agenda to skew that information one way or the other.
-
Never rely upon a book you haven’t personally read.
Baltazar said:
How do you know? There are ways of hiding the little horns on their heads, you know.
Or he might try switching the “ia” and the “ai”
I’m not talking about a guarantee here. I’m just saying that he’s an old educated professor who probably have a lot more credibility than a 25 year old hothead with strong opinions.
Thsi can be used in both a negative and positive way.
Even a 25 year old talmudic scholar?
You have never met any Jewish people. Ever. Then where does this wealth of suspicions about the religion and Israel come from?
Amazingly enough, so can this message board.
Yes. An educated professor. In chemistry. Not history or religion or any sort, or something else useful like linguistics. Chemistry.
What are his credentials regarding his knowledge of history? Why should anyone believe him at his word?
Well, but he was a Chemistry professor, and I’m willing to believe he was educated about chemistry, but that doesn’t mean he knew enough about Judaism to write a book about it. I have a masters degree in government, and would have a BA in History (Thanks a lot, Mr. “No double majors even if you have the credits”), but that doesn’t mean I could tell you anything about calculus, for example.
WHAT’S WRONG WITH MOST PEOPLE HERE.
I seems like most of you don’t even considers the option that some of the things Shahak writes may be true.
.