Joe_Cool just does not seem to want to expand on his views on Israel and Jews in re The End Times…
Too many biblical moral contradictions that would have to be dealt with?
Is this the flame that burns so hot that a literalist dare not handle it for the risk of having to actually be honest and admit that literalism is not really that literal after all? Because in all honesty literalist views of the bible can only be based on willful ignorance and/or a need to dress otherwise acquired biased world views in “God’s voice.” Covert anti-Semitism in the guise of “love for Israel’s right to be” would be a prime example.
Quoting Collounsbury: “I rather think it is sader to see such simplistic readings of what has gone on here. Akohl’s ‘expression of gratitude’ is hardly a simple ‘expression of gratitude.’ It’s structuring a bit of propaganda. Good Xians and Jews versus evil Arabs aka Muslims.”
Rereading the OP, I just don’t see it. Thanking Christians for their support, solidarity, and friendship towards the people of Israel hardly seems like propaganda.
Quoting Collounsbury: "Bullshit. Ignorant bullshit. Expropriations, extensions of settlements. Even the present security fence engages in effective land siezures to enclose illegal settlements. "
What a rigorous intellectual discourse! If you can’t argue facts, call your opponent ignorant! What genius! Consider this- the Egyptians chose peace, they chose to negotiate with Israel, they recognized Israel’s right to exist. They got the Sinai back. The Palestinian leadership chooses terrorism. Collunsbury, if you wish to become knowledgeable about Middle Eastern issues, I suggest you visit this fine website: www.factsandlogic.org. Please read the well written articles in that site.
Again quoting Collounsbury: "What the fuck sort absurd magical thinking is this? (a) Xian is simply an abbreviation and a Xian one at that. Your ignorance on the matter notwithstanding. "
Again, what a great intellectual discourse! You really need to get measured for a tux, I bet you’ll be getting a call from Stockholm to pick up your Nobel Prize. Here’s the deal: We Christians believe that Jesus Christ is God. Some Christians do not believe that God’s name (Christ) should not be abbreviated and that to do so shows disrespect. Some Christians frown on the term “XMAS”, while some have no problem with it. There likely isn’t a single Christian Church in the world that has a sign like “Main Street Xian Church” or “Springfield Church of X” out by the street. People take the name of God seriously. It is a taboo among some faiths to utter the name of God, some will spell “G_d” to avoid spelling it. The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ doctrine centers about their name for God, Jehovah. Simple human decency dictates that you call others by names that do not offend them. Why do you not show Christianity the same respect that you demand for Islam?
Quoting akohl: “But I was a bit uncomfortable with the way you put that “expect salvation” thing.”
Sorry if I made you uncomfortable. Perhaps the term “salvation” has a Christian bias. What I meant is that when I pray for those of other faiths, is that I pray that God blesses and keeps you, and that if your faith has a heaven, I pray that you get there. If your faith has other rewards after death, I pray that you get those rewards.
Well, you don’t just see it. Oh how very suprising. Thanking Xians for their support makes no motherfucking sense really, insofar as Xians are not supporting Israel en gross, but rather some largely North American sub-groups, sects etc are for a range of theological/ideological reasons of largely non-rational reason. (from this, by the way, I exclude the social-democratic vision in the larger Xian West, but rather the spectrum defined by the supporting organization).
The manner of expression then attempts to cast a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ kind of structure to the issue of Israel. Muslim versus the good Judeo-Xian tradition. An explicit bit of agit prop. which falls apart when one puts it in context.
Amusing, newbie, vaguely amusing. Telling me to learn something about the Middle East. Ignorant and entertainlingly naive, but ultimately rather misplaced my little ignorant friend. As is your reference to some third rate propaganda site.
I really am not inclined to waste my time arguing this, let me just point to the simplistic idiocy of your naive little parallel between Sinai and the West Bank.
(a) Sinai was never central to Greater Israel ideology, as West Bank is. As a general matter, Israelis did not argue for annexation on historical/religious grounds. This is not the case for the West Bank. Quite the contrary, the wet dream for a solid portion of the hard-right religious parties, and a singificant fringe of Likoud is annexation of West Bank (Judea and Samaria in settler propaganda) with the explusion of the Palestinian popuation (which is both Xian and Muslim). Indeed some recent reporting in the Israeli daily Ha’aretz highlights this sort of thinking in re the formula “Palestine is Jordan” In this instance, both sides in the negotiation believe they have eternal claim to the land, it is not analogous to Sinai.
(b) The same goes for the issue of Jerusalem.
Neither of these issues are going to be easily resovled, and your assertion that the P’s just gotta negotiate is simplistic twaddle. Informed analysts have noted a clear tendency of the Sharon and Netanyahu governments, in particular, to sieze upon any radical’s act to smear the entire Palestinian side, and cease negotiations/application of accords. There are bad actors on each side working to blow up negotiations.
Magical thinking. Simplistic little magical thinking.
That fact that some ignorant fools are unaware that X (standing for the Greek) originated as an Xian abbreviation implies no disrespect on my part, except for illiteracy and ignorance, for which I make no apologies.
Now a multitude of sects have their little obsessions. I have no intention in changing my writing style to not bother them.
BTW, you got your connection wrong, if I were being ‘unfair’ in re Xianity and Islam, I’d be complaining that people don’t write PBUH after Muhammed’s name, the english equivalent of the salaa 'alihi wa selim. That represents a similar bit of magical thinking, that after one mentions Muhammed one has to show respect by this little bloody phrase, and some magical disrespect is shown or some such nonesense. The same in regards to the Quran. (and Iasa, Jesus etc.)
Now you’ve mistaken my irritation with general ignorance on the matter of the religion, its basics and outlines with the idea of respect. A certain basic respect of course is always nice.
Respecting magical obession about “abbreviations” and necessary phrases, however, in my opinion, does not represent basic respect. It represents magical thinking.
The same disrespect as the many monks who regularly wrote Xmas instead of Christmas?
The same disrespect as Xians who display a stylized fish as a symbol of their faith?
This is Great Debates. If a poster wanted to show disrespect for Xianity, they’d go much further than abbreviations. Search for posts by the banned LoLo (IIRC -Christianity I Am So Not Impressed). In this very thread Gobear, who’s really done his theology homework, calls the Old and New Testaments fiction.
Let’s remember Occam’s Razor-the simplest explanation(which fits all the facts), is usually the correct one. With IIRC, IANA, OTOH, DNFTT, LOL and all the others it seems likely that people type Xianity simply because it’s shorter.
I consider the website you reccommend as an extremely biased propaganda site. Although I didn’t have time to read it all, I did have time to read one of the headlines, which read:
I don’t consider these lands “occupied territories” and anyone who does reveals that he/she has already taken sides.
Take a look at this excellent factual article by Dr. Dore Gold explaining why “occupied territory” is a bad term to use when discussing the current dispute between Israel and the Palestinians.
Not so. I called the Left Behind books fiction and I referred to the fundie exegesis of the Revelation as “eschatological mythology,” but I didn’t call the OT and NT fiction. The books of the Bible are a mixture of history (I and II Chronicles), folk myth (Genesis), didactic stories (Jonah; Ruth), and confabulations of fact and fiction (the Gospels). I give the authors of the Bible the same skepticism I give Herodotus when he talks about Libyan ants mining gold or when Aristotle states that the brain’s purpose is to cool the blood. Like those two worthies, the Bible’s writers mixed historical fact with dollops of pious embellishment.
If you will refer to my explanation on p. 1 of this thread, the X is not an English letter X, but the Greek letter chi, which is the first letter of Christ in Koine Greek, the language of the New Testament. Moreover, using chi as an abbreviation for Christ is a Christian invention, albeit an ancient one, much as the Xians today use the Ichthys decal on their cars. I might have given in on “niggardly”, but this is one etymological battle where I will return with my shield or on it. Arguments based on historical and literary illiteracy need not be taken seriously.
In addition, telling Collounsbury, who speaks Arabic, in Maghribi, Egyptian, and other dialects, and whose career has been spent sorting out the geopolitics of the MENA region, “to become knowledgeable about Middle Eastern issues” is just, words fail me, risible in the extreme.
Well, except Gold is wrong. The West Bank and Gaza Strip can’t be called “disputed”, because Israel has never claimed them. The Golan and East Jerusalem, yes, but not the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Every Israeli government has explicitly said that they are not part of Israel. The people who live there are not Israeli, with the exception of settlers, who are Israeli due to their prior citizenship in Israel, and the Knesset has never seriously considered annexing the two areas. The only people who claim that the West Bank and Gaza are and should be Israeli are some Haredi and a smaller group of secular “Greater Israel” supporters, neither of whom make up the mainstream of the Israeli population.
And anyone who identifies them otherwise has revealed their own stance.
**
I was horribly disappointed with this article. Calling the West Bank and Gaza “disputed territories” would be appropriate IF THERE WASN’T A ISRAELI MILITARY PRESENCE. As it is, “occupied” is a pretty darn good description. If it waddles, quacks, …
I sit corrected. I apologize for attributing to you a statement you did not make. Note, however, that Gobear has just posted exactly what he does think of the OT and NT. He did so openly and in detail.
[Sigh] It’s like Gobear and the other abbreviators have visited the grave of a Jewish friend, left pebbles on top of the marker to show that somebody has visited, and then been yelled at by a Jew for showing disrespect for the dead.
Extremely biased? Because of the phrase occupied teritories?
Well, I guess that is what we can expect from an apologist for the worst section of the settlers, the ideological fools who bear no small responsibility for the failure of the peace process to date.
Yes, and your mealy mouth attempt to pretend an occupation is not an occupation clearly indicates your rationality and your position.
Ah, there’s nothing like the sweet smell of uninformed, unsuspecting posters claiming (with the use of sarcasm, no less!) that Collounsbury is not knowledgeable in MENA matters.
akohl, I suggest becoming informed about this matter. Collounsbury’s style has teeth, but justly so, given the incredible quantity of irritating falsehoods that are regularly uttered on this topic. I pay close attention to any link or source he provides on this topic, because he knows more about this subject than most people can imagine there is to know. And I have lived and travelled in the region, followed its politics, learned Arabic, studied its religions, etc., so I’m not precisely ignorant on this either.
Sorry, but claiming that the Occupied Territories are not occupied and that the term alone is indicative of bias is completely ridiculous and rather laughable (not to mention that, if anything, it indicates your bias). I see you live in Israel, you really ought to be better informed than that. Do you get BBC? That helps keep you informed on a basic level. Otherwise dig into Collounsbury’s Web site recommendations…
I see that Colllounsbury has quite a fan club over here.
I really feel that by providing that link about the disputed territories I did my part to give an answer to his tangential arguments. I say tangential because discussing the Arab Israeli conflict was not the purpose of this thread. For people who are open to the idea that the heartland of biblical Israel might not neccessarily be deemed Arab lands, the article I refered to gave the background for an alternative approach. I really don’t think it needs to be pursued further here in this thread since, as I mentioned, that wasn’t the purpose of the thread.
Also, I do not accept that my purpose in expressing thanks to the Christians was propaganda. True, my my views on the issues did come out in this thread. But this was perfectly natural since the friendship that I was acknowleding is based in large party on a shared Biblico-geo-political point of view.
Anyway, Mr Collounsbury, or should I say honorary sdmb “Professor” Collounsbury, has been hammering away at the political issues even though that’s not what this thread is about. I guess this just proves what they say; “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”
Abe, as to your suggestion that I listen to the BBC to get better informed, with all the internet resources available, why would I go specifically to the BBC? Or are you suggesting that I am so uninformed that even a few soundbites over the radio would enlighten me? I don’t think that agreeing with Dr. Gold’s article indicates ignorance. Do you? And as far as digging into Collounsbury’s Web site recommendations, well, maybe, If I have some time on my hands in the near future.
As to the political angle it is fundamental to understanding your propaganda, my dear akohl, fundamental. Of course that you share the concept of ‘biblical’ claims to others’ lands, w/o regard for the violence this will engender. (I note again the sly insistance on Xian as if it were general.)
I would like to add for those of you who would doubt there is substance to fears, even among Palestinian moderates that simplying laying down arms / ceasing resistance and ‘negotiating’ with the current Israeli government will lead to their complete dispossession the following:
I have personally heard the same thing, from people like akohl and this fellow. There is no solution down this road, only oppression, violence and more of the same. It is to make Israel into Algeria, c. 1950.
Yes, akohl, you are part of the problem. You and yours are among the roots for this bloodshed, since you’re siezing other folks lands.
Yeah whatever. What is this, the 8th time you’ve found an excuse?
The facts are you want to disposs a whole people based on some bullshit religious text. A good number of your enemies want to do the same on equal grounds.
That wonderful text both docoments and creates an attachment between a nation and its land for thousands of years. Its not some document that was dug up and imposed upon a situation in an arbitrary way. Its a reality that has been part of the drama being played out between the nations of the world throughout history.
I admit to have no knowledge of the Islamic sacred texts. Please enlighten us. Where does is say in the Koran that the people of Israel have no rights to a national homeland in the region that was given to Abraham and his decendants? Do they claim that the inheritance went to Yishmael instead of Issac?