Historical Jesus

[TomC]

Cool.

When does the slaughter of dissidents begin?

The plan is to establish the New World Order on the basis of a fractal democracy. Where there is dissent, members are free to establish their own sub-orders.

I am confident that Bilby summed it up superbly.

Well, those are certainly all words.

What do you mean by "fractal democracy", as opposed to the messy and imperfect "real democracy"?

That's just a start on my questions.

You've made lots of unsupported assertions about Jesus and Christian culture and moral principles and ethical codes. So many, the general term is "gish gallop", or something like that.

Don't tell me that you are part of the illuminati, and I'm a mere illiterati, unless you can defend your arrogance.
I can be very pointed, just ask the staff of IIDB.
Tom

 

[No Robots]

What you must realize is that I am not communicating to you, but through you. Those who have ears, let them hear.

 

[steve_bank]

If the gospels are true, and you are an atheist Christian, should we follow rte words of Jesus on fornication and divorce?

How should we determine what to follow and what not to follow of the words of Jesus?

A simple straightforward question.

If you require a lesson on sexual ethics, I will provide it on a private basis.

Nice try, I am questioning what your sexual views may be based on the words of Jesus.

You are doing what Christians generally do. Fr example the extreme homphobes wil cite Levticus on gays, yet reject the old dietary laws.

Pete Buttigieg our secratery of state is married gay conservative Christian. If a gay choses Chrtianity it is teir bsdmess, bit I don;t see it if yiu go by scrpture.

The new modern liberal Certainty invented it version of god as including gays.

If you are pro gay rights are maybe gay then you are faced with one of those pesky scrptural moral dilemmas. Jesus said , according to the gospels, no divorce or fornication and marriage between a man and woman.

If you will not answer this basic issue then I'll just dismiss you as morally weak abd ambiguous.

 

[No Robots]

Look, Steve, this is a fascinating and important area of study. I could go over my own study in detail. It seems, however, that you want the short version, my own view of things. So, here goes.

On divorce, Christ is talking to his own people, telling them that he is commanding them against divorce. Anyone who does not follow his commandment on this is in breach. I was in a bad marriage, and my wife divorced me. Technically, the breach is hers. But the truth is that I drove her to it. As a man, I take full responsibility for all my actions and all their consequences. I am now remarried. Is it possible that I could end up divorced again? Sure, I guess. But I am certainly not seeking it this time. Life is messy, sure. But if you want to be happy, best to do everything possible to ensure that if you marry it is for good. The best thing is to do what you can to ask yourself at the outset if the person is honestly right for you.

On fornication, it is clear that sex should only take place within marriage. Anything else is a breach. Have I been in breach? Yes.

On adultery, to look at a woman with lust is a breach. Have I been in breach? Yes. I am now working on eliminating sexual imagining from my mind.

On homosexuality, it is a breach of sexual ethics. Have I been in breach? Yes.

True service to the cause requires the elimination of one's own breaches of sexual ethics. It does not require condemning others for their breaches.

On abortion, I condemn it as a practice generally, but I do not condemn those who undergo it. Rather, I condemn those men who drive women to it. If men were to confine their sexual activity to their own wives, abortion would be, to all extents and purposes, completely eliminated.

 

[steve_bank]

He's testifying too.

Fascinating? You are the one claiming to follow the alleged words of a long dead Jew, not me.

You appear to be a routine conservative Christian, without the supernatural.

I don't find it fascinating. I have to undertsnd Christians because I have to deal with it in the real world.

A moral posture of exclusive truth and who think they can impose it on everyone else.

 

[TomC]

What you must realize is that I am not communicating to you, but through you. Those who have ears, let them hear.

What I understand is that you are making vague assertions that you don't understand well enough to explain what you mean by the words you use.

Like "fractal democracy", for starters.

You're being used by arrogant people. I don't know who they are, but I know that they exist and use people like you. They spout nonsense like "fractal democracy".

They use dumbasses like you who want to feel special and will pretend that they are smart enough to understand crap like that.

Christians have done that for centuries. Convince the illiterati that now they understand what's really important.

Guess what? When the illuminati don't need you any more they'll dump you like yesterday's trash. Which you'll be at that point. Centuries of history back up my opinions. Centuries of Christian history, people who understand Christ way better than you do.
Tom

 

[steve_bank]

Let's see.

No Robots,

Jesus said fornication and divorce are not accepble. Did he come up with that out of nothing?

Or was he teaching existing Jewish Mosaic Law?

He came out of Jewish tradition and teachings never renouncing his Jewish faith. I would think he
kept kosher, keeping to Jewish dietery rules.

If so should one eat kosher foods only?

He said he came not to end Moseaic law, but to fulfill it.

New International Version
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

New Living Translation
“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.

English Standard Version
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Berean Standard Bible
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.


Berean Literal Bible
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill.

King James Bible
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

The above shows how traslations reflect the traslaotors.

So, it sure sounds like if you want to follow Jesus one should be an observant Jew.

That is the irony of the anti Jewish Christians. They take Jesus as their personal savior, a man who was an observant Jew.

I am not Jewish but I do like Hebrew National kosher ho dogs... Had one for lunch.

 

[No Robots]

Christ clearly articulates what he means by the law:

Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law?
Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind.
This is the greatest and the first commandment.
And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

He opposes trivial observances:

• The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.
• Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man: but what cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

In the New World Order, the law will be a matter of active conscience, not external imposition:

I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

The New World Order is essentially Jewish, the universalist Judaism of Christ, Judeo-Marxist globalism, if you will, or, if you prefer, Christian National Socialism. The only mandatory externality is universal male circumcision.

 

[steve_bank]

OMG! No Robots is a conspiracy theorist? The global Jewish cabal runs the world!

Sounds like Neo Nazi propaganda. Just when I thought I'd heard most everything.

If you want to follow Jesus keep kosher.....

 

[No Robots]

I am a follower of Harry Waton. Look him up.

 

[steve_bank]

Could not care less. Probably yet another exploiter writing books pandering to the gullible and weak minded.

Like I said, if you want to follow Jesus keep kosher. No pork.....

 

[No Robots]

Yeah, books, fuck those things, amirite?

 

[TomC]

Yeah, books, fuck those things, amirite?

Books by people teaching:

The only mandatory externality is universal male circumcision.

Yeah. Definitely.

That's idiotic, and there's already too much of that in the world.

You don't understand evolution and you think you can take a knife to guy's privates? Nope. You think this nonsense makes you illuminati? Nope.
Not in my book. Fuck your book.
Tom

 

[bilby]

Could not care less. Probably yet another exploiter writing books pandering to the gullible and weak minded.

I suspect he was yet another nutcase hiding in the ranks of the clergy, where being insane is hard to distinguish from being closer to the gods.

Waton was a Marxist rabbi, who (in the 1930s and '40s) wrote a number of articles and essays about how great Naziism was for Jews and Communists, because it humbled them and (apparently) thereby made them the winners.

It would be tempting to excuse him on the basis that his thesis was mostly settled before the holocaust, or at least before it became known about outside Nazi dominated areas of Europe. But he doesn't appear to have changed his tune one iota once the full horror of the holocaust became apparent.

He was just one of millions of religious lunatics that litter the pages of history. His writings are mostly incoherent, but the central message, insofar as it can be deciphered, is that the worse off you are, and the more downtrodden you are, the more powerful you are.

Which only a comfortable lunatic whose every need is provided by his followers would ever suggest.

 

[No Robots]

Waton actually stated that the Nazis were modelling themselves on Jews and that this is part of the process by which the whole of humanity is moving toward its destiny of becoming wholly Jewish.

 

[TomC]

Waton actually stated that the Nazis were modelling themselves on Jews and that this is part of the process by which the whole of humanity is moving toward its destiny of becoming wholly Jewish.

Does this not strike you as goofy?

To be charitable about it?
Tom

 

[No Robots]

Not at all. It is a commonplace in study of the psychodynamics of Nazism.

 

[No Robots]

The whole of humanity over the last two millennia has been busily apeing the Jews in the form of their wayward son.

 

[No Robots]

Meanwhile, of course, murdering the actual Jews. Or discounting their observations.

 

[TomC]

Not at all. It is a commonplace in study of the psychodynamics of Nazism.

What do you mean by Nazism?

Nazis included everyone from Hitler and his elite, to the hoi polloi who were thrilled to have a functional economy, to Americans like Henry Ford, to the people operating the killing chambers of Daschau.

Nobody can study the "psychodynamics of Nazism" as though it's one big thing. It's not.

But it does resemble your ideological bent, your "Illuminati".
Tom