oh my the left pacifist will love this

[Richpo64]

>>Hillary is after Jewish campaign contributions from wealthy and bellicose Jews, the ones that would delight in a war with Iran. One can never be too pro Israeli or pro Jewish when one is a senator from NY.<<

Those pesky Jews again...

It amazes me that this kind of blatant racism goes unchallenged in this forum.

[Michael Tee]

I dunno. 

I just have to wonder about a "message" that scholars allegedly spend their lives trying to interpret and still can't agree on. 

If such a message had been prepared by an advertising executive and nobody could figure out what it meant, he'd get his ass canned for rank incompetence.  If it came from a schoolteacher, he or she would be fired for inability to teach the young.

That the "message" is said to come from almighty God boggles the mind.  Somebody here seems to think that God almighty could fuck up a simple message like "Turn the other cheek" so that it becomes an admonition to "search for justice"  or an exhortation to pacifism, depending on the listener.  That has got to be the most patent nonsense I have ever heard.  Is God such an inarticulate fuck-up that even scholars can't decipher the meaning of a single uncomplicated sentence after a lifetime of study?  That even something as simple as "turn the other cheek" gives grounds for debate?  That's about as close to blasphemy as you can get.

"Turn the other cheek" means "fuhgeddabowdit" - - don't get mad and don't get even.  Because slaps and insults are no big deal.  If you love your fellow man, you will forgive him a mere slap on the face.  Your love is so deep that any insult the guy inflicts is as nothing compared to your love for him.  THAT'S what "turn the other cheek" means.  Jeeeeziz.

[Henny]

It amazes me that this kind of blatant racism goes unchallenged in this forum.

ROFLMAO!!!!!

[Amianthus]

These are ancients. Their importance decreases with the square of their antiquity, I am afraid.

The original comment by Plane did not indicate a century, however:

Mme Arno (1915), Countess Markievicz (1916), Olga Kokovtseva (1916), Elaine Mordeaux (WWII). There are others.

(As a matter of fact, he specifically said "historically" which tends to indicate a larger span than 100 years.)

[Michael Tee]

<<It amazes me that this kind of blatant racism goes unchallenged in this forum.>>

Your intellect is such that you are probably amazed when little voices come out of the radio.

If you were previously unaware that politicians in New York have a choice of pandering to the Jewish vote or falling by the wayside, then in addition to your inborn stupidity, which seems to be of cosmic proportions, I would have to think that you have been asleep in a cave since the age of five.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Mme Arno (1915), Countess Markievicz (1916), Olga Kokovtseva (1916), Elaine Mordeaux (WWII). There are others.

=================================
Piffle.

Minor players, if players at all.

--------------------------------------------------
Hillary is after Jewish campaign contributions from wealthy and bellicose Jews, the ones that would delight in a war with Iran. One can never be too pro Israeli or pro Jewish when one is a senator from NY.<<

Those pesky Jews again...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It amazes me that this kind of blatant racism goes unchallenged in this forum.

It is hardly anti-Semitic to state that New York Senators cater to Jews and Israel, just as it is not anti-porcine to state that senators from Iowa and Nebraska cater to the Pork producers lobby. Senators from Nevada suck up to the mining lobby in a shameless way as well.

But we the taxpayers are not asked to subsidize the pigs or to arm them, either. And there lies the difference.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"I just have to wonder about a "message" that scholars allegedly spend their lives trying to interpret and still can't agree on"

tee why?

honestly whats to wonder about?

it's not allegedly? isn't it a fact?

there are thousands of biblical scholars that have attended all kinds of fancy-smancy univeristies and spent their entire lives studying the bible and they can not agree among themselves as to the "correct" meanings/translations of the "Good Book".

why do you think there are so many denominations within the christian church?

there are baptist bible scholars, there are catholic bible scholars, there are lutheran bible scholars, there are methodist bible scholars, there are assembly of god bible scholars, there are pentecostal bible scholars, ect ect ect ect, some with doctorate degrees, many very smart educated men and women and obviosuly they don't agree on exactly what the bible says or there would not be so many different denominations within the christian church.

and I HOPE HILLARY ISNT LYING WHEN SHE SAYS SHE MIGHT ATTACK IRAN

[Xavier_Onassis]

I HOPE HILLARY ISNT LYING WHEN SHE SAYS SHE MIGHT ATTACK IRAN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And I hope someday you wil be bright enough to realize how utterly dumb that statement is.

How would anyone prove anyone was lying when they stated what they MIGHT do?

MIGHT also means MIGHT NOT.  Otherwise AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT modal auxiliary verb would be used, such as WILL or SHALL.


I further observe that you and that Christian frog in your pocket have been 'United 4 Less Government' for over a month, and yet the government has not shrunk even as teensy bit.


If you really wanted to shrink the government, I would suggest moving the Capital to Juneau, Alaska.
There isn't enough room for Alaska's government there.

[Christians4LessGvt]

How would anyone prove anyone was lying when they stated what they MIGHT do?

who said anything about proving she was lying?
i just hope she is not lying
either Hillary might actually attack Iran (which i hope is true)
or Hillary is just saying that (lying) to appease the jewish vote and would never attack iran
again i hope Hillary is not lying when she says she might attack iran

[Michael Tee]

MT:  <<I just have to wonder about a "message" that scholars allegedly spend their lives trying to interpret and still can't agree on">>

CU4:  <<tee why?

        <<honestly whats to wonder about?>>

I am a pretty simple guy.  I am not a fucking genius by any stretch of the imagination.  I am not as eloquent as Winston Churchill or FDR.  But at times, I have to communicate a thought, an idea, an instruction, a joke, an apology, whatever.  So I say what I have to say or I write it down.  Rarely if ever does a person fail to understand what I am saying.  (I must say in this group there are several exceptions to that.)  This group apart, when someone of normal intelligence fails to understand me, I blame myself for not expressing myself clearly.  I set a fairly high standard for myself, so I am kind of chagrined when I fall short and realize that something I said or wrote was not clearly understood.  This can mean only that it was poorly expressed.

Now you have a book, supposedly of Divine inspiration.  It has a sentence that goes, roughly, in translation, "If somebody slaps you on the face, turn the other cheek."  IF the meaning is so unclear that generations of scholars can study it for entire lifetimes and not agree on its meaning, you are really accusing God of being a lousy communicator.  I pride myself on crafting messages that are 99% fully understandable on the first reading but I'm human and fallible.  If I see any misunderstanding of anything I write or say, (again assuming I am communicating with people of normal intelligence with normal sincerity) then I can correct the misunderstanding with a single re-write.  And that's just me, the mortal and fallible schmuck, Michael Tee.  To make a statement that God is a less effective communicator than Michael Tee is basically blasphemous.

To me the message of "Turn the other cheek" is perfectly clear.  There is no debate possible.  I don't believe it was divinely inspired, but if I DID believe that, then I could not reconcile the divine inspiration on the one hand with the alleged inability of scholars to agree on its meaning on the other hand.  My God is NOT an inarticulate schmuck.

[Xavier_Onassis]

MOst of the message of Jesus was pretty clear. He preached pacifism, and did not preach that oppression, such as that of Rome and its soldiers, should be opposed with any sort of force. He was opposed to moneychangers in the Temple, and hypocrites whose religion is mostly following the letter of the religious dictates, but not their intent. He favored the common men over Biblical scholars, and was against discrimination of even paraiahs like ther Samaritans, because even they could be good people.

He seem to have thought that bad times would be ended and the Romans would leave.

The diffic8ulty understanding the NT comes from reconciling it with the OT and the more voluminous letters of Paul and the off-the-wall ravings of the Book of Revelation, usually attributed to St. John the Divine.

Other conflicts have arisen between the peaceful message of Jesus and the more bellicose messages of those who professed to be Christians.

[Plane]

Cleopatra II, Medb (Maeve) of Ireland, Aife (Aoife) of Alba (Scotland), Queen Scathach of Skye, Queen Boadicea (or Bodiecia, Bouddica, Voadica, Voada) of the Iceni, Queen Aethelburgh, Queen Thyra, Eleanor of Castile, Queen Tamara of Georgia, Empress Maud (also known as Matilda) Germany, Jehanne la Pucelle (better known as Joan of Arc), Graine Ni Maille (also known as Grace O'Malley), Catherine the Great of Russia, Phillipa of Hainault.

==================================================================================
Ami the Medievalist. of course.


These are ancients. Their importance decreases with the square of their antiquity, I am afraid.

For every bellicose woman leader there have been dozens of warmongering men. I find this list unimpressive.

In 2000 years, one will can find so many two-headed calves that a one-headed one will seem like a freak.
-----------------------------------

Hillary is after Jewish campaign contributions from wealthy and bellicose Jews, the ones that would delight in a war with Iran.

One can never be too pro Israeli or pro Jewish when one is a senator from NY.

Goldia Maier count? Or was Indira Gandhi not such a strong leader as to count?

Hapsepsut seems so distant that the square of her age puts her out of consideration in modern minds , but the principal is that Women are often quite belligerent leaders once they rise to national leadership, ancient or modern is this not so?

[Xavier_Onassis]

but the principal is that Women are often quite belligerent leaders once they rise to national leadership, ancient or modern is this not so?

Actually, it isn't so?

Who have Birdie Ahern of Ireland and Angela Merkle, of Germany attacked recently?

The point is that women are less warlike than men, and this is generally so.

Certainly, President Hillary will not be such a warmonger as Juniorbush.

Not nearly as stupid, stubborn, or ignorant, either.

Juniorbush has excelled at all three traits. Plus, he also lies a lot.

[Christians4LessGvt]

" It has a sentence that goes, roughly, in translation, "If somebody slaps you on the face, turn the other cheek"."To me the message of "Turn the other cheek" is perfectly clear. 

well tee to me it is perfectly clear that when the below action is taken one does not turn the other cheek, one seeks justice which can many times equal punishment. if you, Lanya, and or js think that it means to turn the other cheek and continue to be slapped then I can certianly respect that opinion and not agree that is the message in the bible.



(just "turn the other cheek"? - i dont think so & dont think that is what the bible intends - but to each his own)

[Christians4LessGvt]

re: you are really accusing God of being a lousy communicator

exactly the opposite
imo god communicates in ways that are purposefully ambiguous