Are you like this in real life?

[Noor]

Any action which elevates one segment over another necessarily cheapens those segments which are untouched. This is what happens whenever an ideology attempts to favor one thing over others rather than accepting what is, and what isn't, as a whole.

To put it simply; there is only so much pie and those who attempt to steal from the shares of pie which belong to others, only end up with one result - conflict.

This is not healing. It is the direct opposite of healing and is what activist ideology creates. You may believe that the pie favors some, at the expense of others, but that is based on beliefs and desires rather than acceptance of the reality. Further, inherent in the ideology is a hidden truth; that those who seek change in the status quo do not do so for anyone other than themselves.

Whether that change is monetary, social, or spiritual, the change is sought only for oneself rather than the whole because absolute altruism cannot exist where there is life.

Secondly, I caution you to not confuse technological advancement with "better." Life is easier today because of technology which assists us. Food is safer, transportation is more efficient, good health is easier to attain and keep, and so on. That doesn't mean the same struggles as existed 3000 years ago have been eliminated. There is still hunger. Still death. Still disease.

My observation on all of this is that those who promote today's ideological stances seek not to change the world to eliminate hunger, disease, and death; but instead seek to elevate themselves. Not so they can change the world, but merely to change their status in it.

I’m still confuse about what you perceive my idealogy to be or how what you are writing pertains to me.
Jew have provide many advances in the world that benefit everyone.
Drip irrigation for instant.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

^someone is intentionally ignoring her own religious history.

Now, why in the world would someone do that?

The Romans crucified Jesus, not the Jews.

The Sanhedrin probably could have tried to intercede to save him, but relations were shaky enough with the Roman occupiers that they probably figured it wasn’t worth endangering the entire community to protect an annoying blasphemer.

 

[Noor]

Those who murdered the Son of God should guard their tongues when they use antisemitism as a sword instead of as a shield.

Wow, it’s you who don’t know your history.
That’s propaganda.
The idea that "the Jews" collectively killed Christ is a theological myth (deicide) originating from interpretations of the New Testament (specifically Matthew 27:24-25) and early Christian writings. Historically, Jesus was a Jew in Roman-occupied Judaea, and his death was carried out by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.
(specifically Matthew 27:24-25) and early Christian writings
Historically, Jesus was a Jew in Roman-occupied Judaea, and his death was carried out by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.
The Roman’s kept records too.

 

[HisArpy]

Wow, it’s you who don’t know your history.
That’s propaganda.
The idea that "the Jews" collectively killed Christ is a theological myth (deicide) originating from interpretations of the New Testament (specifically Matthew 27:24-25) and early Christian writings. Historically, Jesus was a Jew in Roman-occupied Judaea, and his death was carried out by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.
(specifically Matthew 27:24-25) and early Christian writings
Historically, Jesus was a Jew in Roman-occupied Judaea, and his death was carried out by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.
The Roman’s kept records too.

There's a nice bit of omission of critical facts.

In point of fact; Jesus was accused by JEWISH LEADERS of Blasphemy, breaking Sabbath, and challenging the teachings of the Torah by claiming to be a King.

It was those accusations which brought him to the attention of the Romans who perceived him as a threat to Roman rule as well as the claim he was King of the Jews which directly threatened Cesar and Rome.

Upon pronunciation of his guilt and crimes, Jesus was crucified before the populace.

THAT is actual history, not your sanitized version of events.

 

[HisArpy]

I’m still confuse about what you perceive my idealogy to be or how what you are writing pertains to me.
Jew have provide many advances in the world that benefit everyone.
Drip irrigation for instant.

I believe your ideology is one in which you either favor or adhere to progressive beliefs. If I am wrong, I will accept being corrected. However, I don't believe I'm wrong based on your posts against ICE and Trump.

Irrigation is a complex subject. However, the gist of irrigation is that you take water from one place and use it in another where there is insufficient water to grow crops.

Now the bad news; when you take water from an area in which it is abundant and the agriculture and natural flora are based on that amount of water, you restrict what water is available. That stresses the environment. When you use the diverted water in areas which don't have that amount of water, you again stress the environment.

This is not "healing the world." It is in truth, disrupting the natural balance of the world and is inopposite to your stated goal.

What I see in your posts are micro level viewpoints wherein you do not see the big picture. I'm not sure this is because you don't wish to see beyond what you're being told, or for some other reason not disclosed.

 

[Noor]

There's a nice bit of omission of critical facts.

In point of fact; Jesus was accused by JEWISH LEADERS of Blasphemy, breaking Sabbath, and challenging the teachings of the Torah by claiming to be a King.

It was those accusations which brought him to the attention of the Romans who perceived him as a threat to Roman rule as well as the claim he was King of the Jews which directly threatened Cesar and Rome.

Upon pronunciation of his guilt and crimes, Jesus was crucified before the populace.

THAT is actual history, not your sanitized version of events.

Bs. In Judaism being challenged for stuff is not as big of a deal as it is with Christianity.
Jesus was one of about 50 people at the time who either thought he was the messiah or their followers thought they were. A large number of followers who thought he was the messiah was threatening to the Romans.
What makes you think your version of history,clouded through fundamentalist Christian eyes is a better than anyone else’s? This is an old blood libel propagated by Christians, and was disproved long ago.
Romans’ kept records, the Jews were not in power, the Romans were. A Jew such as Jesus with power of a crowd/mob was a threat to their rule.

 

[Noor]

Bs. In Judaism being challenged for stuff is not as big of a deal as it is with Christianity.
Jesus was one of about 50 people at the time who either thought he was the messiah or their followers thought they were. A large number of followers who thought he was the messiah was threatening to the Romans.
What makes you think your version of history,clouded through fundamentalist Christian eyes is a better than anyone else’s? This is an old blood libel propagated by Christians, and was disproved long ago.
Romans’ kept records, the Jews were not in power, the Romans were. A Jew such as Jesus with power of a crowd/mob was a threat to their rule.

From the Annals of Tacitus (A.D. 56-120)
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.”

I have this in the original Latin and can the Latin quote when I’m back home.

 

[HisArpy]

Bs. In Judaism being challenged for stuff is not as big of a deal as it is with Christianity.
Jesus was one of about 50 people at the time who either thought he was the messiah or their followers thought they were. A large number of followers who thought he was the messiah was threatening to the Romans.
What makes you think your version of history,clouded through fundamentalist Christian eyes is a better than anyone else’s? This is an old blood libel propagated by Christians, and was disproved long ago.
Romans’ kept records, the Jews were not in power, the Romans were. A Jew such as Jesus with power of a crowd/mob was a threat to their rule.

Just because you like your version of history doesn't mean that your version is the correct one. Here, the facts are well known that Jesus was first accused by Jewish authorities, not the Romans. You can google it and AI will tell you the same. This makes your version of history incorrect.

Notably, it was only after the Jews made their accusations that the Romans acted. This is because the Romans were in charge of ruling the land and it fell to them to decide. Had the Jews still been in charge, the Jews would have been the ones who crucified The Son Of God because neither they nor the Romans could accept the challenges to their religious views.

Again, that's nothing except the factual truth. Another factual truth is that I'm not a Christian Fundamentalist. However, just because I don't follow the Christian faith doesn't mean I don't know what it's about. Nor does it mean that I don't know history. What it does mean is that I can look at what happened without needing the lens of religious bias to make it fit comfortably into my personal faith and beliefs.

 

[HisArpy]

From the Annals of Tacitus (A.D. 56-120)
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.”

I have this in the original Latin and can the Latin quote when I’m back home.

This merely reports that the rise of Christianity was a threat to the Roman empire and that it was widespread. It holds no direct significance to the crucifixion other than all who pleaded guilty to being Christian were put to death.

However, what's missing is the accusation. Had no one accused anyone of being Christian, none of this would have happened.

 

[RoryN]

Just because you like your version of history doesn't mean that your version is the correct one.

...says the guy who has been living in his own version of reality on this forum for years.

 

[HisArpy]

You are ignoring content by this member. Show ignored content

 

[ll74]

If you don't tell everyone that you're ignoring them, the ignore feature doesn't work.

Good job, Arpy

 

[Noor]

This merely reports that the rise of Christianity was a threat to the Roman empire and that it was widespread. It holds no direct significance to the crucifixion other than all who pleaded guilty to being Christian were put to death.

However, what's missing is the accusation. Had no one accused anyone of being Christian, none of this would have happened.

Yep, and that was the bottom line of why Christ was crucified.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

There's a nice bit of omission of critical facts.

In point of fact; Jesus was accused by JEWISH LEADERS of Blasphemy, breaking Sabbath, and challenging the teachings of the Torah by claiming to be a King.

It was those accusations which brought him to the attention of the Romans who perceived him as a threat to Roman rule as well as the claim he was King of the Jews which directly threatened Cesar and Rome.

Upon pronunciation of his guilt and crimes, Jesus was crucified before the populace.

THAT is actual history, not your sanitized version of events.

Jesus was found guilty under the law and was given the standard punishment for the crime he had committed. It’s not like he was just cut down in the street by Roman soldiers.

 

[Noor]

Just because you like your version of history doesn't mean that your version is the correct one. Here, the facts are well known that Jesus was first accused by Jewish authorities, not the Romans. You can google it and AI will tell you the same. This makes your version of history incorrect.

Notably, it was only after the Jews made their accusations that the Romans acted. This is because the Romans were in charge of ruling the land and it fell to them to decide. Had the Jews still been in charge, the Jews would have been the ones who crucified The Son Of God because neither they nor the Romans could accept the challenges to their religious views.

Again, that's nothing except the factual truth. Another factual truth is that I'm not a Christian Fundamentalist. However, just because I don't follow the Christian faith doesn't mean I don't know what it's about. Nor does it mean that I don't know history. What it does mean is that I can look at what happened without needing the lens of religious bias to make it fit comfortably into my personal faith and beliefs.

Accusing means nothing if you don’t have the power to do anymore than banning someone from your faith.
You obvious have religious bias if you’re saying the Jews are reasonable for Christ’s death.

 

[Noor]

I believe your ideology is one in which you either favor or adhere to progressive beliefs. If I am wrong, I will accept being corrected. However, I don't believe I'm wrong based on your posts against ICE and Trump.

Irrigation is a complex subject. However, the gist of irrigation is that you take water from one place and use it in another where there is insufficient water to grow crops.

Now the bad news; when you take water from an area in which it is abundant and the agriculture and natural flora are based on that amount of water, you restrict what water is available. That stresses the environment. When you use the diverted water in areas which don't have that amount of water, you again stress the environment.

This is not "healing the world." It is in truth, disrupting the natural balance of the world and is inopposite to your stated goal.

What I see in your posts are micro level viewpoints wherein you do not see the big picture. I'm not sure this is because you don't wish to see beyond what you're being told, or for some other reason not disclosed.

I don’t like the current Ice in my home town. I have watched them do things solely to terrorize the local citizens. When I’m home I get waken up repeatedly by helicopters. They block the roads for no viable reason and are basically throwing their weight around.
I have no problem picking up criminals from jail using judicial warrants as they have always done and are supposed to do.
Pulling people out of cars, esp native Americans, because they look like they could be Hispanic, taking their possessions and then after finally checking their paper work, if they do, releasing some of them without their possessions miles away from where they picked them up in the freezing cold, is something I strongly disagree with.
You don’t live here, you don’t know the demographics of the cities. These are people I know land thbgs I have actually seen.

I don’t remember saying much if anything about Trump.

 

[Noor]

This merely reports that the rise of Christianity was a threat to the Roman empire and that it was widespread. It holds no direct significance to the crucifixion other than all who pleaded guilty to being Christian were put to death.

However, what's missing is the accusation. Had no one accused anyone of being Christian, none of this would have happened.

Christ was hardly a secret at the time, the mere name Christ was guilty of enough, to the Romans Jesus was the leader. Romans were not particularly nice people to non citizens.

 

[Pavlovsdog6862]

Yeah, I’m pretty much like this in real life too.

With my husband and friends there’s a lot of “can you believe this shit?”

I’m actually the cheerful Pollyanna of the group, telling the doomers if we just stick together and stay true to our values we’ll get through it.

I actually did lecture a guy at the dog park about Israel.

I don’t interact with MAGA in real life. I cut off all those assholes years ago.

And yet over and over you interact with me whom you claim is maga hmmm hypocrite much?????

 

[HisArpy]

Accusing means nothing if you don’t have the power to do anymore than banning someone from your faith.
You obvious have religious bias if you’re saying the Jews are reasonable for Christ’s death.

So, by extension of this belief, the Salem Witch Trial accusers are innocent for what was done there?

 

[Noor]

So, by extension of this belief, the Salem Witch Trial accusers are innocent for what was done there?

Uh?
Salem witch accusers had rye poisoning…

 

[ll74]

Strange enough, this forum is part of your real life.

 

[Raybies93]

Any action which elevates one segment over another necessarily cheapens those segments which are untouched. This is what happens whenever an ideology attempts to favor one thing over others rather than accepting what is, and what isn't, as a whole.

To put it simply; there is only so much pie and those who attempt to steal from the shares of pie which belong to others, only end up with one result - conflict.

This is not healing. It is the direct opposite of healing and is what activist ideology creates. You may believe that the pie favors some, at the expense of others, but that is based on beliefs and desires rather than acceptance of the reality. Further, inherent in the ideology is a hidden truth; that those who seek change in the status quo do not do so for anyone other than themselves.

Whether that change is monetary, social, or spiritual, the change is sought only for oneself rather than the whole because absolute altruism cannot exist where there is life.

Secondly, I caution you to not confuse technological advancement with "better." Life is easier today because of technology which assists us. Food is safer, transportation is more efficient, good health is easier to attain and keep, and so on. That doesn't mean the same struggles as existed 3000 years ago have been eliminated. There is still hunger. Still death. Still disease.

My observation on all of this is that those who promote today's ideological stances seek not to change the world to eliminate hunger, disease, and death; but instead seek to elevate themselves. Not so they can change the world, but merely to change their status in it.

“There is only so much pie “ is a false belief.
When was anyone ever told “Sorry. There’s no money left on this planet for you to be successful”

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

And yet over and over you interact with me whom you claim is maga hmmm hypocrite much?????

This message board is my only regular contact with MAGA.

 

[Pavlovsdog6862]

This message board is my only regular contact with MAGA.

And you interact with maga over and over ! I just said that wtf

 

[Wilson23]

There IS no "real life." This is it.