anthony@utcsstat.UUCP (04/12/85)
> Subject: Ban the new testement with the Zundel law > > It's not hard to get any minister to tell you that the new > testament says: > > 1) All men are sinners, and thus damned. > > 2) Only those who believe in Christ may be redeemed. > > Now it seems to me that this book is saying that all Jews are damned and > deserve to burn forever in eternal torment, or at the very least don't > deserve to meet the one they believe to be their creator. > > Let's ban this book before it makes any other nasty remarks about identifiable > groups! I am amazed by the mentality of some people, or LACK thereof, when they speak with their emotions rather than their BRAINS!!! From statements (1) and (2) above, the author derives the (LOGICAL) deduction that the new testement implies that all non-believers in Christ "... deserve to burn forever in eternal torment ...". Furthermore, it seems to him that the book is saying that "... all Jews are damned and deserve to burn forever ...." - I would like to see how that logically follows from premises (1) and (2) above. It seems to me that the only "group" identified is the (mathematical) complement of the set of non-Christian believers - no specific mention of Jews, no specific mention of Jews deserving to burn forever ...., etc. Furthermore, is the author implying the Jewish religion is perfect in its writings? Can he care to define a perfect religion? Can he care to define perfect morals and beliefs? Is he implicitly saying that we all should follow the Jewish religion because it is more "credible" in its beliefs, lexical syntax, etc.? I would like to point out that not a SINGLE group, however you may define group, is divorced from biases, prejudices, superstitions etc. A case in point is the Jewish religion - my favorite contradiction is the remark that they believe in forgiveness ("turning the other cheek") BUT they then turn around and hunt down war criminals. Don't get me wrong, I do NOT support the "extermination" of ANY (political, social, religious, ethnic, ...) group nor I do deny the fact that attrocities did, do, and will happen. Unfortunately, revenge, domination, aggression and many other traits ARE *human* nature!!!! No matter how close we each follow our religions (and their beliefs), we all break them. Whether it is lying for being late for a meeting, or calling someone an a**hole, we ALL violate some "commandment", and we do so freq- uently. I would assume that the basic commandments of one religion may be found in all religions in some form. I seriously doubt that one can find me some Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddist etc. who has not broken at least one of his religion's commandments (who hasn't told a "white lie"?). One of the reasons I am not religious is because of the many contradictions that exist in religious writings. I think the author of the above message would be more credible if he were to claim that women are discriminated against in the new testament! The underlying belief(s) in all religions is that we should respect our fellow "man" - regardless of colour, ethnicity, religion, social status etc. I would go as far as saying that ALL religions imply the above underlying belief. I wish to go on record as also saying that EVERY member of EVERY religion has broken one of his/hers religion's commandments and will cont- inue to do so frequently (be it through lying, deceit, adultery, murder, etc). In the final analysis, it should not matter whether we believe in a cow or goat, but how we attempt to use our superior skills as humans (rather than just members of the animal kingdom) to create an environment where everyone is equal (note the implicit innuendo that humans are superior => we all break our values !). The above opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect ...... etc. -- {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!utcsstat!anthony {ihnp4|decvax|utzoo|utcsrgv}!utcs!utzoo!utcsstat!anthony
dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) (04/15/85)
I agree with much of what Tony Ayiomamitis wrote, but I can't let this one pass: || my favorite contradiction is the remark that [Jews] ||believe in forgiveness ("turning the other cheek") BUT they then turn ||around and hunt down war criminals. Pardon me? Judaism has no concept of "turning the other cheek". That's a Christian concept. Furthermore, war criminals are not appopriate objects for "forgiveness". The scale of what happened to Jewish communities during the Holocaust is so horrible that justice - even justice delayed by 40 years - should be done. Dave Sherman -- {utzoo pesnta nrcaero utcs hcr}!lsuc!dave {allegra decvax ihnp4 linus}!utcsri!lsuc!dave
nixon@utai.UUCP (Brian Nixon) (04/16/85)
Re the concept of "turning the other cheek" in Judaism: If your enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat, And if he be thirsty, give him water to drink; For you will heap coals of fire upon his head, And the Almighty will reward you. (Proverbs 25:21-22)
julian@deepthot.UUCP (Julian Davies) (04/17/85)
Probably (as was said) noone has been completely successful in following the precepts of christianity, buddhism, etc. Nevertheless, a few individuals in history have come pretty close. Two examples that come to my mind: 1) John Woolman (1720-72) -- see his "Journal" which exists in several editions, also collected essays. 2) Mahatma Ghandi, a few biographies are available.