Of Salvation

[musicman]

"...without U.S. backing, Israel would not have survived past the 60s...".


You'll get no argument from me there, Comrade.

 

[Shazbot]

(Unrelated)can anyone tell me the meaning of the 3 red squares under my nuber of posts stat: Am I heading for a ban?

Whoa! Holy crap you have a bad reputation here! And, no, I do not think that has any bearing on being banned - I don't think being disliked is against the rules here.

-Douglas

 

[Shazbot]

NO OFFENSE MEANT TO YOUR BELIEFS

None at all taken.

You will have to excuse my lack of response...I am about to take a two day road trip up to college. Thanks!

-Douglas

 

[ajwps]

AJ:

Attempting a dialogue with you is a frustrating business, since your idea of conversation is a never-ending game of "debate, deflect, and misdirect."

Okay lets say for arguments sake that you are not the one deflecting and misdirecting in your posts. (Forget that debating is what this is all about).

So let me say for your benefit and to avoid being religiously incorrect, let me state what you consider to the truth, nothing but the truth so help me G-d.

Israel owes its entire existence to the Christian right of the USA
Israel's only ally is the Christian right in the USA
Israel has no better friends than the Christian right of the USA
Israel will never be abandoned by the Christian right of the USA

So is this no longer lying so we can just move on?


"Ergo American Christianity is AND HAS BEEN the only friend and ally of Israel and the Jewish people."

I said nothing of the kind. I said that Jews, and the State of Israel, have no better friends on earth than the American Christian right.

"So, you speak for ALL AMERICAN CHRISTIANS that will never allow the US to abandon Israel."

I replied, *I hate to break this to you, but America IS in a big war with Islam.* You answered like a cornered child who has just run out of excuses: "For your information, Israel has also been in a big war with Islamic terror for many more years than America."

Excuse me, but what has this to do with anything? It is meaningless to the discussion, completely irrelevant to the point, a pitifully lame attempt to - all together now, kids - DEBATE, DEFLECT, AND MISDIRECT.

Again you hear and believe that only America is at war with Islam and for me to agree with you but add that both Israel and the USA are at war with Islam is deflecting and misdirecting your position of truth.

Brother it appears that as far as you are concerned there is no alternative truths or evidence that you see as grey than just your black and white ideations. The US is Israel's ally now. The future is hopefully the same.

"That Israel should genuflect in front of America and confess thanks for its existence."

That's the kind of attitude that gives ammunition to Israel's enemies - the perception that the American taxpayer doles out billions of dollars a year to aid a nation of snarling ingrates. Way to go, AJ. Keep up the good work.

Here you go again whinning and deflecting. Israel's enemies need no more ammunition as the nations are already using everything in their arsenal against Israel. How much more can the US be despised by its enemies. Do you really think that appeasement or paying money to your allies increases tensions or hate of America or Israel.

No matter how you want to deflect the facts or distort the truth; America is an ally of Israel and Israel is an ally of America. The world knows it and making one's ally admit that there is no GREATER Ally protecting both of these countries from disaster is denying the obvious.

 

[ajwps]

"...without U.S. backing, Israel would not have survived past the 60s...".

You'll get no argument from me there, Comrade.

I suppose that you can back up your argument about Israel disappearing without America by some kind of proof?

 

[5stringJeff]

[I=Shazbot]A branch from the thread entitled "Government-Christian Groups Lock Horns over Anti-Conversion Bill"



It is held about Christ's eternal sacrifice but by whom was it held? So you believe that the very law of Moses was somehow nothing more than a preparation for the Israelites (not gentiles) getting prepared for Christ's sacrifice. Powerful reasoning.

Would you agree that Christ's first coming was somehow a symbol of a second coming of Christ when he met Joseph Smith in Philadelphia, PA?

It is held that somehow this second coming was a foreshadowing a brand new covenant with his new church of the Latter Day Saints. By the same ones who held Christs first eternal sacrifice no less.

Can you follow your reasoning here?



So after a non-believer is dead and ready to understand that an afterlife and a Creator are no longer in question, then Jesus will come along and preach to this new choir of the lost dead who will believe him. I'll bet it won't take much convincing.



Oops my mistake. I see, this chance for salvation is gonna be offered for a 'one-time opportunity' only to those who weren't told of this miraculous god in life on earth or lived before he was born. That sounds fair to me.



Okay

For Salvation with Christ

1) faith in Christ
+
2) Christ told his disciples what and how to do things. (The Jewish disciples had to be aware of the Ten Commandments before Jesus advised them of same).

GIFT OF SALVATION



So Christ asks you to do good works but they are not necessary for salvation. Why do good works at all if they are not necessary?

This is also the differentiation between Christianity and Judaism.

Christianity is a religion of CREED (for reward of paradise with Christ)

Judaism is a religion of DEED (with no guarantee of a prize or reward in any afterlife)

I think I will take the one with no guarantee for doing good deeds and only for the happiness in doing them without a treat at the end.

I know I'm a day late and a dollar short... but may I please point out that Shazbot (Douglas) is presenting the Mormon argument, not the Christian argument, for salvation. Mormon theology and Christian theology are two vastly different things.

 

[musicman]

AJ:

"...let me state what you consider to [be] the truth, and nothing but the truth so help me G-d."

It's not all that complex a proposition, man. A faithful recounting of the spirit of my posts would do nicely . I'm not talking verbatim here - just basic honesty, minus the deflections and misdirection. If those things are permissible - even laudable - in debate, then fuck debate. I'd rather converse.

"Israel owes it's entire existence to the Christian right of the USA."

See? That's exactly what I'm talking about. I never said that, and what's more, you KNOW I never said that. Debate, deflect, misdirect. Let's just pretend we're two human beings, talking.

"Israel's only ally is the Christian right of the USA."

See previous.

"Israel has no better friends than the Christian right of the USA."
"Israel will never be abandoned by the Christian right of the USA."

Now, what was so hard about that? Those are my statements, and I stand by them.

"Again, you hear and believe that only America is at war with Islam..."

Never said that. You know it.

"...and for me to agree with you but add that both Israel and the USA are at war with Islam is deflecting and misdirecting your position of truth."

That is not the context in which you offered that observation - otherwise, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed. You advanced it as if it somehow rendered moot my statement that the USA was in a war with Islam. I'm reminded of a televised debate between DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe and his Republican counterpart, Ed Gillespie. Gillespie had just finished exposing McAuliffe as a clown on the issue of President Bush being "AWOL". The moderator was so shaken that he actually said, "Mr. McAuliffe, this man just called you a liar. Would you care to respond?" McAuliffe's rapier-like reply? "Well - they lie TOO!" That's about how much sense your statement made in context.

"Here you go again [whining] and deflecting."

What color is the sky in your world?

"Israel's enemies need no more ammunition..."

I agree. Why don't you stop giving it to them?

"...as the nations are already using everything in their arsenal against Israel."

I think - or, at least hope - that you're being deliberately opaque here. Surely, you're astute enough to grasp that I was speaking of Israel's enemies in this country; hence, my reference to the perceptions of U.S taxpayers.

"Do you really think that appeasement or paying money to your allies increases tensions or hate of America or Israel?'

*...paying money to your allies...* Interesting choice of words, AJ - as if the billions sent to Israel are somehow "owed".

"No matter how you want to deflect the facts or distort the truth;America is an ally of Israel and Israel is an ally of America. The world knows it and making one's ally admit that there is no GREATER ally protecting both of these countries from disaster is denying the obvious."

It would KILL you to say that Israel owes a debt of gratitude to the U.S., wouldn't it?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

AJ. Lies, strawmen, and debating tricks do not constitute good debate. So knock it off.

 

[musicman]

AJ. Lies, strawmen, and debating tricks do not constitute good debate. So knock it off.

Thanks for the clarification, RWA. And, you're right - there can be a "good" debate - lively, entertaining, informative, even brutal, at times. I've got no problem with any of that.

But "victory" at the price of truth, reason, and common sense seems a rather hollow proposition. What has the victor really won?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I don't know. Aj gets squirrelly when his own inflated sense of Judaic superiority is not parroted back to him on cue, doesn't he?

 

[musicman]

It's bloody weird. And, he reserves his most caustic vitriol for those who truly wish the Jews well.

 

[ajwps]

AJ: "...let me state what you consider to [be] the truth, and nothing but the truth so help me G-d." It's not all that complex a proposition, man. A faithful recounting of the spirit of my posts would do nicely . I'm not talking verbatim here - just basic honesty, minus the deflections and misdirection. If those things are permissible - even laudable - in debate, then fuck debate. I'd rather converse.

So obvious a ploy... Any refutation of your propostions are simply deflections or misdirections. You prefer convesation instead of debate. Why are you afraid to debate when conversations are simply polite nicites. What are you afraid of?

"Israel owes it's entire existence to the Christian right of the USA."

See? That's exactly what I'm talking about. I never said that, and what's more, you KNOW I never said that. Debate, deflect, misdirect. Let's just pretend we're two human beings, talking.

"Israel's only ally is the Christian right of the USA." Do you deny.

Yes really, here is what you said Musicman:

"Your need to minimize, or dismiss outright, America's role in Israel's very existence is almost a reflex. Why is that?"

"Israel has no better friends than the Christian right of the USA."
"Israel will never be abandoned by the Christian right of the USA."

Now, what was so hard about that? Those are my statements, and I stand by them.

Why do you find it necessary to find your Christian American's statements so one-sidedly true?

Do you find the following statements not true?

America has no better friend than their long time Middle Eastern ally Israel?

Israel will never abandon their American allies?

"Again, you hear and believe that only America is at war with Islam..."

Never said that. You know it.

"...and for me to agree with you but add that both Israel and the USA are at war with Islam is deflecting and misdirecting your position of truth."

What?

That is not the context in which you offered that observation - otherwise, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed. You advanced it as if it somehow rendered moot my statement that the USA was in a war with Islam. I'm reminded of a televised debate between DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe and his Republican counterpart, Ed Gillespie. Gillespie had just finished exposing McAuliffe as a clown on the issue of President Bush being "AWOL". The moderator was so shaken that he actually said, "Mr. McAuliffe, this man just called you a liar. Would you care to respond?" McAuliffe's rapier-like reply? "Well - they lie TOO!" That's about how much sense your statement made in context.

This analogy of yours has absolutely no correlation to the point you made.

You originally made a very direct statement, " You ought to be rooting for us. We are besieged on all fronts by enemies foreign and domestic. It would be nice if we could live in peace with our friends. P.S. - I hate to break this to you, but America IS in a big war with Islam. Then you claim that my response to your statement about both Israel and American being at war with Islam which somehow you find your statement somehow being made moot.

Then you compare an interview between Terry McAuliffe and Ed Gillsspie as a possible comparistion to being called a liar because America and western civilization are at war with Islamic fundamentalism. I never made any statments that both sides are liars. I'm sorry but your analogy is far above my ability to comprehend any equivalency.

What color is the sky in your world?

What has your statment to do with my observing you to be whinning and complaining that America and others being at war with Muhammad's Qur"an?

"Israel's enemies need no more ammunition..."

I agree. Why don't you stop giving it to them?

Have you ever heard of giving rope to your enemy so that they can more easily hang themselves? The enemies of Israel and the United States create out of thin air all the ammunition they need in order to convince themselves and the Nations of the righteousness of their cause. Truth never hurt anyone or do you disagree?

"...as the nations are already using everything in their arsenal against Israel."

I think - or, at least hope - that you're being deliberately opaque here. Surely, you're astute enough to grasp that I was speaking of Israel's enemies in this country; hence, my reference to the perceptions of U.S taxpayers.

You said,

"That's the kind of attitude that gives ammunition to Israel's enemies - the perception that the American taxpayer doles out billions of dollars a year to aid a nation of snarling ingrates. Way to go, AJ. Keep up the good work.

Do you find Israel's enemies only in the United States in your statement? Israel has many enemies in the world and in the United States but you did not clarify that point in your words. Your words "doles out billions of dollars a year to a nation of snarling ingrates" is truly an obfuscation and has no reality. The US doles out billions to the Arab nations that attack our people but Israel is the only one that has loan guarantees with interest that are being paid back. Not one other country repays the US. Not even England and Europe after WW2 when the Marshall plan poured tens of millions of taxpayer dollars into these war ravaged countries. No effort was ever made to pay these funds back to American taxpayers. And yet these same nations are the ingrates that you see in the news everyday condeming America for it imperialism.

"Do you really think that appeasement or paying money to your allies increases tensions or hate of America or Israel?'

*...paying money to your allies...* Interesting choice of words, AJ - as if the billions sent to Israel are somehow "owed".

Interesting choice of your own words. The billions in US loan guarantees to Israel are actually 'owed' back to America and they are slowly being repaid with interest. Ignore that fact if you will. American also funds for research and development in the universities and labs of Israel which 'helps' America remains the sole remaining superpower. Not to mention the level of healthcare technology that Israel contributes to Americans and the world to make everyone healthier and live longer.

It would KILL you to say that Israel owes a debt of gratitude to the U.S., wouldn't it?

Not at all... How about saying the same about your little ally in the Middle East?

 

[ajwps]

I don't know. Aj gets squirrelly when his own inflated sense of Judaic superiority is not parroted back to him on cue, doesn't he?

Your own religious superiority is inflated to be the only truth.

Imagination could hardly do without metaphor, for imagination is, literally, the moving around in one’s mind of images, and such images tend commonly to be metaphoric. Creative minds, as we know, are rich in images and metaphors, and this is true in science and art alike. The difference between scientist and artist has little to do with the ways of the creative imagination; everything to do with the manner of demonstration and verification of what has been seen or imagined.

ATTRIBUTION: Robert A. Nisbet (b. 1913)

 

[ajwps]

It's bloody weird. And, he reserves his most caustic vitriol for those who truly wish the Jews well.

Do you think that there may be an ulterior motive behind those who truly wish the Jewish people and Israel well?

 

[ajwps]

AJ. Lies, strawmen, and debating tricks do not constitute good debate. So knock it off.

Your metaphor of the straw man and debating tricks is unfortunate and misleading. A more accurate analogy would be truth, for, though the strawman is an entity, the debate can still be distinguished from reality, as good debate from admitting you have nothing with which to respond.

 

[musicman]

AJ:

Well, it's a quiet Sunday night, I'm off the clock, and I find myself with time and energy on my hands. Let's see - how shall I spend it? Should I trot out your distortions one by one, or should I let them stand on their own, speak for themselves, and convict you by your own hand? Well, all right - twist my arm. I'll respond to the more outrageous of your claims.

"So obvious a ploy...Any refutation of your propositions are simply deflections or misdirections".

That's kind of hard to answer. I'll be sure and let you know, though, if you ever do manage to refute any of my propositions.

"Why are you afraid to debate when conversations are simply polite [niceties]."

That's rather a warped view of the art of honest conversation.

"What are you afraid of?"

Actually, nothing. It's just that you seem to have set the parameters of this particular debate, to wit: exaggerations, distortions, and outright lies are not only permissible, but downright laudable gambits. By that definition of "debate", I'd have to say that I much prefer conversation.

"Why do you find it necessary to find your Christian American statements so one-sidedly true?"

Find it necessary to find? What are you talking about, Beavis?

"Do you find the following statements not true? America has no better friend than their long time Middle Eastern ally Israel?"

Great Britian springs to mind. They haven't attacked any American ships, or killed any American sailors, in my lifetime.

"Israel will never abandon their American allies."

A drowning man is unlikely to abandon the lifeguard.

"I'm sorry but your analogy is far above my ability to comprehend any equivalency."

Well, maybe it is, and maybe it isn't. Personally, I credit you with more intelligence than to have missed my point. I just think you don't like the fact that I busted you in a childish, reflexive, and pointless reply.

"The billions in loan guarantees are actually 'owed' back to America and they are slowly being repaid with interest."

Well, since the billions in aid continue to pour in annually, when do you figure we'll be settled up? Ever?

"How about saying the same thing about your little ally in the Middle East?"

OK. I'll even go first. Israel has proven to be a staunch ally, a reliable friend, and the lone outpost of democracy in a critically strategic area for the United States. I'm damned glad we've got her.

Your turn.

 

[musicman]

Do you think that there may be an ulterior motive behind those who truly wish the Jewish people and Israel well?

I'll refrain from a rush to judgement on this statement, pending clarification. Please, by all means, elaborate.

 

[ajwps]

AJ:

Well, it's a quiet Sunday night, I'm off the clock, and I find myself with time and energy on my hands. Let's see - how shall I spend it? Should I trot out your distortions one by one, or should I let them stand on their own, speak for themselves, and convict you by your own hand? Well, all right - twist my arm. I'll respond to the more outrageous of your claims.

"So obvious a ploy...Any refutation of your propositions are simply deflections or misdirections".

That's kind of hard to answer. I'll be sure and let you know, though, if you ever do manage to refute any of my propositions.

One can believe he is absolutely truthful and sincere even though admittedly the most outrageous prevaricator. Fiction and invention are of the very fabric of life.

You are so certain in your righteous propositions that they actually refute themselves.

"Why are you afraid to debate when conversations are simply polite [niceties]."

Why do you think being abusive or argumentative must be necessary to debate the merits of one's position?

That's rather a warped view of the art of honest conversation. "What are you afraid of?"

Honest you say? Why do you think I am afraid of words of truth; in fact there is no need to be afraid of your contrived words at all.

Actually, nothing. It's just that you seem to have set the parameters of this particular debate, to wit: exaggerations, distortions, and outright lies are not only permissible, but downright laudable gambits. By that definition of "debate", I'd have to say that I much prefer conversation.

Do you really consider yourself the interpreter of exaggerations, distortions or lies when in fact you are the master of them.

"Why do you find it necessary to find your Christian American statements so one-sidedly true?"

Find it necessary to find? What are you talking about, Beavis?

You are much like the Muslims. Only they have the right to be correct. Anyone who finds that both have a right to their opinions is simply WRONG. Why are you becoming so defensive with your name calling?

"Do you find the following statements not true? America has no better friend than their long time Middle Eastern ally Israel?"

Great Britian springs to mind. They haven't attacked any American ships, or killed any American sailors, in my lifetime.

So Great Britain is a greater MIDDLE EASTERN ally of America than Israel. You really are brilliant.

"Israel will never abandon their American allies."

A drowning man is unlikely to abandon the lifeguard.

When two drowning men assist each other from drowning, then they are unlikely to abandon one another.

"I'm sorry but your analogy is far above my ability to comprehend any equivalency."

Well, maybe it is, and maybe it isn't. Personally, I credit you with more intelligence than to have missed my point. I just think you don't like the fact that I busted you in a childish, reflexive, and pointless reply.

From the lowly perspective of a dog's eyes, everyone looks short.

"The billions in loan guarantees are actually 'owed' back to America and they are slowly being repaid with interest."

Well, since the billions in aid continue to pour in annually, when do you figure we'll be settled up? Ever?

Probably a lot quicker than England, France and the rest of Europe repays their Marshall Plan loans following WW2. When you go to the bank and make a loan, you pay it back and then you can borrow again. What is your point?

"How about saying the same thing about your little ally in the Middle East?"

OK. I'll even go first. Israel has proven to be a staunch ally, a reliable friend, and the lone outpost of democracy in a critically strategic area for the United States. I'm damned glad we've got her.

Your turn.

At least we both agree that America has proven to be a stuanch ally, reliable friend and a lone outpoost of democratic cooperation with Israel and am darned glad that we have eath other in this time of immenent peril.

 

[ajwps]

I'll refrain from a rush to judgement on this statement, pending clarification. Please, by all means, elaborate.

There is no need to inflame you with the theology of which you already are aware.

 

[musicman]

AJ:

"Fiction and invention are of the very fabric of life".

That assertion explains a lot about your debating style.

"You are so certain in your righteous propositions that they actually refute themselves".

Extraordinary. Certainty=refutation. I'd have never thought that.

"Why are you becoming so defensive with your name calling?'

Medic! Medic! I've been attacked by psychobabble! I've been hit with a powerful burst of JARGON! Oh, please, AJ - let me up!

"So Great Britian is a greater MIDDLE EASTERN ally of America than Israel? You really are brilliant".

Flattery will not avail you, sir. Seriously, AJ, this is the kind of lame word-twisting that damages your credibility so badly. You don't need a refresher course in sentence structure. You don't need to hear Rush Limbaugh's admonition, "Words mean things". You know perfectly well that "America has no better friend than their long time Middle Eastern ally Israel" means something entirely different from "America has no better Middle Eastern friend than their ally Israel". This is just a silly game you play when you've got no point to make. It's sad, it grows tiresome, and it's beneath you.

"From the lowly perspective of dogs, everyone looks short".

I would have thought everyone would look tall, but, what the hell - it's your delusion. Enjoy it.

"Probably a lot quicker than England, France, and the rest of Europe repays their Marshall Plan loans following WW2".

You're not factoring in the billions that continue to flow into Israel every year. I think America would be safe in calling all these debts a wash.

"At least we both agree that America has proven to be a staunch ally, reliable friend and a lone outpost of democratic cooperation with Israel and am darned glad that we have each other in this time of imminent peril".

But you would die in fire before you would utter the simple, unqualified statement that Israel relies on the U.S. for it's existence. If you tried to say it, you'd choke on the words. I wonder why that is.