Religions > Atheism > The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
06 May 2006 05:14:46 PM |
| Object: |
The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDY0YmNhMjc5YThmZWIxY2VjNmM3MWE0YjU1MDFhYTg=
May 05, 2006, 7:17 a.m.
The Da Vinci Protocols
Jews should worry about Dan Brown's success.
By David Klinghoffer
With less than three weeks before the May 19 release of the Sony
Pictures version of Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code, worries continue to
mount among Christians about both the book's and the movie's
impact. But should non-Christians be concerned, too?
Absolutely. Jews in particular need to be aware of the gift
mega-selling Dan Brown has given, in all innocence, to anti-Semites.
As everyone knows by now, Brown uses a gripping suspense story set in
the present to inform us that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, and
that he has descendants living in Europe today. Furthermore, the
members of this surviving Jesus family have been protected for
centuries by an altruistic secret organization, the Priory of Sion,
which is locked in combat with a sinister, violent Catholic group, Opus
Dei. That latter seeks to keep the secret of Jesus' paternity from
getting out. Behind Opus Dei stands the Catholic Church. For millennia,
the church has perpetrated what the film calls "the biggest cover up
in human history."
Opus Dei, the real-life Catholic lay order, asked Sony to place a
disclaimer at the beginning of the movie admitting that the story is
fictional-a request the studio has so far refused. Brown himself
states at the outset of the novel that his tale is grounded in
"fact": "The Priory of Sion-a European secret society founded
in 1099-is a real organization," and so on.
Scholars have done a solid job of pointing out the fictions that
interweave Brown's "facts." Notably, the "Priory of Sion" is
"real" only in the sense that it really is the modern invention of
Pierre Plantard, a peculiar Frenchman with royalist and anti-Semitic
views. It dates to the year 1956, not 1099. Plantard's hoax merely
took the name of a medieval monastic order that had ceased to exist by
the 14th century and which had nothing to do with legends about
Jesus' fathering children.
You may wonder if Brown's readers find his tale convincing, not as
fiction but as truth. Seemingly they do. A Barna Group poll found that
53 percent of the book's readers said The Da Vinci Code aided their
"personal spiritual growth and understanding."
But why should a non-Christian care?
Consider that the alleged conspiracy underlying the "biggest cover up
in human history" bears a remarkable resemblance to another phony
conspiracy, the famous hoax called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Apparently authored by Russian monarchist and anti-Semite Mathieu
Golovinski in 1898, the Protocols tells of a secret society of Jewish
elders that work to keep gentiles ignorant of a plot to rule the world
through "Darwinism, Marxism, and Nietzscheism."
In both conspiracy theories, an ancient world religion turns out to be
a massive fraud perpetrated to gain or maintain power. In Dan Brown's
version, the "Priory of Sion" ("Sion" simply means "Zion"
in French) is the good guys. They've been waiting for the right
moment to reveal the secret about Jesus having children and to
introduce the world to the worship of the "Goddess," a.k.a. Mary
Magdalene.
Meanwhile the Catholic Church plots to suppress forever the truth about
the "sacred feminine." Opus Dei is willing to go to any lengths,
including murder, to keep the male church hierarchy in power.
Pierre Plantard (1920-2000), the French monarchist and anti-Semite who
gave us the "Priory of Sion," spent much of his life inventing
minuscule esoteric organizations intended to "purify" France of the
evil influences of modernity-and of Judaism. In 1940 he wrote of the
"terrible Masonic and Jewish conspiracy" that threatened France.
The Priory of Sion was one group he started. The point of this occult
order was to advance Plantard's claim to be the surviving heir of the
ancient Merovingian line of French kings, whose "holy blood" was
guarded by the Priory. The idea that the Merovingians were the
descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdalene was added on later.
Besides highlighting the word "Zion" or "Sion," the two
conspiracy theories share an understanding of how to deal with ideas
you disagree with. Rather than taking traditional Christian beliefs at
face value and arguing with them (as I do in my current book by the
way), Dan Brown portrays the religion itself as resting upon a
conscious deception. That excuses him from having to make arguments at
all.
Anti-Semites do the same thing. Rather than coming out honestly against
Darwinism or Marxism or modernity in general, they concoct a story
about Judaism as a lie and a conspiracy. The Protocols remains a global
phenomenon of staggering popularity, especially in the Arab world.
I emphasize that Dan Brown never intended to foment bigotry. Yet to the
cause of conspiracy theorizing, he has done a wonderful favor, training
his readers in the habits of paranoia and gullibility. For people
committed to finding the truth through investigation and argumentation,
that's depressing.
As for Jews, we haven't fared well when the culture we live in turns
to entertaining fantasies and delusions at the expense of an
unfashionable religion. The success of Brown's book, now transformed
into a movie blockbuster, is bad news.
- David Klinghoffer is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and
the author most recently of Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning
Point in Western History.
.
|
|
| User: "Jim Lovejoy" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
11 May 2006 11:46:18 PM |
|
|
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@hoshmail.com> wrote in
news:1146953685.982110.260680@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDY0YmNhMjc5YThmZWIxY2VjNmM3MWE0Yj
U1MDFhYTg=
text snipped. follow the link if you want to read it.
- David Klinghoffer is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and
the author most recently of Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning
Point in Western History.
Being a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute ought to disqualify one
from being taken seriously on any topic.
Apparantly being a member of a scam that cost the school district that fell
for it $ one million is considered a recommendation.
Go figure.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
06 May 2006 07:04:53 PM |
|
|
The Da Vinci Protocols
Jews should worry about Dan Brown's success.
Naaah, we still control 99.8% of the world's wealth. But that Rowling broad
had better watch her step..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tracy Hall" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
13 May 2006 02:09:29 PM |
|
|
Devout Christians of all stripes appear to be pretty much united in
discrediting the "historical" content of Dan Brown's "historical
fiction," "The Da Vinci Code." I agree with Klinghoffer that Jews
should also be concerned about this kind of "history." When
intellectually lazy people rely on entertainment for their
understanding of history, it really does become a very short leap from
"The DaVinci Code" to "The DaVinci Protocols."
I read the book and found it entertaining, but I was skeptical of much
of the "history." For this reason I will not be seeing the movie.
However, Mormons, rather than Jews, may be the target of Brown's next
work of "historical fiction:" "Those who cannot wait to read the novel
claim it will link freemasons to both the founding of America and the
Mormon church and will involve a search for treasure across the United
States."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1965286,00.html
There was some discussion about this speculation last January on
soc.religion.mormon.
Search Google Groups for <11rp5qcaeagk1e1@news.supernews.com>.
If Brown does indeed take this direction, and if he treats the
"history" of Mormonism in his sequel like he treated the "history" of
Christianity in "The Da Vinci Code," I expect that millions of lazy
Americans will accept it as "gospel truth," including many Christians
who were a bit more skeptical of how Brown treated their own history.
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=14345
I expect Brown's sequel to come out just in time to stir the pot for
the 2006 presidential race. I only hope that Brown refrains from
fueling the fires of anti-Mormonism, which ought to be recognized as
irrational, prejudicial, hateful, and akin to anti-Semitism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormonism
Tracy Hall
hthalljr'gmail'com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Laub" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
13 May 2006 03:29:31 PM |
|
|
A lot of people disagree with the Novak article:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mitt_Romney_For_President_2008/message/574
Though well-respected, Novak and his sources are not free from a
challenge, so let me do the challenging.
Are Novak and his sources implying that the most morally conservative
voters in the United States would rather endorse a left-wing,
abortion-endorsing, socialist-leaning, gay agenda-adopting, Bill
Clinton-marrying, liberal than a God-fearing, card-carrying
conservative Mormon, who has had remarkable success in business and in
politics, and who has shown he is able to win a liberal state like
Massachusetts? Either something is very wrong with Novak or something
is very wrong with the Evangelicals he is interviewing.
Here are some of my observations as to why Novak and his sources have
been sniffing the Cathedral incense too long and why Romney is the
GOP's best bet in returning a candidate to the White House.
First, he is the best of the leading candidates. If you hadn't
noticed, his competitors are a mean gray-haired old man named John
McCain from Arizona who cannot decide if he is loyal to the GOP or
whether he is just a conservative Democrat. You can only cross that
line so many times without someone noticing. The other candidate is
Rudy Guliani. He was a great mayor, but before 9/11, he was on his way
out of office because of political scandal involving a marital affair.
Additionally, an examination of his political views put him on the far
left of the conservative political spectrum, which interpreted means he
supports gay marriage rights and abortion. If the highest office was
only about 9/11 he would be a shoe-in, but the White House is about
setting a conservative agenda and he fails on this count. That leaves
Romney.
Romney is a well-seasoned politician who rescued the billion dollar
Salt Lake Olympics from scandal, who has successfully run an investment
business (which specialized in turning around companies in trouble) and
has been a well-respected governor in Massachusetts after returning
that state's budget from a significant deficit to black and healthy.
He is conservative, he is religious, he can cross-over to get
Democratic votes, he is young and healthy, he is a financial wizard and
people just like him. Certainly, Ronald Reagan has very little over
this chap.
The second reason Romney is the best candidate is that in a
Romney-Clinton run, the Mormon will win. How is that possible, one
might ask? Here is a fair analysis.
Romney is criticized for his Mormon faith, but a closer and a more fair
examination will see straight through this issue. In many ways his
Mormon faith might just be what is needed for the GOP. If Romney is
going to be criticized for something, can you imagine anything better
than being too goody-two-shoes. A few appearances with the likes of
Johnny Miller, Donny Osmond, Gladys Knight, Steve Young, Pat
Buchanan's sister Bay Buchanan and other prominent LDS folk will
quickly put the religious conservative masses at ease. Though there are
some in the deep - and we are talking in the woods deep - south
will perceive Romney's Mormon faith as a barrier to the highest
office, in the end, it didn't hurt Kennedy to be Catholic and being
more morally adroit than every President since Washington should not
offend most within the relgious mainstream. If it did, can you imagine
America's image after-the-fact? Ouch. And we thought Iran and China
were unaccepting of religious diversity.
Let's assume for a moment that Romney does lose a state or two in the
south - which is highly unlikely given that his record is an exact
match with the political movements of the south. But let's assume the
wacky far-far right wing convince their faithful that Romney is growing
horns in his head. No problem. Political pundits have forgotten that
Romney can carry a few northeastern states - something no one since
the young John McCain has been able to do. A gain in only one state
between Massachusetts and Minnesota will easily replace a religious
revolt in a southern state. In fact, the whole concept of religious
intolerance might just motivate folks from the northeast to vote for
Romney as a centralist who is not beholden to the extreme right.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a president who doesn't have to call
Jerry Falwell for advice before he signs a bill? Just where is that a
problem for America?
And then there is the secret weapon. Most in the east, including
Robert Novak and many supposed religious leaders in the deep south have
no experience in western elections. That is probably why these
"leaders" would attempt to flex their muscles this early in the
game - because they are not only ignorant, but they are also
ignorant. Specifically, they are ignorant to Romney's power base in
the west.
Perhaps Novak and these narrow-minded religious leaders have overlooked
the fact that the west, from the Colorado mountains to the Pacific
Ocean, was settled and secured for the United States by religious
refugees escaping persecution. Those refugees were called Mormons.
Every major city in the west has its roots in Mormon settlements and
the Mormons stayed. There are millions of them in the southwest and
northwest and they are politically strong.
Consider the recent scourge and embarrassment occurring in Las Vegas
politics. Once the corrupt politicians were thrown out of office, the
electorate replaced them with Mormons. Why? Because Mormons have shown
over time they are trustworthy in office. Not perfect, but at least
trustworthy. Howard Hughes surrounded himself with Mormons. On both
sides of the parties, Democrat and Republican, Mormons serve or have
served as local, state and federal elected officials with very few
"issues." That tradition is ingrained in the political workings of
the western states.
Mormons also turn out in droves to vote. In Nevada, for instance,
Mormons only represent eight percent of the population, but when it
comes time to vote, Mormons are so dedicated that they represent nearly
twenty percent of the voting block. That is one in every five votes.
It doesn't matter who lives in the southwest, only who votes in the
southwest, and Mormons have a long and very stable record of voting in
every election. If Romney is challenged because he is Mormon, you can
expect a monster turn out of the Mormons to the polls and that would
spell doom for any competitior.
Consider as an example of the Mormon electorate muscle-flex, the recent
pro-marriage initiatives in liberal states like Hawaii, Oregon and
California. Thanks to a highly effective Mormon turnout, these
initiatives passed by hefty and comfortable margins. It wasn't the
Mormons alone, but those familiar with Mormon politics know that
conservative Christians and Jews were equally motivated to "do the
right thing." We can expect a repeat of that same accepting
mentality when it comes to putting the right man in office, regardless
of his religious views. In the west, Mormons are the norm and are
mainstream. That means Romney can spend more time enlightening the
south.
If the Mormon faithful simply turned out in high numbers in the west,
it would be a real challenge, but one cannot overlook the built in
support system that Romney will have coming to the southwest. Mormons
are not only good voters, they are also fantastic volunteers and they
love conservative politics. Ninety-five or so percent of Mormons are
also Republicans. If we count millions of Mormons in the southwest, we
should assume that Romney will be able to motivate many of these
millions to help advance his campaign. You will also see a strong
number of the religious right advance his candidacy in the southwest as
Mormons have worked hand-in-hand with the religious right on many moral
issues. With potentially hundreds of thousands of these workers, there
will be few city blocks without a Romney for President sign.
Clinton would have to pull off a major miracle to simply overcome the
numbers of volunteers. Obviously states like Utah and Idaho are
already in the bag for Romney, but other states like Hawaii,
Washington, Oregon and New Mexico would actually be in play because of
the strong volunteer force Romney would bring to the table. Indeed,
Romney could even take California with the right message and the right
VP Candidate. No other candidate would even have a shot at many of
these states.
Is it possible that Romney's being separate from the far religious
right might be the very thing that makes him so attractive to voters?
If John McCain is a strong candidate because of his ability to attract
the cross-over vote, then Romney is a Goliath as he can attract both
the conservative voter as well as the cross-over Democratic voter as he
will not be beholden to those with radical right viewpoints.
So when Novak talks about losing a few narrow-minded evangelicals, and
that the loss of these votes spells doom for Romney, he fails to
recognize the off-setting strengths and intangibles that Romney brings
to the table. When one considers what an army of volunteers can do for
Romney - unpaid and motivated - and how many western and
cross-party voters he will get out, you start to see the true picture
of why Romney is the best candidate for the Republican Party.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mitt_Romney_For_President_2008/message/593
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
13 May 2006 03:26:17 PM |
|
|
In article <1147547369.898744.275580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tracy Hall" <uce.dump@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
Well, it's good to see their insanity is still holding strong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
13 May 2006 05:03:29 PM |
|
|
"BTR1701" <btr1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-E31302.16261713052006@news.giganews.com...
In article <1147547369.898744.275580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tracy Hall" <uce.dump@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me,
Respectable only because they know enough to hide their bigotry.
not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
Well, it's good to see their insanity is still holding strong.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown'sSuccess |
13 May 2006 05:46:10 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1147547369.898744.275580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tracy Hall" <uce.dump@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
Well, it's good to see their insanity is still holding strong.
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book, a *MYSTERY* book whose plot sometimes deals with a
historic time period. Funny how I've never seen this kind of uproar
surrounding any of James Michener's books, 99.9% of which are
"historical fiction", same goes for the authors Dana Fuller Ross, Gore
Vidal, James Clavell, Leon Uris, etc I could go on but I'm sure you see
my point. It's ironic that people who worship a person who's historical
evidence is non-existent get bent out of shape over a *STORY*!
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
13 May 2006 11:15:16 PM |
|
|
In article <Wkt9g.46631$iU2.46343@fed1read01>,
Miriam Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1147547369.898744.275580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tracy Hall" <uce.dump@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
Well, it's good to see their insanity is still holding strong.
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book
No, I was commenting on the way these lunatics will utterly dismiss an
otherwise qualified person for elected office just because he doesn't
believe in the same version of the fairy tale that they do.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown'sSuccess |
13 May 2006 11:29:41 PM |
|
|
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <Wkt9g.46631$iU2.46343@fed1read01>,
Miriam Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
In article <1147547369.898744.275580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tracy Hall" <uce.dump@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert Novak recently wrote, "Prominent, respectable Evangelical
Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their
co-religionists cannot and will not vote for [Mitt] Romney for
president [in 2006] solely because he is a member of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their
abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's
just too bad. The Evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way
Romney can win them over."
Well, it's good to see their insanity is still holding strong.
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book
No, I was commenting on the way these lunatics will utterly dismiss an
otherwise qualified person for elected office just because he doesn't
believe in the same version of the fairy tale that they do.
Yes, my comment was intended to agree with yours and against Tracy's
silliness. :)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Eney" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown'sSuccess |
14 May 2006 10:33:20 AM |
|
|
In article <Wkt9g.46631$iU2.46343@fed1read01>,
Miriam Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book, a *MYSTERY* book whose plot sometimes deals with a
historic time period.
Errr...are we talking about "The Da Vinci Code", or "The Book of Mormon"?
-- ***** Eney
OPERATION CRIFANAC PUBLICATIONS
http://www.crifanac.net/Index.htm
prozines and fanzines 'n' stuff
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown'sSuccess |
14 May 2006 02:41:27 PM |
|
|
Richard Eney wrote:
In article <Wkt9g.46631$iU2.46343@fed1read01>,
Miriam Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book, a *MYSTERY* book whose plot sometimes deals with a
historic time period.
Errr...are we talking about "The Da Vinci Code", or "The Book of Mormon"?
:)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: The Da Vinci Protocols: Why Jews Should Worry About Dan Brown's Success |
15 May 2006 07:50:43 AM |
|
|
Miriam Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism
It's ironic that people who worship a person who's historical
evidence is non-existent get bent out of shape over a *STORY*!
Would you get upset at some controversial story about King David, who
is just as non-existent historically as Jesus?
Granted, it'd be pretty hard to come up with anything which could
taint the image of David, since he did such a good job of it himself.
How many wives and concubines did he have, anyway?
Nothing at all like Jesus, who wasn't even supposed to have been
married or even had sex before. Born of a perpetual virgin, and a
virgin himself, according to the people who get upset at the thought
of him having a wife and children.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Don't be upset about fiction? |
13 May 2006 06:31:24 PM |
|
|
Miriam Cohen wrote:
....
I find it amazing that some xians are so bent out of shape about a
fiction book, a *MYSTERY* book whose plot sometimes deals with a
historic time period. Funny how I've never seen this kind of uproar
surrounding any of James Michener's books, 99.9% of which are
"historical fiction", same goes for the authors Dana Fuller Ross, Gore
Vidal, James Clavell, Leon Uris, etc I could go on but I'm sure you see
my point. It's ironic that people who worship a person who's historical
evidence is non-existent get bent out of shape over a *STORY*!
========
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
Does anybody recall any complaints about the alleged anti-Semtism in
the movie "Sophie's Choice"?
"The anti-Semitic undercurrent surfaces... Indeed, the depiction of
Jews in SOPHIE'S CHOICE suggests that Jews - dark, dishonest,
vindictive, obsessional, cruel - got just what they deserved."
- www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/ JC29folder/SophiesChoice.html
Does anybody recall any complaints about the alleged anti-Semitism
portrayed in a flying bug in Star Wars Episode 1?
"George Lucas serves up anti-Semitic stereotype in "Star Wars" Episode
I
....
Oddly, the official Star Wars website (www.starwars.com) illustrates
all the "Episode I" characters except this strikingly anti-Semitic
portrait of a greedy Jewish merchant who sports droopy eyes, rotten
teeth and an elephantine hooked nose (without any effort to simulate an
elephant). He speaks in a heavy Yiddish accent and haggles prices. He
floats in the air on tiny wings and hovers "in your face." He's amoral
and tries to cheat in a bet on the race. He's downright devilish when
it comes to splitting Skywalker from his mother at the tender age of
nine. This early wounding is psychoanalytically supposed to have been
part of the cause of Anakin's fear and depression which ultimately
turned him into Darth Vader. So Watto's role is seen mythically to be
part of the incipient root of evil."
- http://www.americanreview.us/back71.htm
Does anybody recall any complaints about the alleged anti-Semitism
portrayed in the movie "The Mummy"?
"Then there's that character in "The Mummy" who waved the Star of David
and got passed over by the Mummy and then appeared to play the role of
Judas to betray the good guys. Hated archetypal portraits are
everywhere, building upon and reinforcing disparagement of their
source. Some are subtle, some blatant. Part of watching the pathology
of media is to watch for them."
- http://www.americanreview.us/back71.htm
Hey, all those things were just works of fiction, Miriam Cohen, so why
complain?
- moshe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
14 May 2006 02:16:56 PM |
|
|
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ingeborg Denner" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 03:19:25 AM |
|
|
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> schrieb :
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Wasn't that the reason Shakespeare couldn't get on the Euro
notes? (In the end, they didn't find anyone who was without
sin and didn't put people on the notes at all.)
inge
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Bruells" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 04:23:45 AM |
|
|
"Ingeborg Denner" <wildwusel@gmx.de> writes:
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> schrieb :
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Wasn't that the reason Shakespeare couldn't get on the Euro
notes? (In the end, they didn't find anyone who was without
sin and didn't put people on the notes at all.)
Shakespeare didn't get on the Euro notes because it's damn near
impossible to agree on seven Europeans everybody can agree with.
Even when one limits oneself to "the greatest authors", you get a tad
more than 7, or even 8, if you put Goethe and Schiller on the 500 Euro
note.
The current design is just fine - generic (more or less) architecture
and the backsides of coins for national symbols to play with.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ingeborg Denner" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 05:08:13 AM |
|
|
"Peter Bruells" <pb@ecce-terram.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:m2ejyvmyji.fsf@rogue.ecce-terram.de...
"Ingeborg Denner" <wildwusel@gmx.de> writes:
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> schrieb :
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish
lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Wasn't that the reason Shakespeare couldn't get on the Euro
notes? (In the end, they didn't find anyone who was without
sin and didn't put people on the notes at all.)
Shakespeare didn't get on the Euro notes because it's damn near
impossible to agree on seven Europeans everybody can agree with.
Wasn't the idea to have every country represented? I seem to
remember it that way, but maybe it was just some quickly
passing suggestion by whoever which made an impression due
to its infeasibility.
Never mind, not on topic in any of the groups.
inge
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 04:48:04 AM |
|
|
On 15 May 2006 11:23:45 +0200, Peter Bruells wrote in message
<m2ejyvmyji.fsf@rogue.ecce-terram.de>:
"Ingeborg Denner" <wildwusel@gmx.de> writes:
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> schrieb :
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Wasn't that the reason Shakespeare couldn't get on the Euro
notes? (In the end, they didn't find anyone who was without
sin and didn't put people on the notes at all.)
Shakespeare didn't get on the Euro notes because it's damn near
impossible to agree on seven Europeans everybody can agree with.
Even when one limits oneself to "the greatest authors", you get a tad
more than 7, or even 8, if you put Goethe and Schiller on the 500 Euro
note.
The current design is just fine - generic (more or less) architecture
and the backsides of coins for national symbols to play with.
Didn't the map they use on the back of the notes turn out to be
copyright violation because they didn't get permission from the
artist?
--
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
attrib: Pauline Réage. Cine To DVD? http://www.video2cd.co.uk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
16 May 2006 10:39:07 AM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:rgjg62t60n4c7il7ut2vlf8u92t5prgf6k@4ax.com...
Wasn't that the reason Shakespeare couldn't get on the Euro
notes? (In the end, they didn't find anyone who was without
sin and didn't put people on the notes at all.)
Shakespeare didn't get on the Euro notes because it's damn near
impossible to agree on seven Europeans everybody can agree with.
As the UK wasn't using the Euro, it was unlikely that he'd ever be picked.
And if they'd picked someone else it would have been used as propaganda
against joining the Euro later. So we end up with an amorphous nothing
design.
J/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
14 May 2006 05:47:33 PM |
|
|
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer. Jews weren't allowed to be
lawyers back then. He was a moneylender - a job that
many Jews were forced into, since they weren't
allowed to be much else by bigoted Christians.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
BAAWA Knight & Bible Thumper Thumper
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
14 May 2006 08:17:11 PM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 01:36:46 AM |
|
|
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
Which is just one of several examples I used to show that the
anti-Christian poster was being a hypocrite.
- moshe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 08:49:02 AM |
|
|
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 01:19:49 PM |
|
|
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer. He was *WRONG*! (don't hold your breath waiting for him
to *ADMIT* it though)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 02:18:41 PM |
|
|
"Miriam Cohen" <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote in message
news:dD3ag.47112$iU2.2180@fed1read01...
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer.
Ya think?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mordecai! mldavisplease dont" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 05:13:09 PM |
|
|
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Miriam Cohen" <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> wrote in message
news:dD3ag.47112$iU2.2180@fed1read01...
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer.
Ya think?
Yeah ... his reputation is not very good.
We are having a couple of debates right now. One where we are discussing if his
is merely a troll or acutely evil.
Another - well he is deciding if his first answer
"No man comes to the father" ought to be "No man comes to theG_d who brought me
out of the land of Egypt"
or his second answer "I am discussig his genitalia because I cannot answer the
question"
Is correct.
I think he has gone back to the first answer for now. Eventually he will
revert to the second answer ... of course.
Yeah - I honestly think Morris made ... yet another ... mistake and will not
admit it.
--
Mordecai!
When words and actions disagree, believe actions.
When rhetoric and reality disagree, either rhetoric is wrong or reality is
wrong, and reality is Never wrong.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 03:33:01 PM |
|
|
Miriam Cohen wrote:
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer. He was *WRONG*! (don't hold your breath waiting for him
to *ADMIT* it though)
=======
You were the one who made the idiotic claim that Christians had no
reason to complain about fiction.
I gave examples of Jews complaining about Shylock, about the movie
"Sophie's Choice", about the movie "Star Wars", about the movie "The
Mummy".
Proving that your accusation was not only idiotic, but your accusation
was also hypocritical.
- moshe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 03:41:57 PM |
|
|
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147725181.073914.116210@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Miriam Cohen wrote:
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish
lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer. He was *WRONG*! (don't hold your breath waiting for him
to *ADMIT* it though)
=======
You were the one who made the idiotic claim that Christians had no
reason to complain about fiction.
I gave examples of Jews complaining about Shylock,
You also mentioned "A Jewish lawyer". What was his name?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miriam Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 05:12:33 PM |
|
|
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147725181.073914.116210@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Miriam Cohen wrote:
Mike Schilling wrote:
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147675006.352958.27630@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schilling wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvednbHRau7gLvrZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ImL9g.86707$dW3.43100@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
<fact-checker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147563084.930509.139290@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Does anybody recall any complaints about how a certain Jewish
lawyer
was portrayed in a Shakespeare play?
No, I honestly don't. Enlighten me.
Shylock wasn't a lawyer.
So, clearly, f-c wasn't talking about Shylock.
I'm waiting.
==========
The other poster said that only an idiot Christian would be offended by
fiction.
The point I was trying to make was that for centuries followers of
Judaism have been complaining about Shylock.
No, you said "Jewish lawyer". Whom did you mean?
He *MEANT* Shylock, he was just too ignorant to realize that Shylock
wasn't a lawyer. He was *WRONG*! (don't hold your breath waiting for him
to *ADMIT* it though)
=======
You were the one who made the idiotic claim that Christians had no
reason to complain about fiction.
I gave examples of Jews complaining about Shylock,
You also mentioned "A Jewish lawyer". What was his name?
Mike, that's as close to an admission of error that you're ever going to
get. Funny thing is that loser actually "thinks" anyone gives a *****
what he "thinks". If you hadn't quoted him I'd have missed his lame
complaint, I don't waste the second or two to read his moronic bigoted
posts. Morris is a bigot, make no mistake about it, but unlike Sewerwad
and Salad Jar he isn't brave enough to publicly take responsibility for
his bigotry. It's pretty bad when he makes Sewerwad and Salad Jar look
good in comparison. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't be upset about fiction? |
15 May 2006 05:18:03 PM |
|
|
Miriam Cohen wrote:
Morris is a bigot, make no mistake about it
===========
-----------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: Columbine massacre...the jewish connection
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/05/05
[snip]
There are good Gentiles.
There are bad Gentiles.
There are good Jews.
There are bad Jews.
There are Gentile criminals.
There are Jewish criminals.
Because Gentiles and Jews are both people
and are both prone to the same sins.
-----------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterlNOSPAM@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: The Catholic Church "made" Hitler.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic, alt.messianic
Date: 1999/12/09
[snip]
I criticize specific individuals for
specific sins, recognizing that Jews
are no better and no worse than
Gentiles, for all are human and all
have sinned and fallen short of
the glory of G-d as seen in I Kings 8:46
and Romans 3:23.
However, you seem to lump all Jews
together in your description of them
as detestable creatures.
Therefore, you are presenting false
stereotypes of Jews and you are engaging
in anti-Semitism.
Are you aware of that?
Do you know that you need to repent of it?
-----------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterlNOSPAM@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: How "messianic jews" are made
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/12/28
[snip]
Jews are not better than Gentiles, and
Gentiles are not better than Jews, for
all have sinned and come short of the
glory of G-d (I Kings 8:46, Romans 3:23),
and Jews and Gentiles are equals in
receiving G-d's salvation (Romans 10:12).
-----------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: rules for quoting Jewish sources
Newsgroups: alt.messianic, soc.culture.jewish
Date: 2004-06-19 19:59:44 PST
[snip]
Hey moshe, so what is your deal with the Jews anyways? Do you like 'em or
hate 'em?
-Mike
******************
"The Jews"?
There are atheist Jews.
There are Jews who believe in Jesus.
There are Jews who follow Judaism.
There are some very nice, loving rabbis in the world.
There are some extremely hateful followers of Judaism in this
newsgroup.
Not all Jews can be lumped together, just as not all Gentiles can be
lumped together.
When John 3:16 says that "God so loved the world", that means that God
loves both Jews and Gentiles.
When II Peter 3:9 says that it is not God's will that any should
perish, that means that God loves both Jews and Gentiles and wants to
save them.
When Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned, that includes all Gentiles
and all Jews.
- moshe
**************
90 percent of the followers of Judaism in this newsgroup (includes
soc.culture.jewish) are hateful liars and slanderers whenever the mood
hits them.
That is *not* typical of the followers of Judaism out in the real
world.
If you go into the average synagogue in America you will find that
more than 95 percent of the members there are very nice people.
So please do not judge the followers of Judaism elsewhere by the
behavior of the dozen or so that post here.
- moshe
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: New Testaments burned in Israel
Newsgroups: alt.messianic, soc.culture.jewish
Date: 2004-10-09 09:25:55 PST
Hieron <george@msn.de> wrote in message
news:<2spt81F1nmmqaU1@uni-berlin.de>...
If this is true, this says something about the Jewish tolerance of other
religions that was stated so often here.
It appears tolerance only works in foreign lands, but not in Israel.
According to Mordecai the JWs are the closest to the Jews in belief and
practice, so why is this awful rage?
Can the Jews explain?
*********
Fortunately, the Orthodox in Israel who feel compelled to burn New
Testaments are only a tiny minority of the entire Jewish population,
and so the entire Jewish population should not be judged by the
actions of that tiny minority.
Those who burn New Testaments in Israel do not even represent all
Orthodox, but are rather a small sub-group of Orthodox.
But that tiny group manages to stir up trouble for everyone else.
In the same way that I have often pointed out to the Gentile
Christians here that the hateful and dishonest followers of Judaism
who post in alt.messianic and soc.culture.jewish do not represent the
vast majority of the followers of Judaism in the world who are very
honest and friendly.
- moshe
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: denouncing bigotry (from moshe)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 2003-07-21 06:35:48 PST
Martin Graham said:
Thew Jews to this day reject Christ, just as they did when their
rejection led to his suffering. ...
To this day,> he Jewish people do not disavow the actions of those
among them who commited this crime against God and man.
Do you believe that all Jews are "Christ killers"?
To the extent that thye do not repent of the crime against God
committed by their ancestors, yes...
**************************
You lump all Jewish people together and judge them as a "race".
You then hate that "race".
That makes you a "racist".
You hate Jews.
You want to call Jews "Christ killers".
You have made up your mind, dug in your heels, and nothing will make
you change.
In that case, I want to be *the* Jew that you hate.
I want to be *the* Jew that you call "Christ killer".
Anytime you feel the urge to hate a Jew, you should e-mail *me*.
Anytime you feel the urge to call a Jew a "Christ killer", you should
e-mail *me*.
I will consider it an honor.
Your condemnation of me will serve as evidence for your own
condemnation at the White Throne Judgement of Revelation 20:11-15.
Here is how you are the ultimate hypocrite:
You complain that Jews refuse to come into your church to accept
Jesus.
But what Jew would want to walk into a church full of anti-Semites
like you?
I am *already* a believer in Jesus, and *I* would not want to be in a
church full of anti-Semites like you.
Your hateful anti-Semtism drives Jews away from your church, then you
condemn Jews for staying away from your church.
- moshe
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: For me/moshe: Read and learn.
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/04/20
[snip]
Some parts of Talmud
are profoundly true and profoundly
beautiful. Other parts of Talmud are
the traditions of men which
misrepresent the character of G-d
and which attempt to nullify the
word of G-d in the Bible.
[snip]
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: a messiah with real value
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/04/29
[snip]
I am on record that there are some tremendously
beautiful and profoundly true statements in Talmud,
mixed in with some utter blasphemy and false teachings.
Thus I give credit where credit is due, and give
criticism where criticism is due.
I am on record as saying that there are some wonderful
people in our local Orthodox shul, while some of the
people representing Rabbinic Judaism in this forum
are atrociously hateful.
[snip]
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: Persecuting Moshe<was-Re: Jesus is not the Messiah...
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/11/06
[snip]
These people are indeed a profound surprise and marvel. Their example
and their faith is one reason that I choose to believe. I am sure their
are Jewish individuals that you hold in the same regard and strengthen
your faith.
**************
Our town's Lubavitch rabbi is so
patient, so gentle, so kind, that
he never defends himself when
the non-Lubavtich rabbi-emeritus
bad-mouths him to the congregation.
Either that Lubavitch rabbi is extremely
weak, or that Lubavitch rabbi has an
inner strength that is almost never seen
in Gentiles or Jews in this world.
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterlNOSPAM@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: The Catholic Church "made" Hitler.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic, alt.messianic
Date: 1999/12/09
[snip]
There are good and bad Jews, just
as there are good and bad Gentiles.
Both groups are human and fall
short of the glory of G-d (I Kings 8:46
and Romans 3:23).
The difference between our local
Lubavitch rabbi and "Rabbi" Moshe
Shulman is like the difference between
night and day.
The difference between the former cantor
of our local traditional synagogue and
Joel here in alt.mess is like the difference
between night and day.
All four people I just mentioned are Jews
who do not believe in Yeshua.
2 of them are real stinkers, while the other
2 are extremely nice people who wouldn't
say a bad thing to a fly.
------------begin quote-------------
From: moshe (joesterl@earthlink.com)
Subject: Re: missionaries and Jews
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Date: 1999/11/26
[snip]
In case you haven't been around long
enough to know this, I have great
respect for some Orthodox rabbis.
Our local Lubavitch rabbi, for example,
has a G-dly patience that is amazing
and I repect him for it.
The cantor in the Modern Orthodox
shul was also a very G-dly man and
the kindness he showed my daughter
will always be appreciated.
------------end quote-------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
