Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

So you need Nethanyahu to blow up the Mount then whoever wins elections next can build the Temple? 

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

So you need Nethanyahu to blow up the Mount then whoever wins elections next can build the Temple? 

That wasn't needed

[Frumple]

Neither was the casual more-or-less-racial slur BP threw out, but hey, here we are.

How does oldschool YWHW deal with inter-group complicity, anyway? Would it actually take a non-israeli jew to qualify for unbloodied hands, given how the nation has been flapping about killing innocents over the last handful of decades? Or is it strictly personal killing?

[Sheb]

Oh, sorry if I offended anyone, I didn't want to. 'was just an innocent joke.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Sorry I didn't notice the racial slur

Oh, sorry if I offended anyone, I didn't want to. 'was just an innocent joke.

It's ok, just try to keep any jokes involving the religions themselves and or leaders of people's countries out of it just to keep anything from happening

And what was the racial slur? I didn't catch it

[Frumple]

"Goyim" is not a particularly polite phrase.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

"Goyim" is not a particularly polite phrase.

Noted, I did not know that


BP please refrain from using offensive language, please

[Orange Wizard]

So, is sacrifice not actually as important as it was made out to be in the OT? I would think that if it was, Jews would be willing to go to any lengths to get a new temple, or something.

[burningpet]

"Goyim" is not a particularly polite phrase.

You humor radar is broken, again. i was making a "racial" joke as a response to another racial joke.

[ggamer]

Abrahamic Religions; trying to be more pretentious than the poster before you

also the killing non believers doesn't exactly work anymore to spread religion since you know, people have changed over the past 10,000 years

... killing to spread christianity was done in the states... less than two, three hundred years back? Fair amount of that done during the whole native american mess. It's only been really ruddy recent, historically, that that has fell out of favor, and it's still not entirely gone in certain areas, iirc.

People haven't really changed all that much in the last 10k years -- our environment has (and fairly significantly, over the last half millennium or so), but we're still mostly the same sort of jumped up monkey. Christianity's only been around for less than 2k, anyway, and it's certainly had its periods of conversion by the sword...

okay, realtalk

do you honestly believe that religion was the first thing on every american settler's mind? If so, you're buying into the excuse they were using, that they wanted the indian's land solely because the indians weren't christian, and not because they had hilariously fertile land. That's a really sad fact of history: people use religion to justify a goal that they want. Saying "God hates those strange people so I should supervise their land" sounds a lot better than "I want more money so that I can buy eeeeevery hooker in London."

Also, those people with that kind of attitude that exist today are also probably the same that fuck their cousins and think that America should create genetic diseases to kill all black people, so their opinion doesn't count.

[WillowLuman]

Their reasons for coming to America weren't because of the natives. By and large there was nothing missionary in their objectives. Puritans went because they didn't think England was Protestant enough for them, others because they wanted to found their own sect or didn't think their sect was treated well back home. As far as the natives went, the settlers probably thought "well, look at all this land that isn't claimed! At least, not by any authority governments back in Europe will respect!"

[Glowcat]

Some early colonialists justifying their materialist desires with a range of "beneficent conversion" to "exterminate the heathen" responses does not invalidate their religious-cultural background's role in the subjugation and genocide of natives. Nor does it invalidate how early colonies would literally have laws to kill those who either did not believe (atheists) or believed something against the local orthodoxy, or at the least deny people standing because they found a nonbeliever to essentially be dishonest (sourcing Tocqueville on this).

Trying to conceptualize the entirety of these violences as petty greed is inaccurate because often enough those espousing these beliefs were not themselves beneficiaries of the action. Instead they believed in a divine/transcendental right and whether they acted themselves to further their goals or justified the atrocities of their fellows with it, their belief system still reflected itself in their collective actions because if it didn't there would've been enough push back against them to make it impossible. Eventually they stopped "conversion by the sword", but again, that's only a few hundred years ago.

[Frumple]

do you honestly believe that religion was the first thing on every american settler's mind?

Full stop. Nope. Even with the revisionist bullshit trying to be pulled in the US, I'm well aware that religion was not the primary motivation for the vast majority of american settlers.

But Glowcat covered it pretty well. Even if it wasn't the primary motivation, that doesn't mean it wasn't a significant one. Doesn't help that, from what I've personally seen, most people using their religion to make excuses don't actually realize they're doing that -- they're just fitting their actions into how they see the world or what they desire to be done. There's relatively little metaphorical mustache twirling involved with that sort of thing, y'know? It's usually fairly sincere. Often badly misguided, but sincere none the less.

[ggamer]

Puritans went because they didn't think England was Protestant enough for them

IIRC there was a very violent backlash against puritans in england, seeing as how they wanted to purify the Anglican church. They got pretty much abused right the hell out of england, consequences be damned.

snip

Well put, but I still think that this was a perversion more on the part of man than on christianity. IIRC, there are several verses in the new testament where peter tells newborn churches to leave gentiles alone if they refuse to convert, because it's only going to make witnessing harder if the church starts murdering people.

However, once missionaries converted as many native americans as they could, those in power couldn't very well leave the pagan remainder there, could they? Squatters, on land legally belonging to the crown! they must be murdered by the dozen!

Furthermore, I do think violent zealots existed; every religion has their fair share, and most competent church leaders use their religious fervor for good. However, I dont believe these zealots could have significantly affected the native american population without the guidance and support of those in power who were motivated by greed.

[Helgoland]

"Goyim" is not a particularly polite phrase.

Noted, I did not know that

Me neither - I thought it was a pretty neutral way to say non-Jew.

Anyway, PTW to let the flames warm me.