winsor

When I was in High School a number of people refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, for a variety of legitimate reasons. For one thing, I went to school in the Occupied Confederacy. We freely joined and freely left the Union, and were brought back into the fold under force of arms, by a president for whom we were not afforded the opportunity to vote out of office. The Pledge is a throwback to that ignoble chapter in our glorious nation's history (one nation... indivisible - like it or not), and has been further modified to suit other agenda (under "god?" which one? Zeus? Odin? Gichimanitou?) along the way. We pride ourselves as a nation of rugged individualists in theory, but aspire in practice to be something between sheep and lemmings. The Pledge is but a reflection of that, according to one school of thought. For someone to sit during the Pledge is to demonstrate an understanding of what should be taught in Civics - that it is not only the right, but the obligation, for the population to think. Government with the consent of the governed is not achieved by coercion; if you want people to stand as a sign of respect, earn that respect. BSBD, Winsor

Skip past it. It works for me.

That was the Wang Computer commercial that got pulled. "The chink in IBM's armor..."

Clearly not Texas then, there you would shoot them in the back as they run away. If they fail to keep their hands in view while running away, cause of death is listed as "suicide."

It was up to 613 over 3,000 years ago. As has been pointed out, a few of these are somewhat dated, but we keep tabs on them for their traditional value at the very least. Cranking out commandments is not necessarily a good idea. Like any system of law, often the fewer the better. BSBD, Winsor

Bob?

"Old Testment?" No such thing. "Old" presumes that "new" is a continuation, and nothing could be further from the truth. There are 613 Commandments - but who's counting? The Hebrew Scriptures are a Bronze Age family history. A big, dysfunctional family perhaps, but a family nonetheless. There is no claim to universality in the Tanakh, and the audience is by no means "all of mankind." Judaism is a tribal, not religious, identity, though the religious traditions of the tribe are laid out in these tomes. The groups who have taken these texts and put them into their own cultural context have done so to their own detriment. Torah without Mishna and Gemara is only a partial picture, and the Roman and Mecca crowds are given to blind faith, rather than review, reflection and question. BSBD, Winsor

That would be Kethuvim (The Writings), not Torah (The Law). Kethuvim includes such books of questionable origin and content as Esther and Job; Esther (the Magilla) is the only book in the Tanakh with no reference to a supreme being, and also gives an account that is not supported by excessive independent documentation (no Hamen character mentioned elsewhere). Torah is fundamental, Nevai'im are basic as well, Kethuvim are supplemental. My point still stands that there is no reference to "heaven," "hell," or "satan" in the first five books (Torah/pentateuch). BSBD, Winsor

And then there are those of us who got it right the first time around. You are an Atheist?

Agreed...actually, I think Satan is most prevalent in Christian denominations. I also believe he clearly infiltrtated judaism, and though he's still there I think he pretty much used them up the best he could... "Satan" is a pagan concept. Just for fun, list all the places such an entity is discussed in Torah. am I using your copy or mine? How is your Hebrew?

"What about the Christians?" "Christianity" is pretty much a Roman hijacking of a Jewish movement. Rome had nothing but trouble with its Hebrew population in Judea and, after Masada, quit playing Mr. Nice Guy and evicted the populus. The resistance continued, but now it was disperse. By the time of Constantine (who remained a pagan until his dying breath - press releases to the contrary), it became apparent that, if you can't beat them, become their spiritual leader. Thus, "christianity" became a Roman franchise, and its "truth" was whatever books the Romans did not choose to burn. It's amusing to note that the epicenter of "christianity" is the home of the people who put Jesus to death for treason, not Jesus' home. "Chrisitianity" is but a cult that went viral, and was subjected to corporate takeover when it became useful as a power base to the major power brokers of the era. Islam is no better. BSBD, Winsor

Agreed...actually, I think Satan is most prevalent in Christian denominations. I also believe he clearly infiltrtated judaism, and though he's still there I think he pretty much used them up the best he could... "Satan" is a pagan concept. Just for fun, list all the places such an entity is discussed in Torah.

I say depleted uranium is the way to go.

The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference. In the same sense that cops, judges and jailers would be out of business without criminals, "Satanists" are as much a part of the christian world as is the Vatican. When someone goes through a "satanist" phase, I assume they will eventually become a born-again something or another at some point. "Methinks thou doth protest too much," and all that. BSBD, Winsor

They have competition.

Mormons make it up as they go along. Joseph Smith makes L. Ron Hubbard look like a case study in the presentation of reproducible results. Joseph Smith and Muhammad were kindred spirits in that they had a series of "revelations" that served to both keep them in power and provide an endless supply of fresh "wives." What amazes me is that anyone takes any of it as anything but hokum of the first order. BSBD, Winsor

Then could I repectfully ask for your thoughts on Isaiah 7:14? Also, I understand your disdain for anti-semitism, so when considering that, I find it odd you would still consider us (gentiles) as "swine" and treat us like "dogs." It's the old "pearls before swine" thing, and listening to you put forth is like trying to make sense of of the cacaphony emenating from a kennel - a lot of volume, but precious little coherent content.

I have seen anti semitism here - but it wasn't from any Christians . . . You are referring to the wrong prophet, or the absence of one. Fair enough. Disregard last.

Yup.

Such as? Especially when you use the word "all", implying that there are many. Please explain. Come on.. you are a smart guy.... rub a few of those brain cells together..... unless you ... as others are ........completely oblivious to it. Do you mean those that hate Jews? There are a few of those on this site. It never ceases to amuse me when you have people that claim to be followers of Cousin Jesus - but also practice anti-semitism. Somehow they lose sight of the fact that their figurehead was an observant Jew. He was admittedly of the tribe of Judah, so he was not a Kohain or even a Levite, but both "Matthew" and "Luke" trace his paternal lineage to the House of David (the virgin birth nonsense was the brainchild of an early pope, who might as well be the patron saint of priestly pederasts). It seems to come down to jealousy - in religions whose revered texts include Torah, you only have Jews and wannabes. BSBD, Winsor

The origin of Bereshit (Genesis) lies in the Babylonian Exile. Prior to that point, "the Book" referred to Devarim (Deuteronomy), and the rest of Torah was oral tradition, passed down from generation to generation. Ezra the Scribe was responsible for putting into written form the oral tradition that became Bereshit (Genesis), Shemoth (Exodus), Vayiqra (Leviticus) and Bamidbar (Numbers), about the time of the return to Judea. There is strong indication that the oral tradition that became codified in the "first" four books of Torah had incorporated a great deal from sources outside the Tribes of Israel; Sumerian cuneiform records relate what appear to be the literary origins of Bereshit at the very least. Needless to say, Torah is but the history of an extended family - dysfunctional though it may be. The interpretations of Torah provided by those outside the family are generally laughable. BSBD, Winsor

And someone is forcing you to read it. You could always just turn your computer off Scrolling past the posters whose output is universally without merit is annoying, and having one of them whose dreck constant is enhanced by their circumventing the redundancy limiters built into the website is even more so. A killfile would be a very useful tool. BSBD, Winsor

Source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/38830968 "Change" Buckle up, kiddies; we are still going full steam ahead toward the cliff and there is no way to avoid it. The outcome will be as fun as trying to survive a BASE jump with a well-executed PLF. We have been saying "charge it!" for a generation and the rest of the world is still honoring our credit, but they can not do so for very much longer. The first time we try to buy oil and the people who have it say "uh, okay, but we don't take dollars," things will get interesting - and there will be no turning back. What we have gone through for the last couple of years is merely a warm up. BSBD, Winsor

Would you be OK with the forces having a Yusuf Islam concert as part of the Spiritual Fitness series? Wendy P. Wouldn't bother me in the least. I'd rather clean the latrine.

In 1972 Dennis and I parachuted into Scotland together, where we then got to static line out of balloons at 800 ft.. I have a bunch of pictures I took of our old stomping grounds that I was going to show him, but I missed that chance. Dennis was a mensch, and I really do not like knowing I will not get to spend time with him again. Blue skies and gentle breezes my friend, Winsor