Religious Prejudice

[ppp]

Would that investment be a form of religious prejudice?

I don't know enough about you to evaluate that. I referred to non-neutrality, not to prejudice. You may equate the two. I do not.

Would that investment be a form of religious prejudice? That's what the neutral P.O.V. relates to. The ability to change your mind when new data turns up is a trait of rationality.

I have held strong non-neutral points of view.
New data has turned up, and change my mind
Therefore, a neutral position is not required to change my mind

I am neither unique or exceptional in this.

Paul's doctrine does support your point.

My statement that "Both Christianity and Islam endorsed the prophets of Judaism", for Christianity, is about the many cases where text from the writings of the prophets of Judaism was used, rightly or wrongly, so support new doctrine. My point is that the prophets were regarded as authoritative, which implies some commonality between the Abrahamic religions despite their obvious differences.

I agree with that for the most part. My objection is that the commonality found in Christianity and Islam is a funhouse mirror reflection of the Hebrew prophets. A pastiche, rather than an endorsement.

 

[Ebionite]

Belief in being correct about the extreme differences between religions and their divisions is impossible to resolve and a resolution is an idealistic assumption that does not work in the real world.

Belief can be resolved by testing it against reason.

You have not established what "being correct: would be given the subjective nature of religious belief has no standard of "being correct" would be.

Reason is the basis of my argument, not belief.

I gave my proposal of the belief in Universalism, which is a neutral view, but it is optimistic that it would happen in the near future.

How is that specific belief any different from the beliefs that are implied by your argument to be impossible to be tested for correctness?

Your view is unreasonably idealistic considering the reality of the diverse conflicting beliefs that cause prejudice and is unlikely to change in the near future. IF as bolded, is far too idealistic based on the fact that at present the different conflicting religious views show no willingness to change, because their beliefs are grounded in scripture they consider sacred and not changeable.

Your basis for "unlikely to change in the near future" is apparently "their beliefs are grounded in scripture they consider sacred and not changeable".

That same basis can be used to to argue for the resolution of religious divisions when those divisions share the same texts that are considered to be beyond criticism. This point is more about textual interpretation than it is about ordinary belief.

Not really relevant here.

Arguments against error (here the error of the human condition) are always relevant. The human condition is most closely associated with Christianity, as Christianity was the official religion of Rome, Cicero was a Roman statesman, and the language of humanism originated with Cicero.

What are the people of the way

For I have kept the ways of YHWH, and have not wickedly departed from my Elah.
Psalms 18:21

Dead Sea Scrolls 1Q and 4Q describe the recalcitrant Jews and others not following correct religion since “they did not choose the wa[y o]f your [heart] nor attend to Your word, but they said concerning the vision of knowledge, ‘it is not sure,’ ; and concerning the way of your heart, ‘It is not the way.’ THANKSGIVING PSALMS - Col. 12:17-18 , 1QH + 4Q432 frag.3

No, Universalism is NOT an appeal to tradition.

My statement about an appeal to tradition was in response to your assertion that: "Humans will always be fallible human, and prejudice is deeply ingrained in the reality of conflicting differences between their traditional religions."

In fact, it is likely that you would not be willing to change your beliefs which conflict with those who believe differently.

Because my beliefs are consistent with reason, not tradition.

 

[Ebionite]

This works in science, but not the diverse conflicting basis for religious beliefs including yours.

The common basis that exists is the body of texts from the prophets which is considered to be beyond criticism by the Abrahamic religions.

Fundamentally not true, because Judaism emphatically rejects the interpretation of the prophets in the OT.

I'm referring to the text itself, not to the clearly diverse interpretations.

 

[Ebionite]

I agree with that for the most part. My objection is that the commonality found in Christianity and Islam is a funhouse mirror reflection of the Hebrew prophets. A pastiche, rather than an endorsement.

The funhouse mirror of Christianity could be described as a blend of the complementary ideologies of life and death. I'm not aware of any theological inconsistency between the Quran and the prophets.

 

[idea]

Looking at religious prejudice in the context of the betrayal by Judas Iscariot leads to insight about the crucifixion and fulfilment.

Judus - yes, religions persecute themselves, great example- the mote and beam, beam is in their own eyes.

Religious groups create their own downfall.

Its their own members who kill them from within.

It's their own pedophiles, corruption - using tithes to build palaces instead of caring for poor, hypocritical false priests, fake manipulative grooming friendships...

Athiests didn't kill Jesus. The apostles killed him.

Religious persecute themself.

 

[Ebionite]

Judus - yes, religions persecute themselves, great example- the mote and beam, beam is in their own eyes.

Religious groups create their own downfall.

Its their own members who kill them from within.

It's their own pedophiles, corruption - using tithes to build palaces instead of caring for poor, hypocritical false priests, fake manipulative grooming friendships...

Athiests didn't kill Jesus. The apostles killed him.

Religious persecute themself.

Religion has both positive and negative aspects. The positive aspect is that mutually beneficial behaviour derives from the idea that a higher power will hold people accountable for their actions.

And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
Matthew 12:25

Using the analogy of a religious group as a kingdom, the remedy for the desolation would be to find what is common to those groups.

 

[ppp]

The funhouse mirror of Christianity could be described as a blend of the complementary ideologies of life and death. I'm not aware of any theological inconsistency between the Quran and the prophets.

I am on shaky ground when talking about Islam.

The inconsistencies between Islam and Judaism are, IMHO, more finely gradated. There is subtle, but distinct difference between their respective ethe of Submit to God and Obey God. But ignoring the finer points, prophesy in Judaism is specifically about the history and destiny of the Jews. In Islam, prophecies are messages and directions from God for all mankind.

Aren't Moses' life events and miracles different in the Koran?

 

[ppp]

Religion has both positive and negative aspects. The positive aspect is that mutually beneficial behaviour derives from the idea that a higher power will hold people accountable for their actions.

The negative aspect is that mutually detrimental behaviors derive from the idea that a higher power will hold people accountable for their actions.

 

[Bthoth]

Created life has rights and obligations that persons do not have.

Our parents created each of us. And no matter the human beings culture, race, parents or gender.............. all of us are equally capable and have rights equal to any other. What you just wrote is fuel for dividing people and as usual based from the religiously biased.

This is meaningful in terms of religious prejudice when the context could include persons of states which exist in union with the church.

Are you suggesting that you believe iran as a religious state is better than the USA which is secular by its own creation?

The USA does have roots in religious morals but is not christian by any means. Proven by the fact that there are many sects of christianity.

 

[Ebionite]

Our parents created each of us.

What happens if you walk that back?

And no matter the human beings culture, race, parents or gender.............. all of us are equally capable and have rights equal to any other.

No, human rights are not the same as natural rights.

What you just wrote is fuel for dividing people and as usual based from the religiously biased.

The division of the people into separate groups is a major part of the theology of the time of the end. Also, the word holy is a translation of the Hebrew word qodesh, which means set-apart.

Are you suggesting that you believe iran as a religious state is better than the USA which is secular by its own creation?

The Declaration of Independence isn't secular.

 

[Bthoth]

What happens if you walk that back?

Evolution of the living process. Keep in mind, each and every one of us have grand parents that lived during the time of moses, jesus and even the forefathers. If you did not, then you would not be here.

No, human rights are not the same as natural rights.

Now you want to impose a new goal post?

All life has natural rights and the UN sets human rights. Do any of them supersede the gods (pick which ever you ilke)?

The division of the people into separate groups is a major part of the theology of the time of the end.

You just confirmed what I said, At least you agree even if unknowlingly.

Also, the word holy is a translation of the Hebrew word qodesh, which means set-apart.

Does that mean, the holy are better than thou? Or could you accept just as jesus did, that all of us are equal no matter what the scribes and pharisee claim?

The Declaration of Independence isn't secular.

There will never be a USA that is a christian country except to perhaps trump0craps and the Waco's of texas. What makes US so much better is tolerance, the pursuit of equality, and LOVE of thy brethren, the human species. "WE the people" are conscious lives capable of learning beyond the beliefs.

 

[Ebionite]

But ignoring the finer points, prophesy in Judaism is specifically about the history and destiny of the Jews.

Ephraim isn't part of the house of Judah, which is known today as the Jews.

They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim [is] my firstborn.
Jeremiah 31:9

Also the isles are not the promised land of the near east.

My righteousness [is] near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust.
Isaiah 51:5

Aren't Moses' life events and miracles different in the Koran?

There's a difference as to whether it was Pharoah's wife or daughter who adopted Moses. The Quran endorses him, though.

It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.
Quran 5:44

The negative aspect is that mutually detrimental behaviors derive from the idea that a higher power will hold people accountable for their actions.

In the Abrahamic religions the higher power is described as being just, and it's difficult to get a negative outcome for society from justice being served.

 

[Ebionite]

Evolution of the living process.

Evolution can't explain language being a creative agent.

Now you want to impose a new goal post?

You asserted equal rights, not me.

All life has natural rights and the UN sets human rights. Do any of them supersede the gods (pick which ever you ilke)?

How is your question relevant to the rights and obligations of persons?

You just confirmed what I said, At least you agree even if unknowlingly.

No.

Does that mean, the holy are better than thou? Or could you accept just as jesus did, that all of us are equal no matter what the scribes and pharisee claim?

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Matthew 7:6

human species

.. doesn't exist. The human condition is social/political, not biological.

 

[idea]

Religion has both positive and negative aspects. The positive aspect is that mutually beneficial behaviour derives from the idea that a higher power will hold people accountable for their actions.

And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
Matthew 12:25

Using the analogy of a religious group as a kingdom, the remedy for the desolation would be to find what is common to those groups.

The solution is happening, rise of the unaffiliated. The evils within the church awaken us to our own inner light.

No borrowed light. No church needed.

 

[Ebionite]

The solution is happening, rise of the unaffiliated. The evils within the church awaken us to our own inner light.

Light relates to lamps, oil, and to the candle.

Commit thy way unto YHWH; trust also in him; and he shall bring [it] to pass.
And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday.
Psalms 37:5-6

For the commandment [is] a lamp; and the law [is] light; and reproofs of instruction [are] the way of life:
Proverbs 6:23

And it shall come to pass at that time, [that] I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, YHWH will not do good, neither will he do evil.
Zephaniah 1:12

Then answered I, and said unto him, What [are] these two olive trees upon the right [side] of the candlestick and upon the left [side] thereof?
And I answered again, and said unto him, What [be these] two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden [oil] out of themselves?
And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these [be]? And I said, No, my lord.
Then said he, These [are] the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.
Zechariah 4:11-14

 

[Bthoth]

Evolution can't explain language being a creative agent.

Evolution of knowledge is ongoing. Go to school and evolve with languages and knowledge.

For example: the term thermonuclear war was never used by even jesus but you can now comprehend the terms (language/words)

You asserted equal rights, not me.

Yes i do.. Is that beyond your comprehension?

How is your question relevant to the rights and obligations of persons?

The rights and obligations have never been perfected for all

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Matthew 7:6

Lousy use of scripture. I am against the hypocrisy of prejudice and trying to help you but I do not want to bark in your language.

.. doesn't exist. The human condition is social/political, not biological.

Human beings are biological. Please do not separate yourself from reality. The human imagination created the religions, a human condition.
What is pure to reality is biological, not the opinions of created beliefs.

 

[ppp]

The Declaration of Independence isn't secular.

Ephraim isn't part of the house of Judah, which is known today as the Jews.

They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim [is] my firstborn.
Jeremiah 31:9

Also the isles are not the promised land of the near east.

My righteousness [is] near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust.
Isaiah 51:5


There's a difference as to whether it was Pharoah's wife or daughter who adopted Moses. The Quran endorses him, though.

It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.
Quran 5:44

The way that you are using endorsed is so indeterminate no meaning is successfully conveyed..

In the Abrahamic religions the higher power is described as being just, and it's difficult to get a negative outcome for society from justice being served.

I am talking about how the religions interact in reality. Not how they describe themselves.

 

[Ebionite]

The way that you are using endorsed is so indeterminate no meaning is successfully conveyed..

The meaning is derived from the verse from the Quran that I quoted. Light as expressed there relates to this:

For the commandment [is] a lamp; and the law [is] light; and reproofs of instruction [are] the way of life:
Proverbs 6:23

I am talking about how the religions interact in reality. Not how they describe themselves.

That leads to the issue of the prejudice of the world. It's described in the gospels, but refers back to the texts of Judaism.

But [this cometh to pass], that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 15:25-26

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
John 5:46

 

[ppp]

The meaning is derived from the verse from the Quran that I quoted. Light as expressed there relates to this:

For the commandment [is] a lamp; and the law [is] light; and reproofs of instruction [are] the way of life:
Proverbs 6:23


That leads to the issue of the prejudice of the world. It's described in the gospels, but refers back to the texts of Judaism.

But [this cometh to pass], that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 15:25-26

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
John 5:46

Thanks for the non sequiturs. But no thanks.

 

[Ebionite]

Thanks for the non sequiturs. But no thanks.

The core argument is validation by prophetic knowledge. Light associates with the Torah/law, and the fulfilment of the Torah/law associates with the prophetic Psalms. Moses, as the preeminent prophet of the Torah/law, writes of the Messiah in his account of the star of Jacob.

I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.
Numbers 24:17

The sceptre is a symbol of the kingship of the star of Bethlehem (Michael Molnar's solution), and the children of Sheth are those who didn't repent, since Sheth was the literal son of adam, and those who repent are associated with the son of man, the symbolic son of adam.

El [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
Numbers 23:19

Edit: (synchronicity bonus) stargazers relate to astrology, and the Genatria of בכוכבים , which translates as stargazers, is 100. Molnar's solution is an astrological interpretation of the star of Bethlehem.