General Category > General Discussion
BBC online article on judaism looks like it's written by a muslim.
q_q_:
this bbc article on judaism has to have been written by a muslim
I just extracted the bits that give it away.
want to bet that a muslim wrote this article on judaism?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2004/08/11/communities_jewish_feature.shtml
"London has always been home to many Jewish settlers"
"Men and teenage boys are proudly seen wearing a Yiddish Kippah, Yarmulke or skullcap. This external display of absolute commitment and devotion is the very essence of Jewish faith."
"Judaism has experienced many changes since the time of Moses"
muman613:
q_q_,
Shame on you... You are just posting your opinion here... No facts, no basis for your thesis... Shame, Shame Shame on you... Nothing in this post but conjecture...
:laugh:
muman613
PS: I thought you weren't a betting man... Shame...
q_q_:
--- Quote from: muman613 on October 19, 2008, 12:43:24 PM ---q_q_,
Shame on you... You are just posting your opinion here... No facts, no basis for your thesis... Shame, Shame Shame on you... Nothing in this post but conjecture...
:laugh:
muman613
PS: I thought you weren't a betting man... Shame...
--- End quote ---
I'm not against speculation.
No doubt that when I criticised your speculation, there were significant differences.
There are essentially three, but excluding this one, two subjects where you have recently made a fool of yourself , the most recent one was Jacob and Esau, and the one before that was Chamish. Forget Chamish because that is not what you have in mind.
You didn't say what you were comparing it against, because, again, you are not for honest discussion. But, you have in mind Jacob and Esau, where I referred to philosophical speculation you had posted. (I have a good memory, though I don't really intend to make a point of memorising your rubbish. And don't expect me to. If you want to make your case, you should have mentioned the jacob and esau thing)
Now, the fact that something is speculation doesn't mean it is necessarily wrong. It just means it is that. And therefore, that it wasn't on such firm ground. The plain text of the tenach is firmer ground. The discussion involved the plain text, and the speculation. And you were ignoring the plain text
The plain text of the tenach, shows Esau to be a very evil person, perhaps even while in the womb.
So what i've been telling you is, to not mix everything up, to understand where you read things from. The source. Not just the website source like "torahanytime" or whatever, but the textual source, is it midrash, tenach , e.t.c. And if it is midrash, are there alternate readings. And don't forget the tenach!! Don't sit there focussing on commentaries when you haven't even understood the plain text. And don't ever ignore the plain text. Especially not *in favour* of philosophical speculation over the plain text. And if you do, then at least say so, don't claim that the website you read is the jewish view and then just ignore the plain text of the tenach.
Now the only thing that you have impressed me with here is that finally you haven't run away from a debate. But you are still not honest in your discussion.
You never expected me to write a reply like this naming examples, and really , you don't deserve it either.
Seriously, nobody would have known that that you had in mind the jacob and esau thread. You are totally dishonest in your tactics. You don't write expecting honest discussion.
It's amazing that you haven't yet learnt that your weak methods can't fool me. I see right through them.
muman613:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on October 20, 2008, 06:33:47 AM ---
--- Quote from: muman613 on October 19, 2008, 12:43:24 PM ---q_q_,
Shame on you... You are just posting your opinion here... No facts, no basis for your thesis... Shame, Shame Shame on you... Nothing in this post but conjecture...
:laugh:
muman613
PS: I thought you weren't a betting man... Shame...
--- End quote ---
I'm not against speculation.
No doubt that when I criticised your speculation, there were significant differences.
There are essentially three, but excluding this one, two subjects where you have recently made a fool of yourself , the most recent one was Jacob and Esau, and the one before that was Chamish. Forget Chamish because that is not what you have in mind.
You didn't say what you were comparing it against, because, again, you are not for honest discussion. But, you have in mind Jacob and Esau, where I referred to philosophical speculation you had posted. (I have a good memory, though I don't really intend to make a point of memorising your rubbish. And don't expect me to. If you want to make your case, you should have mentioned the jacob and esau thing)
Now, the fact that something is speculation doesn't mean it is necessarily wrong. It just means it is that. And therefore, that it wasn't on such firm ground. The plain text of the tenach is firmer ground. The discussion involved the plain text, and the speculation. And you were ignoring the plain text
The plain text of the tenach, shows Esau to be a very evil person, perhaps even while in the womb.
So what i've been telling you is, to not mix everything up, to understand where you read things from. The source. Not just the website source like "torahanytime" or whatever, but the textual source, is it midrash, tenach , e.t.c. And if it is midrash, are there alternate readings. And don't forget the tenach!! Don't sit there focussing on commentaries when you haven't even understood the plain text. And don't ever ignore the plain text. Especially not *in favour* of philosophical speculation over the plain text. And if you do, then at least say so, don't claim that the website you read is the jewish view and then just ignore the plain text of the tenach.
Now the only thing that you have impressed me with here is that finally you haven't run away from a debate. But you are still not honest in your discussion.
You never expected me to write a reply like this naming examples, and really , you don't deserve it either.
Seriously, nobody would have known that that you had in mind the jacob and esau thread. You are totally dishonest in your tactics. You don't write expecting honest discussion.
It's amazing that you haven't yet learnt that your weak methods can't fool me. I see right through them.
--- End quote ---
q_q_,
I have quoted sources and backed up every assertion I made concerning the Esau issue. Your stubbornness is only your weakness. You only impress yourself with your attempts at intellect.
I believe my understanding of the dynamics of the story of Esau and Yaakov to be genuine and authentic. There are NUMEROUS sources on the web and in midrash which support my thesis. There is no doubt that Esau appeared to most to be a son who was concerned with doing good for his father. As I stated in my quotes there is always debate about this but basically this is an accepted fact. You never answered my questions concerning why Isaac would believe in his heart that Esau deserved the blessing? Yes he was blind but he felt a closeness to Esau and wanted to help him improve. And most certainly I have understood the plain text. And I know all the other midrash about how Esau would kick and wiggle when Rivka was passing a place of idol worship while Yaakov would struggle to get out as she passed the Beit Midrash. I spend a good amount of time studying and reading Tanach and I hear the Torah of many teachers. I also am willing to learn from almost anyone.
What is intriguing is why you dragged this into this posting where you make statements which are not born from the facts which you present. Only one with a wild imagination could read what you posted and believe that it MUST BE WRITTEN BY A MUSLIM. That, my friend, is unsubstantiated conjecture. But because you are one willing to believe the rants of a disturbed author you most probably do this quite frequently.
I feel pretty good about what I have said and have no problem repeating it. I also have asked my Rabbi for his insight into this issue and hope to be able to post my findings on my blog soon.
muman613
PS: I apologize about the fact that in my original post I suggested that Esau was actually righteous. My understanding was that he wanted to appear righteous to his father because he really did want to receive the blessing which Yaakov was to receive. I think this may be what upset you about what I wrote. I attempted to clarify this.
jaime:
"You are totally dishonest in your tactics. You don't write expecting honest discussion.
It's amazing that you haven't yet learnt that your weak methods can't fool me. I see right through them."
q_q, why are you being so mean to Muman? So you think, from your experience, that article is written by a Muslim because it is so fundamental in its statements. References to skullcaps, etc. you are probably right, but why do you have to say such mean things to Muman :doctor:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version