Yuku free message boards

brgordon wrote:

---

"Man can no more own an animal then he can own another man."

No need to comment here. It speaks for itself.

"In Genesis God gives man every herb of the field for meat. But selfish meat eaters don't like that so they claim the Bible gives rules for eating meat as does the Torah apparently."

Very apparently.
See Gen. 9:3 for starters. Where G-d tells mankind they can eat meat. Did you ever read it?

A) Yes I read Genesis but 9:3 is after the FALL after man is kicked out of paradise. Did you even read Gen 1:29? And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; B) to you it shall be for meat.

A) SO WHAT that it's after the "fall of man." That's where we are right now. We are AFTER that time. AT that time G-d said it is OK to eat meat. TILL TODAY we can still eat meat. See. You thought it was "apparent." I showed you it's front and center. This counterpoint is irrelevant.

B) The verse says, "to you shall it be for food." Also irrelevant.

"the Bible gives rules for slavery as well does that mean God condones slavery?"

Do you really need me to answer that?

Yes I do. Man often fits his rules into holy books. Man wanted slaves so man put rules in holy books for how to treat slaves claiming it is God's word.

True, man often fits his rules into "holy books." Implicit in the word OFTEN is "not always."
Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Xtians, Muslims, Pagans... they ALL put their own rules into their "holy books." That is quite often.
Doesn't apply to Judaism though.
G-d put His rules of slavery in their and if you learned any of them you might have some idea how foolish your position is.
Did you know that according to Jewish law the slaves eats what the master eats? No.
Did you know if their is only one pillow in the house, the slave gets it. No.
There is much you do not know.

"Animals have their own lives and souls and are not ours to give. When animals kill each other they do not know any better. They are hungry so they do what is their instinct. Their souls allow them to suffer fear and pain but not to reason morally."

I never knew such tests were run on animal souls. Where did you get your data from? Can animals reason immorally? That would explain justifying their eating each other. Maybe its not instinct but reasoning immorally. Like liberal democrats who advocate second and third term abortions and gay marriages.

A) I never knew such test was run on human's souls. Where did your get your data from? B) You seem pretty scientific here for a person bashing science. C) Animals can suffer both physical pain as well as emotional pain. D) There are obviously aware and self conscious. The only thing missing is immortality and human beings can not prove that in themselves either. E) If you can accept that aspect for one type of being that is self aware capable of pain and awareness then you can by the same faith accept that for the other.

A) From G-d. He created them so he is in a position to tell us how they work.
B) Since I was speaking to someone claiming to think like a scientist, I thought I would communicate in a language he would understand. Along those lines, scientifically speaking, when I ask you if and where your animal tests were run, if your only answer is "well, if and where were your human tests run?" the you clearly do not have a statement/argument to stand on.

So you DO NOT KNOW that the statements you made ARE true. You only consider them true with no support. You can certainly think what you want. Right or wrong.

C) The Torah is very much against cruelty to animals and does forbid unnecessary hurt.
D) True. I saw a dog standing in front of the mirror for hours wondering what to wear. Once again you are stating your own machinations as fact but where's the support? And what on earth does immortality have to do with anything?
E) More unsupported propaganda. Mr Scientist, can you say something substantiated? That falsehood of this statement is in being premised on the previous unsubstantiated statement.

"It is bad enough that human beings still eat animals when we no longer live in a world devoid of other food during the winter must we advocate Sacrifice as well?"

Two things.
If global warming is due to cow flatulence, so wouldn't eating a cow be a good thing?

That is like arguing that genocide is a good thing because of all the damage human beings have done the the environment.Besides all animals have flatulence including human beings.

Yes, well, when I said this I didn't realize how far gone you were. I thought you were just an off balanced animal lover. I did not realize you were a full fledged monkeys uncle.

Second, as you intimated above, but not in so many words, [because not only do you NOT read that which you complain about but you also do NOT read your own words,] G-d advocates meat eating, slavery [according to Jewish law], and sacrifices. We do what G-d wants.

Are you admitting religious holy books advocate slavery? I will tell you what I tell xtians. Holy books are just that books not God himself. They are books written by man. God can get through the text in places but man is obstinate and will not only interpret words for his own benefit but will edit out what he doesn't like.

I wish you would follow the conversation.
And I said it paragraphs ago that G-d advocates slavery. It was part of all those things you are complaining about without ever having read of having any first hand knowledge about them.
What you tell xtians is accurate though. Their books our just books.
Fascinating that you said "not G-d Himself," as opposed to "not G-d's words" or the like.
Because our Torah is G-d Himself! So to speak!
Are you Jewish? There may be some hope for you yet.

"Religions obsession with blood and how much God desires it sickens me. Is God some kind of vampire?"

The problem really isn't with G-d. It's your ignorant blabbering.

A) There is no ignorance. B) I speak the truth. C) The xtian myth is built upon the Jewish myth. D) Jesus is all about bloodshed and the holy books go on and on about sacrifice. E) We don't have sacrifice much anymore not because of the morals of religion but inspite of them. It was only from unorthodox freethinkers that questioned the church that came the ideas of slavery as immoral and sacrifice as unecessary. F) Why wasn't the first page of any holy book dedicated to equality of women or the immorality of slavery or the soul of animals and compassion for all living including animals? G) Because most holy books were inspired by mans desire to keep on doing what ever pleased him not what pleased God.

A) Um....
B) We proven that not to be true. You speak what you feel.
C) Myth is actually built off of something true. Myth can certainly be further embellished from a previous myth but, you know what I mean. So again, we are all in agreement xtianity is a myth. No substance to saying Judaism is a myth. Feels good, I'm sure. But unsubstantiated.
D) Especially ours and us.
E) Wrong. [Perhaps more ignorance of Judaism?]
We don't have sacrifice today because we don't have a Temple. When the Temple is rebuilt, sacrifices will commence. May it be speedily and in our day!
IF YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE CONVERSATION, you called G-d obsessed with blood. I said He can't be obsessed if we haven't sacrificed in 1900 years. You say we are not sacrificing in spite of the religion.
WRONG!
Are we clear on that? It is ONLY because of the religion that there are no sacrifices.
So there is no obsession.
Well, certainly no rational mind could now claim there is.
F) Why does all that need to be on the first page? Your thinking of a newspaper. Not a scientific journal.
In a newspaper, front page is news.
In the Torah, every page is an obligation.
G) Again "most" mean "not all." And I know the answer but I'll ask it anyway. Having reject every "holy book" on the planet, [whether you read them or not,] from where do YOU get your information on what pleases G-d?

First of all, read the Torah if you want to complain about it. Because you clearly haven't.
Second of all, think about it.

Ok I will read the Torah. I read everything else.And I will come back and formally apologize here if the Torah contradicts what I have learned about religion by studying all the other holy books. If the Torah admits the truth of reincarnation that was originally accepted by all religions at one time or another and if the Torah admits that animals have souls and do not deserve to be slaughtered for food sport or sacrifice..if also the Torah doesnt present God as a Jealous and Angry God that kills with floods or dashes babies heads against the stones like the bible it inspires. If the Torah is totally different and presents a God of love and peace instead of war and punishment. Then and only then will I apologize.

This is just a repeat of the last question, "F)." You have a list of what determines what is or isn't a book of G-d. So where did you get your list from? But from the sound of it, seems you are too closed minded to read anything and make a decision about it so, don't waste your time. Maybe some later time when you're open, objective, willing to learn.... a little more science minded....

We haven't had a temple for over 1900 years. Do you know when the last time we had an animal sacrifice was?
I know you don't.
Over 1900 hundred years ago!
What kind of an obsession is it when you ABSTAIN from sacrifice for over 1900 years?

I was refering to meat eaters obession with justifying killing animals and denying animals souls as well as human beiings need to create religion based on human sacrifice or killing like Christianity.

Same argument stands: What kind of an obsession is it when you ABSTAIN from sacrifice for over 1900 years? G-d nor we are obsessed with sacrifice. Just wishing it would return.

What kind of an obsession is it when you obligate only TWO community sacrifices... and the rest were required ONLY IF someone sinned?

Shouldnt be required at all. Murder is never pleasing to God. Thal shall not kill.

Again, I didn't know how far gone you were.
"Murder is never pleasing." That's humans!
You know, the same "creatures" who I) acknowledge G-d, III) shouldn't make idols, IV) keep the Sabbath, V) honor parents, VI) don't kill, VII) don't commit adultry, VIII) don't steal, IX) don't bear false witness, X) don't covet

You can skip responding to the WHOOOOOLE rest of this post if you're willing to answer this one question:

Would a rational, sensical, scientific oriented mind think that this list is speaking to humans AND animals OR that this list is speaking to humans in NINE of them and just decides to shtup an animal one somewhere in the middle?

What kind of an obsession is it when tens of thousands of people who had no fields were fed off of the meat and breads from sacrifices?

I know in history the was times when meat was the only food way way back. But one that doesnt justify sacrifice (Killing To Appease God) and two it has been along time since man has been starving without meat. Or dependent on it.

Where do you get this stuff?
The same Torah in which G-d gives us the laws for sacrifices He also gives laws for fruit trees and vineyards and wheat crops and anything else that happens to be growing.

Obviously I think a lot. Just because I disagree with you doesnt mean I do not think. How arrogant.

I did not say you didn't think out of arrogance. I said you didn't think because of the volume of statements you made which were erroneous at worst, unsubstantiated at best and against a text which I surmised and you did admit you never read.

"This is why many science minded people see religion as primitive thinking."

But since we all know that science only acknowledges what it can see, touch and measure... and since religious minded people think BEYOND that BOX- to what cannot be measured... to what is beyond measurement... so the reality is that the scientists are the primitive thinking ones.

Which is why we have philosophy which you mock and without there would be no theology. Also no religious bigots who neither respect science or philosophy.Also science doesn't need to "see" things to measure them. Quantum Physics easily surpasses religion in approaching the truth of the Mystics that by the way religion has almost always persecuted. We need science and philosophy together. Religion by itself hardly makes a contribution unless you include religious philosophers.

Sorry. If you're going to go to philosophy you are going to have to throw all your animals out the window. Better yet, throw them on the BBQ.
So which is it?
Scientist really are the small minded ones or animals really are just animals?

And that other question I said was the only one you had to answer, you can answer this one instead.

Primitive and infantile.

A) The analytical mind is neither primitive or infantile. The intellect is a gift from God.
B) Basing science on empiricism does not limit it. That only focuses it. Scientist pay attention to reality that can be observed. Any other method of measuring truth is both infantile and primitive. Just like a baby religion needs to get what it wants...bleh bleh... Only Mystics Philosophers or Scientist .... C) Before those discplines established themselves the worlds great religions only existed like any other of the small minded magic thinking cults before them accepting the Earth as flat and the center of the universe. D) Religion claims they know God personally yet historically thier ignorance was apalling.

A) True. I just haven't seen one yet.
It's been all closed mindedness, preconceived notions, facts not changing opionion...
B) More totally opinionated unsubstantiated dribble. Lots more. But now you have mystics?!?
C) The flat earth people were the SCIENTISTS of the time.
D) Our religion knew the earth was round and that it moved and our 1500 year old Talmud has the orbit of the moon down to the 6th decimal point. It also says there are seven planets in our solar system. I'm sure you know last year the scientific community demoted Pluto so they no longer say our system has 9 planets but only 8. They are one planet closer!

"When will religion learn to catch up to modern philosophy?"

Soon as it throws the gear in reverse.

In reverse? How can that be when they never left the starting gate? What was it 10 years ago the Pope admitted the truth of evolution?

In case you don't get it yet, this is a Jewish web site. Why do you keep dragging xtianity into the conversationas if it means something???

Flaming hypocrisy aside, Scientist are meat eaters.

Where is the hypocrisy?... I was only implying that... But then I think about experimentation and I have to agree wth you it's the same thing.

Another sign of hope.

they actually make the biggest human sacrifice of all.
They cut themselves off from the purpose of humanity.

Science and Philosophy IS the purpose of humanity. To seek wisdom and truth. Religion is and always will be just comfort food. I bet you take antibiotics and drive a car and use a microwave. Don't tell me you dont benefit from science.

Never said I didn't. I just think and live outside of their box. And they are good for making boxes.

brgordon wrote:

---

"My position hasn't self destructed. You just don't agree with me."

"Most on here believe The Torah is the word of God...
I say these books are the word of man."