The Chosen (Part 1)

The anything-goes forum for insults, board drama, and interpersonal conflicts. No moderation. Rated R to NC-17.
Post Reply
User avatar
Smokey
Bishop
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:47 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Smokey »

Res Ipsa wrote:Smokey:

1. Are the people today who call themselves Jews descended from Adam?
2. Which people living today are Gods chosen people?


Thanks for bumping the thread. Unfortunately I will not be answering questions on this thread until the SPAM posts are pruned. I will, however, be updating the OP as we continue with Genesis 1.
Dr Shades is Jason Gallentine

User avatar
Jersey Girl
God
Posts: 34382
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:16 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Jersey Girl »

Smokey wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:Smokey:

1. Are the people today who call themselves Jews descended from Adam?
2. Which people living today are Gods chosen people?


Thanks for bumping the thread. Unfortunately I will not be answering questions on this thread until the SPAM posts are pruned. I will, however, be updating the OP as we continue with Genesis 1.


So what you are saying is that it's okay for you to spam the ____ out of the threads in Paradise forum but the integrity of this thread of yours should be protected?

Right. Got it.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Dr Moore »

The Book of Mormon makes it very clear that the house of Israel and the Jews are interchangeable terms in multiple places (eg, Mormon 5:14), and that the Jews are a subset of the house of Israel in others (eg, 3 Ne 29:8). Believers in the Book of Mormon would not make the ridiculous OP here because it makes a liar out of the Book of Mormon.

User avatar
Smokey
Bishop
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:47 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Smokey »

Mormon 5:14 certainly does not confuse the tribe of Judah with the tribe of Israel.


Luckily you have someone brave enough to withstand the abuse, threats, and attempts to censor, that is willing to explain these concepts to you. Stay tuned.
Dr Shades is Jason Gallentine

User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10264
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Res Ipsa »

Smokey wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:Smokey:

1. Are the people today who call themselves Jews descended from Adam?
2. Which people living today are Gods chosen people?


Thanks for bumping the thread. Unfortunately I will not be answering questions on this thread until the SPAM posts are pruned. I will, however, be updating the OP as we continue with Genesis 1.


Tapitty tappitty tap.

You and I both know why you won’t answer those questions. And it has nothing to do with SPAM posts. You can answer them now or I will answer for you. Your choice.
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951

User avatar
Smokey
Bishop
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:47 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Smokey »

Res Ipsa wrote:
You and I both know why you won’t answer those questions. And it has nothing to do with SPAM posts. You can answer them now or I will answer for you. Your choice.


I know you can’t help but argue in bad faith, being a shifty anti-Mormon employing pilpul, but please do not infer what I know and don’t know.

You are free to post your own opinions about whatever you like. Readers can give them their due consideration.

Let’s let Shades clean up the blatant-rule violations, threats, SPAM, huge obnoxious walls of text, and see what I know and don’t know.

You don’t get to censor someone and then gloat that they haven’t answered your questions because they can’t.
Dr Shades is Jason Gallentine

User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8510
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by canpakes »

Smokey wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:
You and I both know why you won’t answer those questions. And it has nothing to do with SPAM posts. You can answer them now or I will answer for you. Your choice.


I know you can’t help but argue in bad faith, being a shifty anti-Mormon employing pilpul, but please do not infer what I know and don’t know.

You are free to post your own opinions about whatever you like. Readers can give them their due consideration.

Let’s let Shades clean up the blatant-rule violations, threats, SPAM, huge obnoxious walls of text, and see what I know and don’t know.

You don’t get to censor someone and then gloat that they haven’t answered your questions because they can’t.


Shorter Smokey: “I can’t answer any of your questions. I’m only able to parrot neo-nazi and 4chan talking points designed to make folks hate other people”.

User avatar
Smokey
Bishop
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:47 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Smokey »

Let’s explore this slight derail and topic of tolerable hate.


Is it OK, tolerable, to hate Nazis?

Yes or No?
Dr Shades is Jason Gallentine

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Lemmie »

Antisemitism is the prejudice against, the hatred of, or the discrimination against Jews as an ethnic, religious, or racial group, and is widely recognized as a form of racism.[3][4]

While the term antisemitism might, by parsing the word into its component parts, appear to mean prejudice against all Semitic peoples — Arabs, Assyrians, Samaritans, Jews, and other groups that are associated with the semitic family of languages —, the term refers exclusively to anti-Jewish bigotry and prejudice, reflecting the historical origins of the term as a euphemism for "Judenhass" or Jew-hatred.

(While this may be confusing, language is notoriously inconsistent; for example, "inflammable" and "flammable" are synonyms).

Broadened usage despite historical meaning, though sometimes done out of ignorance rather than bad faith, is frequently associated with bad faith as a derailing or erasure technique to derail legitimate criticisms or historical documentation of anti-Jewish prejudice emanating from non-Jews of other semitic groups.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Antisemitism


[bolding added to emphasize the style of bile currently put forward by the troll.]

User avatar
honorentheos
God
Posts: 11102
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by honorentheos »

Smokey wrote:Let’s explore this slight derail and topic of tolerable hate.


Is it OK, tolerable, to hate Nazis?

Yes or No?

Is it tolerable to hate Nazi propoganda, beliefs and their intended aims? Absolutely. If one can't hate evil and oppose it then even God is damned.

Is it tolerable to hate a person behind those beliefs? I lean against that idea. Hate the sin, not the sinner if you will.

Online there is the issue of a person such as yourself being rather 2 dimensional where it's difficult to see how you've done the work to present the person behind the ideology. It makes more work for someone seeking to not get sucked into the abyss into which one gazes if briefly. It is certainly one reason many people find it easier to want distance placed between you and their participation.

Which brings up the companion question back to you: Who is responsible to separate the person from ideology they espouse? If you present yourself as the embodiment of a vile ideology should you be given the benefits accorded to others who do the work of establishing themselves as more than just a ideological troll?
Last edited by honorentheos on Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa

User avatar
Smokey
Bishop
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:47 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Smokey »

Anti-Mormonism is discrimination, persecution, hostility or prejudice directed against the Latter Day Saint movement, particularly The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The term is often used to describe people or literature that are critical of their adherents, institutions, or beliefs, or physical attacks against specific Saints or the Latter Day Saint movement as a whole.

Opposition to Mormonism began before the first Latter Day Saint church was established in 1830 and continues to the present day. The most vocal and strident opposition occurred during the 19th century, particularly during the Utah War of the 1850s, and in the second half of the century when the practice of polygamy in Utah Territory was widely considered by the U.S. Republican Party as one of the "twin relics of barbarism" along with slavery.[1]

Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites, podcasts, videos or other media offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's semiannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples. Opponents generally believe that the church's claims to divine origin are false, that it is non-Christian, or that it is a religion based on fraud or deceit on the part of its past and present leaders. In 2015, the FBI began tracking anti-Mormon hate crimes in the United States and have noted an increase in incidents over time.[2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormonism
Last edited by Smokey on Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Dr Shades is Jason Gallentine

User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10264
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Res Ipsa »

Smokey wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:
You and I both know why you won’t answer those questions. And it has nothing to do with SPAM posts. You can answer them now or I will answer for you. Your choice.


I know you can’t help but argue in bad faith, being a shifty anti-Mormon employing pilpul, but please do not infer what I know and don’t know.

You are free to post your own opinions about whatever you like. Readers can give them their due consideration.

Let’s let Shades clean up the blatant-rule violations, threats, SPAM, huge obnoxious walls of text, and see what I know and don’t know.

You don’t get to censor someone and then gloat that they haven’t answered your questions because they can’t.


More tapitty tapitty tap.

As you would put it, drop your pilpul and answer two straightforward questions. I haven’t violated any rules, haven’t spammed your posts, haven’t thrown up huge walls of texts, or censored you in any manner. So why do you insist on concealing what you actually believe instead of trying to distract with your “pilpul.”
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Lemmie »

Smokey wrote:
Anti-Mormonism is discrimination, persecution, hostility or prejudice directed against the Latter Day Saint movement, particularly The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). The term is often used to describe people or literature that are critical of their adherents, institutions, or beliefs, or physical attacks against specific Saints or the Latter Day Saint movement as a whole.

...Modern-day opposition generally takes the form of websites, podcasts, videos or other media offering alternative views about Mormonism or non-violent protest at large Latter-day Saint gatherings such as the church's semiannual General Conference, outside of Latter-day Saint pageants, or at events surrounding the construction of new LDS temples.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormonism

So it’s pretty clear the difference, then. “Anti-Mormonism” includes the definition of disagreeing with and presenting different views. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, in the real world:
Antisemitism is the prejudice against, the hatred of, or the discrimination against Jews as an ethnic, religious, or racial group, and is widely recognized as a form of racism.[3][4]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Antisemitism

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Dr Moore »

Smokey wrote:Mormon 5:14 certainly does not confuse the tribe of Judah with the tribe of Israel.


Luckily you have someone brave enough to withstand the abuse, threats, and attempts to censor, that is willing to explain these concepts to you. Stay tuned.


Mormon 5:14 does indeed equate the terms “Jews” and the “house of Israel”. Your OP therefore calls the Book of Mormon in error.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 5?lang=eng

And why? What is the point? What are you hoping to accomplish in making whatever point it is you are so desperately making?

User avatar
honorentheos
God
Posts: 11102
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by honorentheos »

The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9948
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Gadianton »

Here is a related thread on Mormon Dialogue & Discussion Board:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/722 ... tionalism/

Scott Lloyd can't denounce it without qualification:

Scott Lloyd wrote:This is the first I’ve heard of this thing, but at first glance, it appears to be a group of misguided Church members endeavoring to add credence to their political ideology/activism by putting the “Mormon” label on it.

I disapprove of that, but then, I disapprove of the left-of-center Mormon Women for Ethical Government for the same reason.


Scott Lloyd wrote:I think <fascist> is a term that is thrown around far too glibly these days — like <racist> and <white supremacist> and <alt right> and <xenophobe> and <homophobe>.


lol.

Smac drones on and on, and appears to basically unbelieve it out of existence. He goes into a panic when the Nehor says he doesn't like government and laws.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.

User avatar
huckelberry
God
Posts: 4553
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by huckelberry »

Smokey wrote:Mormon 5:14 certainly does not confuse the tribe of Judah with the tribe of Israel.


Luckily you have someone brave enough to withstand the abuse, threats, and attempts to censor, that is willing to explain these concepts to you. Stay tuned.


There is no tribe of Israel, the term refers to the group which includes Judah. To be a Jew there is no requirement to be of the tribe of Judah. There is no separation since about 720 bc of people whose ancestry is more Judah than say Levi, Benjamin etc.

These are rather minor points however in comparison to your process of placing blame on a large diverse group of people, Jews, for various bad choices of a few like those who supported Bolsheviks 1917.

User avatar
Fence Sitter
God
Posts: 8860
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Fence Sitter »

Gadianton wrote:
Smac drones on and on.


Redundant.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 21366
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Kishkumen »

Why is this thread still in the Terrestrial Forum?

It is not a Mormon topic.

It has an anti-Semitic opening post.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 21366
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Kishkumen »

Great! Cool. Got it. Won’t do it again, pinky promise.

Now how about relocating this thread to a non-Mormon forum?
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist

User avatar
Dr. Shades
Founder & Visionary
Posts: 14130
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm

Re: The Chosen (Part 1)

Post by Dr. Shades »

The Book of Mormon makes plenty of references regarding Jews in general, so the question of whether that particular tribe is the "chosen people" by virtue of being of the House of Israel alone vs. the tribe of Ephraim being the "chosen people" by virtue of having Joseph's birthright is indeed of interest to Mormonism in general, because it carries implications regarding the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon itself.

Ergo, the opening post's subject matter has enough relevance to Mormonism to allow it to remain in this forum.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley

Post Reply