AN ACTUAL JOURNALIST, WITH INTEGRITY & A CONSCIENCE

This was a scam. She will turn up on fox or MSNBC depending on who has the deepest pocket for her.

Roy. I though this was an interesting article on as you call it mysticism…have a read if you will.

The only value of man is in the eyes of God.

Mark 8:36
For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?

From the standpoint of Judaism man as such has no intrinsic value. He is an “image of God,” and only as such does he possess special significance. That is why Judaism did not produce an ethical theory of its own, was never embodied in a moral system, and made no pretenses of representing a specific moral point of view. The Bible does not recognize the good and the right as such, only “the good and the right in the eyes of God” (Deut. 12:28). The systematic ethical theories found in the later Jewish sources (Maimonides; Bahya ibn Pakuda) were either adopted from non-Jewish sources or were guides to the systematic cultivation of the religious virtues, appeals to stricter adherence to the Torah and its commandments (Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto). Judaism is a specifically defined entity existing continuously over a period of three thousand years was not realized in philosophy, literature, art, or anything other than halakhic living. Hence whoever is able to achieve religiosity only through the channels of Judaism, or whoever is interested in the Jewish manifestations of religiosity, must, willy-nilly, come to grips with the religious praxis of Judaism, with the world of Halakhah.

Thus, being Jewish means to follow the laws, and only to follow the laws. Any other use of the adjective Jewish is in error. Furthermore, man in and of himself is nothing. Only as a servant to God does his life have meaning.

Those who would ground morality on the image of God in man may remember that Adolf Hitler and Adolf Eichmann were created in God’s image like you and me, and also every rapist and murderer, as well as the most righteous of men. The ultimate message of the Day of Atonement is that man, as such, has no intrinsic value; he acquires value insofar as he stands before God.

There are no ways to faith, since faith is the supreme, if not the only, manifestation of man’s free choice.

Nothing he could experience would lead him to faith if faith did not spring from his own decision and resolve. Signs and wonders, “the mighty hand and the stretched-out arm,” God’s deliverance and even the revelation of the Shekhinah [divine presence of God]—none of these sufficed to inculcate faith in the generation that witnessed them….Conversely, long after them, scores of generations that saw no miracles and never in their lives beheld any testimony of divine governance, who witnessed neither reward of virtue nor punishment of sin and had not experienced deliverance, nevertheless conducted their lives in the fullness of faith.

Imagine the Jews who had passed through the Red Sea but did not believe in the Hebrew God but a golden calf. That is amazing.

Following this logic and to reiterate the essence of Judaism and the Jewish people he states:

The Jewish people, as it existed in history, is definable only by reference to its Judaism–a Judaism that was not a mere idea in the mind but the realization of a program of living set forth in the Torah and delineated by its Mitzvoth. This way of life constituted the specific national content of Jewishness or, in other words, the uniqueness of the Jewish people.

The logic of the understanding that the practice of the program is all leads to remarkable conclusions for this arch Zionist about the state of Israel. For example he writes that: “The state, as such, has no religious value. No state ever had. Political achievements, conquests, victories—none of these are religiously significant.” He criticized his countrymen for their ultimate regard of the state using the ultimate accusation for a Jew; “Regarding the state as an intrinsic value is the essence of fascism.” This is perhaps his most libertarian statement.

admin, I don’t see where where Anne desires the US to attack Russia.In fact she claims the US and Russia are much the same twin beast , therefore neither can be trusted and advices the Ukraine to stand alone…BTW, she is 100% accurate on here assessment of the current global; financial situation,

I guess the most accurate way to state the macro dynamic is thus: the Ukraininans are choosing between the Mongol paradigm and the Christian paradigm. Sadly, they have no idea how far gone contemporary Europe is. They don’t realize that the Mongol paradigm has fully infiltrated and overthrown Europe – and the former United States – in a stealth coup spearheaded by Communists. So yes, unless Ukraine attempts to stand alone, it will be out of the frying pan and into the fire.

I reckon that most of you have watched at least some of my Economics Presentation. For those of you who have, you realize how utterly dire the financial situation is. But how many people truly understand it? How many people have any idea of the enormity of what has been done by the bankster oligarchs in the former U.S. and Europe? The Ukrainian peasants and workers who are taking to the streets demanding that the rape of their country by Putin’s toadie oligarchs stop – do you think THOSE people have any clue as to the debt situation in the west? Hell, the people IN THE WEST have no idea whatsoever what is going on. Why would you think the Ukrainian underclass would understand it? All they know is that a handful of people have stolen nearly all of the wealth in their country, and they want it to stop. No more gold toilets. Sadly, they haven’t realized yet that the “Europe” and the “west” that once was, no longer exist, and are simply the same thing as the Russian oligarchy, except with a different cast of characters, many of whom are servile to Putin already. It is so terribly sad to watch.

Roy, try this link..http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf

Dawkins…an intellectual midget when challenged .The nothing more boring than a blowhard atheist asserting the absolute certainty that there is no God. Who asked you?

Red Queen response #1
A few days ago, I threw down a gauntlet at Richard Dawkins’s fan club. I gave them a week to respond to the seven impossible things believed by Richard Dawkins, despite his claim to only believe in things for which there are evidence. As they spent some 1,669 posts discussing The Irrational Atheist, declaring it to be “the work of an unequivocal idiot” and “a piece of shit”, they can hardly pretend to be unaware of it.http://voxday.blogspot.com/search?q=dawkins+

Only the less biblical astute think that God watches every person on earths actions every minute of everyday.

God gave man free reign to prosper or run amok as he sees fit.Sure,God keeps an eye out,but the road to riches or ruin is all our own doing.

If God was omniscient he wouldn’t have needed to send angels to Sodom twice in order to find out how wicked a ass-humping hole it had become.He would have already known.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/03/mailvox-omniderigistes.html
CM is making the same mistake in confusing capacity with action that Richard Dawkins makes in The God Delusion and which we see with regularity from Team Calvin. The fact that God “could insert himself into any location and any time whenever he wishes” doesn’t make him “functionally omnipresent”, but rather “potentially omnipresent”. This is the same difference and distinction
that I draw between omniscience and voliscience, between God knowing everything at all times and God knowing whatever He decides He wants to know. As for the question, no, I don’t consider God to be a slave to the external force of time. For more thoughts on this, see the chapter on God as Game Designer in The Irrational Atheist.

As for prophecy, this is pretty simple. The fact that you don’t know everything doesn’t mean you don’t know something in advance, especially if you are the one who is arranging to make it happen. There is absolutely no need for omniscience to support the concept of accurate Divinely-inspired prophecy.

follow this link for more.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/03/team-calvin-question-five.html

“First, it is important to note that the Christian God…makes no broad claims to omniscience. Although there are 87 references to the things God knows, only a single example could potentially be interpreted as a universal claim to complete knowledge.”

“Furthermore, there is no theological significance whatsoever to a reduced form of omniscience and omnipotence….one is still left with a God whose theoretical capabilities are sufficient to fulfill the the various claims about His knowledge and power made in His Word. Moreover, from the human perspective, this logically acceptable tantiscient (almost omniscient) God would be completely indistinguishable form the omniscient one.”

I reiterate – RT is nothing but “an Alex Jones prison planet with legs and a hairdo”

Zara, you mewling half-bitch…neither I nor Barnhardt arecalling for war…read fro comprehension , you single issue booger eating moron.

LOL…dick face sez’ the turd face.

Flash, do you get the impression that people here have a serious objectivity problem?
I do…. follow the sandpipers or get out of the way.

TRUMAN UCCNOT – Flash, do you get the impression that people here have a serious objectivity problem?

Nah, they just like to fling shit ….it’s a flame fetish, if you will.

Zara , as soon as you contain your die-Israel-die vitriol to the dark recesses of your demented mind, I’ll consider your request. but it’s highly likely that I’ll just ell you to piss off pal.

Here’s you a bone .booger eater….but scroll on if you’ retoo busy surfing Persian kiddie porn.

Twenty years later in 1988 he wrote of the corruption that he had predicted that also can be applied to the United States virtually word-for-word.

That a subjugated people would fight for its freedom against the conquering ruler, with all the means at its disposal, without being squeamish about their legitimacy, was only to be expected. This has been true of wars of liberation of all peoples. We call the acts of the Palestinians ‘terrorism’ and their fighters ‘terrorists.’ But we are able to maintain our rule over the rebellious people only by actions regarded the world-over as criminal. We refer to this as ‘policy’ rather than ‘terror’ because it is conducted by a duly constituted government and its regular army. The ‘aberrant cases’ of necessity became the rule, since they are not incidental to a conquering regime buy essential to it.

We are creating–and have already created–a political atmosphere affecting the public as well as individual members, in which a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court legitimates the use of torture in the interrogation of Palestinian prisoners. The Israeli Define Force, armed with up-to-date weaponry, kills within a span of weeks a hundred people who did not carry firearms, amongst them women and children; breaks the bones of me, women, and children by order of the Minister of Defense; forces its way into homes and humiliates their residents. In this same atmosphere one hears of cases of soldiers attempting to bury Arab boys alive; the Attorney General distinguishes between torture and ‘reasonable’ torture; those in charge of the army distinguish ‘burial alive’ from the burying alive of bodies without interring the heads. Similar tendencies characterize our foreign and defense policies. The viscous folly of the Lebanese war was an outcome of the intention to maintain and assure the continued rule over the occupied territories and their people. That war, initiated by the Begin government, was undertaken with the consent of the Alignment of workers’ parties, which continues to this day to oppose negotiations with the PLO, the representatives of the Palestinian people, over the repartitioning of the land.

Only by putting an end to our rule over the other people can we be saved from the dire consequences of persisting in the present policy.

If the present situation continues (and here the emphasis must be on ‘if’), the growing savagery of Israeli society will be as inevitable as the severance of the state from the Jews of the world. The policy of a government of Sharon, Raful, and Druckman (or their counterparts), which in such circumstances also seems unavoidable, will begin with suppression of reliable information, elimination of free speech, the setting up of concentration camps for ‘traitors’ (like myself and perhaps you), and end in the mass expulsion and slaughter of the Arab population.

Zara, is busy working , but not to busy to follow a thread he finds offensive.I’m glad I’m not paying your salary, dingle berry.