• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

IDF publishes unedited footage showing Hamas equipment in al-Shifa hospital

rosends

Well-Known Member
Yep, mankind are equally capable to keep the commandments and laws of civil society.
So the commandments that are incumbent on a woman, a man can keep them? Those which apply to an unmarried man apply to a married man? Those that apply to a soldier 3000 years ago apply to a blind infant today? Do you even read what you write?
I see the difference; you dont follow the commandments of bible/torah.
The ones you don't know. Got it.
I can witness that the dross had a problem and now you sustain that they use a completely different set of commandments. Thanks for educating me, that the dross do not follow the commandments. I have had a hard time with understanding why the harsh condemnation by ezekiel 22.
So you have no reading comprehension skills in any context. You misrepresent what I said along with the biblical text. I'm in great company!
10 commandments of Moses are 'THE commandments.' I dont listen to the rabbi'd that enable the dross/israelis to keep an apartheid.
The 10 are "THE commandments"? LOL. So when the text uses the word "command" in other contexts, I guess you say that that doesn't count.
But israel is an apartheid as reflected in legal opinion.
And yet I showed you the legal opinions that say otherwise.
I have no consideration to learn the dross/israeli opinion.
You don't want to consider facts that disprove you. Got it.
Personal.......? Defending Jews from people that are trying to condemn them as Israeli is personal.
oooh. More reading problems from you. The word "personal" modified your interpretation of the bible. Can you not read at all?
Of course, the people of the apartheid DO NOT keep the laws of mankind or torah/bible, the 10 commandments.
That doesn't reply at all to anything I wrote. Good job running away.
Laws against illegal occupation by UN and civil society are the law. The commandments do not conflict with the law, they are about personal responsibility. Huge difference!
So you haven't studied the law and keep insisting that you know something about commandments when you don't.
Funny how you are being found incorrect and still falsely accuse, breaking the commandments. You prove my point very consistently.
You haven't disproven a single thing I have written. You just keep spitting words from your grab bag of "dross" "apartheid" and other terms that are useless.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
So the commandments that are incumbent on a woman, a man can keep them?
What gender are there of the commandments of mt sinai. Equality is important to universal application.
Those which apply to an unmarried man apply to a married man?
Yes........ Where is the ambiguity? Have you ever read the commandments claimed to be upon the tablets?
Those that apply to a soldier 3000 years ago apply to a blind infant today? Do you even read what you write?
IDF handbook is not bible.
So you have no reading comprehension skills in any context. You misrepresent what I said along with the biblical text. I'm in great company!
Yes..... I comprehend what I write of the 10 commandments being universal and are about personal responsibility.

If you keep the wisdom, you can learn and improve beyond the remaining dross.
The 10 are "THE commandments"? LOL. So when the text uses the word "command" in other contexts, I guess you say that that doesn't count.
Additions from scribes and pharisee are not THE commandments of moses (mt sinai)
And yet I showed you the legal opinions that say otherwise.
That's your problem whether belief or law, you prefer opinions that change the scope of personal responsibility. You care nothing of law or staying within the rules, you keep trying to find a method to circumvent civility.
You don't want to consider facts that disprove you. Got it.
Sure in your opinion, the apartheid is OK.
oooh. More reading problems from you. The word "personal" modified your interpretation of the bible. Can you not read at all?
The problem is, no one ever taught you that the individual choice to keep the rules, is personal.
That doesn't reply at all to anything I wrote. Good job running away.
Because you keep telling yourself that you can break the rules with impunity.
So you haven't studied the law and keep insisting that you know something about commandments when you don't.
Here, let me assist you:
1) I am the Lord thy god, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

2) Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

3) Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

4) Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.

5) Honor thy father and thy mother.

6) Thou shalt not murder.

7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8) Thou shalt not steal.

9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

10) Thou shalt not covet anything that belongs to thy neighbor.

Base commandments reflecting personal responsibility to all of mankind. No gender, no soldier, not much to debate.

Still as good now as they were when learned in egypt.

You haven't disproven a single thing I have written. You just keep spitting words from your grab bag of "dross" "apartheid" and other terms that are useless.
I have proven that you do not like to be civil.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
What gender are there of the commandments of mt sinai. Equality is important to universal application.
Which at mt. Sinai. You seem to think that there are only 10 from there. Well, if you look at those 10, you do see something important (assuming you want to stick with the texts literal wording) -- they are written in the masculine. I guess this means that they only apply to men.
Yes........ Where is the ambiguity? Have you ever read the commandments claimed to be upon the tablets?
Which version? You do know that there are 2 versions, right?
IDF handbook is not bible.
Good thing I didn't quote it. You really should stick with what was written.
Yes..... I comprehend what I write of the 10 commandments being universal and are about personal responsibility.
Except that they are not universal. They were given to one population, not others. Are you saying that it is a universal law that all must not do any creative work on Saturday?
Additions from scribes and pharisee are not THE commandments of moses (mt sinai)
Except that's not what I referred to. Try again.
That's your problem whether belief or law, you prefer opinions that change the scope of personal responsibility.
You are now confusion the concept of a published legal opinion and your personal opinion. You aren't very good at this.
You care nothing of law or staying within the rules, you keep trying to find a method to circumvent civility.
Except I keep showing how Israel follows the rules and you keep running away from the topic.
Sure in your opinion, the apartheid is OK.
Really? Show me where I said that.
The problem is, no one ever taught you that the individual choice to keep the rules, is personal.
What does that have to do with anything?
Because you keep telling yourself that you can break the rules with impunity.
No, I never told myself that. Care to guess again?
Here, let me assist you:
1) I am the Lord thy god, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

2) Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

3) Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

4) Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.

5) Honor thy father and thy mother.

6) Thou shalt not murder.

7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8) Thou shalt not steal.

9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

10) Thou shalt not covet anything that belongs to thy neighbor.

Base commandments reflecting personal responsibility to all of mankind. No gender, no soldier, not much to debate.
Yes gender (if you read them in the original) and you have just criminalized atheism and a whole mess of the world's religions.
Still as good now as they were when learned in egypt.
So your knowledge of geography and biblical text is as bad as your reading comprehension and logic.
I have proven that you do not like to be civil.
I have proven that you don't know anything.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
Which at mt. Sinai. You seem to think that there are only 10 from there. Well, if you look at those 10, you do see something important (assuming you want to stick with the texts literal wording) -- they are written in the masculine. I guess this means that they only apply to men.
You guess! That's the joke
Which version? You do know that there are 2 versions, right?
Up and down
Good thing I didn't quote it. You really should stick with what was written.
Guessing is your method
Except that they are not universal. They were given to one population, not others. Are you saying that it is a universal law that all must not do any creative work on Saturday?
mankind is the one population. I am not following your guessing
Except that's not what I referred to. Try again.
Why, you keep guessing
You are now confusion the concept of a published legal opinion and your personal opinion. You aren't very good at this.
Anyone can publish, i choose not too.
Except I keep showing how Israel follows the rules and you keep running away from the topic.
No you keep using opinions and guessing. The majority of mankind as represented by the UN not only created israel with UN res 181 but also expressed that illegal occupation and oppression is wrong. UN res 2334
Really? Show me where I said that.
You have argued with me and anyone reflecting that israel is an apartheid.
What does that have to do with anything?
The honest soul cannot falsely accuse as a matter of retaining personal responsibility
No, I never told myself that. Care to guess again?
I watch what you do, no guessing involved
Yes gender (if you read them in the original) and you have just criminalized atheism and a whole mess of the world's religions.
You keep guessing. I just shared what the commandments are.
So your knowledge of geography and biblical text is as bad as your reading comprehension and logic.
The arm pit known as israel is within palestine, mt sinai is egypt now and then.

""""Mount Sinai, also known as Jabal Musa, is a mountain on the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt. It is one of several locations claimed to be the biblical Mount Sinai, the place where, according to the Torah, Bible, and Quran, Moses received the Ten Commandments""""
I have proven that you don't know anything.
There you go again..... guessing.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
" I follow Legal Opinions"

Look Rose -- War criminal Bibi standing up and claiming to be following the rules of war is not a legal opinion that matters .. nor does you following the opinions you agree with negate the legal opinions of the UN .. and folks like the President of South Africa .. who have stated that Bibi is guilty of War crimes .. crimes against humanity .. and ethnic cleansing.

Do you follow the legal opinion of the the Third Rieich that the Jews were sub-human Rose ? like the opinion of Israwli Defense Minister that the Palestinians are "Animals"

Just because war criminal Facist leader gives a legal opinio does not make that opinion True ... and so you don't have to follow such opinions Rose .. and believe the Jews animals and the Palestinians are sub-human.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
*Mod Edit*
@rosends
"You don't understand" - says the one who didn't know about Ethnic Cleansing by the xenophobic genocidal YHWH. No wonder you are having such trouble understanding what war crimes and ethnic cleansing is - claiming to be an expert in Judaism but not knowing about Ethnic Cleansing by the God of Judaism .

Of course Zionism predates 1948 -- why are you pretending someone told you that it does not Rose - and what does this have to do with the Nakba Ethnic Cleansing conducted by the Zionists in 1948 .. in keeping with the Zionist ideology. How is it that a self proclaimed expert Zionism did not know about the Nakba ethnic Cleansing as per Zionist ideology ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rosends

Well-Known Member
" I follow Legal Opinions"

Look Rose -- War criminal Bibi standing up and claiming to be following the rules of war is not a legal opinion that matters .. nor does you following the opinions you agree with negate the legal opinions of the UN .. and folks like the President of South Africa .. who have stated that Bibi is guilty of War crimes .. crimes against humanity .. and ethnic cleansing.

Do you follow the legal opinion of the the Third Rieich that the Jews were sub-human Rose ? like the opinion of Israwli Defense Minister that the Palestinians are "Animals"

Just because war criminal Facist leader gives a legal opinio does not make that opinion True ... and so you don't have to follow such opinions Rose .. and believe the Jews animals and the Palestinians are sub-human.
I'm following the international law regarding war crimes. Your saying that a legal opinion informed by international law is "not a legal opinion that matters" and this is very revealing so thank you for that.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
"You don't understand" - says the one who didn't know about Ethnic Cleansing by the xenophobic genocidal YHWH.
No, you don't understand the biblical texts you are trying to bring up. I can post them and we can discuss them if you would like. How's your Hebrew?
Of course Zionism predates 1948 -- why are you pretending someone told you that it does not Rose - and what does this have to do with the Nakba Ethnic Cleansing conducted by the Zionists in 1948 .. in keeping with the Zionist ideology. How is it that a self proclaimed expert Zionism did not know about the Nakba ethnic Cleansing as per Zionist ideology ?
Try to follow the logic here, though I know it will be tough for you.
You wrote, "but you clearly know nothing about Zionism .. who's mandate was ethnic cleansing from the start .. beginning with the Nakba in 1948"

So the mandate was "from the start" and the nakba began in 1948. So if Zionism began well before 1948 (which you concede) and the nakba doesn't start until 1948, then there was no nakba from the beginning. Care to try again?

And did you ever wonder why Zionism includes citizenship for millions of Muslims in Israel? Why Zionism accepted the partition plan? Why Zionists PAID for land when they settled? Why Arab leaders told people to leave their lands and why Arab countries never integrated refugees after 1948 the way Israel absorbed the equivalent number of Jews who were forced to leave Arab countries?

Of course you haven't.
 

Orbit

I'm a planet
I'm following the international law regarding war crimes. Your saying that a legal opinion informed by international law is "not a legal opinion that matters" and this is very revealing so thank you for that.
You seem to disregard legal opinions that conflict with yours:


 

rosends

Well-Known Member
You seem to disregard legal opinions that conflict with yours:


Did you even read those? First, they aren't legal opinions but personal opinions. Take this paragraph:
"The ICJ considers that the complete blockade of Gaza – coupled with depriving civilians of water, food, medicine, electricity and fuel – may constitute the specific underlying act of “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction”, as per the genocide definition set out above. "

So they consider the complete blockade to be genocide.
Here's the problem -- Egypt controls part of the border and could open up whenever. Are they committing Genocide? I haven't seen anyone accuse them of that and yet they are part of the blockade.

Next, Israel hasn't deprived people of those things. Here





The piece also wrote, "
The distinguishing feature of genocide is that the perpetrator commits the specific underlying acts of the offence with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.

The Palestinian people constitute a national group for the purposes of the Genocide Convention. The Palestinians of the Gaza Strip constitute a substantial proportion of the Palestinian nation. "

Here's the problem -- the population of these people has INCREASED and Israel has demonstrated an interest (by virtue of warnings and protection for evacuating civilians) that it demonstrates an interest in keeping members of the national group ALIVE. So the definition, under the law, is, on its face, not satisfied.

Would you care to discuss the legal concepts and facts I raised?
 

Orbit

I'm a planet
I find them to be the same self-serving points that Israel uses to cast aspersions on the UN and human rights organizations.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
The distinguishing feature of genocide is that the perpetrator commits the specific underlying acts of the offence with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such. [emphasis added - JS]
And that is clearly not the intent of Israel's response to October 7th.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
" I follow Legal Opinions"

Look Rose -- War criminal Bibi standing up and claiming to be following the rules of war is not a legal opinion that matters .. nor does you following the opinions you agree with negate the legal opinions of the UN .. and folks like the President of South Africa .. who have stated that Bibi is guilty of War crimes .. crimes against humanity .. and ethnic cleansing.

Do you follow the legal opinion of the the Third Rieich that the Jews were sub-human Rose ? like the opinion of Israwli Defense Minister that the Palestinians are "Animals"

Just because war criminal Facist leader gives a legal opinio does not make that opinion True ... and so you don't have to follow such opinions Rose .. and believe the Jews animals and the Palestinians are sub-human.
Good works but even if other claim that jews are animals, does not mean that 'we' do.

i know others contest how i view jews but I love judaism and jews as torah enabled.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
Did you even read those? First, they aren't legal opinions but personal opinions. Take this paragraph:
"The ICJ considers that the complete blockade of Gaza – coupled with depriving civilians of water, food, medicine, electricity and fuel – may constitute the specific underlying act of “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction”, as per the genocide definition set out above. "
Thank you, at least now you can see and have read that such oppression is wrong.
So they consider the complete blockade to be genocide.
Because israel controls the whole concentration camp, even as egypt has a border, israel uses US to make sure egypt blocked it up completely.
The piece also wrote, "
The distinguishing feature of genocide is that the perpetrator commits the specific underlying acts of the offence with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.
Israel is trying to clear the palestinians out of israel. That ethnic cleansing has been ongoing and recorded for decades.
The Palestinian people constitute a national group for the purposes of the Genocide Convention. The Palestinians of the Gaza Strip constitute a substantial proportion of the Palestinian nation. "

Yep, but israel controls the concentration camp, by land, air and sea.

Even now, the location is under seige by israel.
Here's the problem -- the population of these people has INCREASED and Israel has demonstrated an interest (by virtue of warnings and protection for evacuating civilians) that it demonstrates an interest in keeping members of the national group ALIVE. So the definition, under the law, is, on its face, not satisfied.
The apartheid has created concentration camp gaza and with that obtuse oppression literally created the resistance movement and terrorist known as HAMAS.

Sad part now, is even more HAMAS will develop from this mess.
Would you care to discuss the legal concepts and facts I raised?
Sure, UN res 181 has been broken by israel for over half a century............ See UN res 2334 as evidence. When you can address the legal aspect of that then you can try and defend what is known as apartheid.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Israel is trying to clear the palestinians out of israel. That ethnic cleansing has been ongoing and recorded for decades.
You don't follow statistics very well, do you. No, no, you wouldn't. I shouldn't have thought otherwise. You have muffed everything else thus far...why would I assume that, of all things, you would be able to read a chart which shows how the Arab population has INCREASED over the years.
Yep, but israel controls the concentration camp, by land, air and sea.
Well, and Egypt (but who's counting). And in this "concentration camp" there are mansions, luxury car dealers and a cat cafe. Well, there WERE...
The apartheid has created concentration camp gaza and with that obtuse oppression literally created the resistance movement and terrorist known as HAMAS.
You aren't using words especially well so I have no idea what you are talking about and how it answers my point that "the population of these people has INCREASED and Israel has demonstrated an interest (by virtue of warnings and protection for evacuating civilians) that it demonstrates an interest in keeping members of the national group ALIVE. So the definition, under the law, is, on its face, not satisfied."
Sure, UN res 181 has been broken by israel for over half a century............ See UN res 2334 as evidence. When you can address the legal aspect of that then you can try and defend what is known as apartheid.
First of all, 2334 isn't about apartheid. It is about the question of legality of what the UN called settlements in what it called occupied territory. Second, if you want a dissection of 2334's flaws on a legal level, feel free to read through this and follow the footnotes to sources
UN Resolution 2334 | StandWithUs .

Was there anything else you needed me to google for you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top