New decapitation video of an alleged convert to Christianity

[Ibrahim]

. . if A says that his philosophy is deeper than the philosophy of B, this indicates some feeling of superiority . .

Bingo! Hubris is ugly.

That's why you're always talking up Protestant theology?

[Ibrahim]

The 10 commandments, the banning of usury, forgiveness of debt, were all universal ideas and come from Judaism.

Actually the Ten Commandments and much of early Jewish law have precedents the Hammurabic code. Certain ethical constraints are required for all civilized living.

Great, then we should get along well. But my main point in the previous message was to answer the Persian commentator who seems to imply that Hebrew law did not have depth in his opinion, thus inferior in some sense.

I thought he said Persian philosophy was "deeper" than ancient Jewish philosophy.

He further elaborated above, by saying this:

Was not comparing whose philosophy deeper, but saying Judaism has no Philosophical and spiritual dept

But even if A says that his philosophy is deeper than the philosophy of B, this indicates some feeling of superiority at some emotional level. There are many ways of understanding people. Understanding people's inner feelings is at as important as understanding their purely intellectual thoughts.

But I am correct in saying that he was talking about philosophy, and not law, as you claimed.


I think you should shelve your hobby of trying to figure out peoples' "inner feelings," but anyway, in principle is there something fundamentally wrong with thinking one school of philosophy is "deeper" or otherwise "better than" another?

[HAL9000]

The 10 commandments, the banning of usury, forgiveness of debt, were all universal ideas and come from Judaism.

Actually the Ten Commandments and much of early Jewish law have precedents the Hammurabic code. Certain ethical constraints are required for all civilized living.

Great, then we should get along well. But my main point in the previous message was to answer the Persian commentator who seems to imply that Hebrew law did not have depth in his opinion, thus inferior in some sense.

I thought he said Persian philosophy was "deeper" than ancient Jewish philosophy.

He further elaborated above, by saying this:

Was not comparing whose philosophy deeper, but saying Judaism has no Philosophical and spiritual dept

But even if A says that his philosophy is deeper than the philosophy of B, this indicates some feeling of superiority at some emotional level. There are many ways of understanding people. Understanding people's inner feelings is at as important as understanding their purely intellectual thoughts.

But I am correct in saying that he was talking about philosophy, and not law, as you claimed.


I think you should shelve your hobby of trying to figure out peoples' "inner feelings," but anyway, in principle is there something fundamentally wrong with thinking one school of philosophy is "deeper" or otherwise "better than" another?

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue. "Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism, let's stop playing with words, and concentrate with the meaning of what he said: if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior, and he might even be right, but it just shows what counts for him: not the joy of philosophical, intellectual, spiritual, artistic, cultural enlightenment for the sake of it, but to collect the prize, the relative superiority. I don't mind finishing last by the way, I just want to emphasize his needs.

[Marcus]

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue. "Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism, let's stop playing with words, and concentrate with the meaning of what he said: if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior, and he might even be right, but it just shows what counts for him: not the joy of philosophical, intellectual, spiritual, artistic, cultural enlightenment for the sake of it, but to collect the prize, the relative superiority. I don't mind finishing last by the way, I just want to emphasize his needs.

The codification of the Tao, delivered to humanity by the Jews however one chooses to rationalize the event, is one of the great, watershed events in all of human history.

Other than Christianity and the Reformation, where has anything else so influenced the course of human affairs?

[HAL9000]

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue. "Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism, let's stop playing with words, and concentrate with the meaning of what he said: if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior, and he might even be right, but it just shows what counts for him: not the joy of philosophical, intellectual, spiritual, artistic, cultural enlightenment for the sake of it, but to collect the prize, the relative superiority. I don't mind finishing last by the way, I just want to emphasize his needs.

The codification of the Tao, delivered to humanity by the Jews however one chooses to rationalize the event, is one of the great, watershed events in all of human history.

Other than Christianity and the Reformation, where has anything else so influenced the course of human affairs?

It doesn't matter whose book is better because even if you buy the best book in the world and even if you go to the best school in the world, unless you personally have the capacity to be a good student there, being in the school and owning the book won't help you and you will flunk out.

[HAL9000]

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue. "Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism, let's stop playing with words, and concentrate with the meaning of what he said: if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior, and he might even be right, but it just shows what counts for him: not the joy of philosophical, intellectual, spiritual, artistic, cultural enlightenment for the sake of it, but to collect the prize, the relative superiority. I don't mind finishing last by the way, I just want to emphasize his needs.

The codification of the Tao, delivered to humanity by the Jews however one chooses to rationalize the event, is one of the great, watershed events in all of human history.

Other than Christianity and the Reformation, where has anything else so influenced the course of human affairs?

It doesn't matter whose book is better because even if you buy the best book in the world and even if you go to the best school in the world, unless you personally have the capacity to be a good student there, being in the top school and owning the best book won't help you and you will flunk out.

[Ibrahim]

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue. "Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism, let's stop playing with words, and concentrate with the meaning of what he said: if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior, and he might even be right, but it just shows what counts for him: not the joy of philosophical, intellectual, spiritual, artistic, cultural enlightenment for the sake of it, but to collect the prize, the relative superiority. I don't mind finishing last by the way, I just want to emphasize his needs.

The codification of the Tao, delivered to humanity by the Jews however one chooses to rationalize the event, is one of the great, watershed events in all of human history.

Other than Christianity and the Reformation, where has anything else so influenced the course of human affairs?

Ugh. C.S. Lewis' ham-fisted misuse of Chinese terminology to advance his Christian supremacist ideology is one of his less-famous literary crimes, but no less an affront to both good taste and good sense. Trumpeting the superior influence of the Reformation immediately after complaining that such observations are "hubris" is yet another offense.

As I stated earlier, the Jews did not codify any concepts that had not previously been espoused be earlier and, at the time, more advanced civilizations. The point, and this is always the point of revealed religions, is that they had direct access to the source. Not that they constructed new or outstanding philosophical models.

[Ibrahim]

But I am correct in saying that he was talking about philosophy, and not law, as you claimed.


I think you should shelve your hobby of trying to figure out peoples' "inner feelings," but anyway, in principle is there something fundamentally wrong with thinking one school of philosophy is "deeper" or otherwise "better than" another?

The lack of philosophical depth that he attributed to Judaism (hence Jews), is the issue.

If Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it does not follow that all Jews lack depth.

"Law" is just one loosely connected consequence of Judaism,

How is "law" a "consequence of Judaism?

let's stop playing with words,

Agreed.

if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior,

Perhaps. Though that certainly does not follow automatically from making the claim.

[HAL9000]

if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior,

Perhaps. Though that certainly does not follow automatically from making the claim.

No single indicator is enough. But from the context and the way he said it makes it clear (in view of his other claims of superiority). Anyway, enough said about AzeriLoveIran.

When I mentioned that the Mizrahi Jews were expelled from Arab countries and it was clear that had they not found Israel to go (some managed to go to France but most of the others had no other choice than Israel), they would have starved in the deserts or drowned in the sea. But AzeriLoveIran said "Oh, it's too bad they burned the bridges by leaving their native countries, now they cannot go back very easily". Basically, he was cynically playing games, only to prolong the discussion and extract blood.
Then he said that he "Googled" the Mizrahi Jews and he found no significant cultural contributions that the Mizrahi Jews made to their native countries. What does that have to do with the value of Mizrahi Jews as humans?

In his statement above, AzeriLoveIran also said that in addition to philosophical depth, Judaism also lacks spiritual depth. From context, it is clear that there are some serious gaps in his spirituality.

[Jnalum Persicum]

if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior,

Perhaps. Though that certainly does not follow automatically from making the claim.

No single indicator is enough. But from the context and the way he said it makes it clear (in view of his other claims of superiority). Anyway, enough said about AzeriLoveIran.

When I mentioned that the Mizrahi Jews were expelled from Arab countries and it was clear that had they not found Israel to go (some managed to go to France but most of the others had no other choice than Israel), they would have starved in the deserts or drowned in the sea. But AzeriLoveIran said "Oh, it's too bad they burned the bridges by leaving their native countries, now they cannot go back very easily". Basically, he was cynically playing games, only to prolong the discussion and extract blood.

Then he said that he "Googled" the Mizrahi Jews and he found no significant cultural contributions that the Mizrahi Jews made to their native countries. What does that have to do with the value of Mizrahi Jews as humans?

In his statement above, AzeriLoveIran also said that in addition to philosophical depth, Judaism also lacks spiritual depth. From context, it is clear that there are some serious gaps in his spirituality.

.

Do not need googling, am quite familiar with subject at hand

I suggested YOU guys Google and post any Middle Eastern Jewish that is anybody in ME history .. there is non

And

Yes,

what I meant was that ME Jews have lived in ME for 1000s of yrs, they endured ups and downs of history like everybody else .. they were integral part of ME people and culture, they still are in Iran.

Israel caused Arabs of Jewish faith to "involuntary" leave their 1000s of yrs home .. matter of fact many evidence that Zionist intentionally sabotaged Jewish life in Arab countries to force them to leave and come to Israel.


Judaism, and Arab-Islam (Wahhabi, Sunni sort of) are worldly religions .. heart of Judaism and Arab-Islam is ritualism & ceremonysm .. eat or don't eat this, how 2B berried, how to marry , how to have sex, how to slaughter animals and and and .. all these are worldly affairs, neither spirituality nor any philosophical dept, not even shallow ones, involved

Islam of Omar was shallow, it was only giants of Persian (Islam) philosophers who gave
the philosophical and spiritual dimension and dept to Sunni-Islam

Don't believe ? ?

Google and see almost all Islamic philosophers were Iranians


.

[Parodite]

Deciding that one philosopher is better than another is a matter of taste, no?

[Jnalum Persicum]

.

Deciding that one philosopher is better than another is a matter of taste, no ?

.

True it is a matter of taste

but

respectfully, Parodite

issue not which philosopher better

issue, there is no Hebrew tribe Jewish philosopher of world caliber in all Middle East last 5000 years that will show up in a WiKi search .. if there is , please name ONE


.

[Parodite]

issue, there is no Hebrew tribe Jewish philosopher of world caliber in all Middle East last 5000 years that will show up in a WiKi search .. if there is , please name ONE

Maybe you can go one by one mentioned here and make a weighed judgement as to their moderate or perhaps significant philosophical contributions.

You can skip the crap saying they had all their ideas from others; all philosophy is the product of individuals in and across cultures adding to the bigger carpet via cross-pollination. Unless one claims that The Words of One Philosopher-Poet in Particular directly came from the highest source as Revelation - which would be a delusional and pretentious thought and better be dismissed.

[Enki]

.

Deciding that one philosopher is better than another is a matter of taste, no ?

.

True it is a matter of taste

but

respectfully, Parodite

issue not which philosopher better

issue, there is no Hebrew tribe Jewish philosopher of world caliber in all Middle East last 5000 years that will show up in a WiKi search .. if there is , please name ONE


.

Moses Maimonides, Jesus Christ,

[Jnalum Persicum]

.

.

.

Deciding that one philosopher is better than another is a matter of taste, no ?

.

True it is a matter of taste

but

respectfully, Parodite

issue not which philosopher better

issue, there is no Hebrew tribe Jewish philosopher of world caliber in all Middle East last 5000 years that will show up in a WiKi search .. if there is , please name ONE


.

Moses, Maimonides, Jesus Christ,

.

will not comment about Moses or Jesus , but they no philosophers rather revolutionary

but

Enki, respectfully, Mūsā bin Maymūn was more a Torah scholars and rabbinical arbiter .. his philosophical work was mostly to explain matter in Judaism but not to open doors to (and create) new schools and thinking .. debate not Jewish philosophy, debate Jewish philosophers

.
His fourteen-volume Mishneh Torah still carries canonical authority as a codification of Talmudic law. In the Yeshiva world he is known as "haNesher haGadol" (the great eagle) in recognition of his outstanding status as a bona fide exponent of the Oral Torah.
.

He for sure an authority for Judaism but he no philosopher of world status entering realm of beyond world of Judaism .. debate not who great Rabbi, debate who Giants of universal spirituality and philosophy shaping religions and spirituality


.

[Ibrahim]

if he says Jewish philosophy lacks depth, it may even be true, but he said it in order to feel superior,

Perhaps. Though that certainly does not follow automatically from making the claim.

No single indicator is enough. But from the context and the way he said it makes it clear (in view of his other claims of superiority). Anyway, enough said about AzeriLoveIran.

When I mentioned that the Mizrahi Jews were expelled from Arab countries and it was clear that had they not found Israel to go (some managed to go to France but most of the others had no other choice than Israel), they would have starved in the deserts or drowned in the sea. But AzeriLoveIran said "Oh, it's too bad they burned the bridges by leaving their native countries, now they cannot go back very easily". Basically, he was cynically playing games, only to prolong the discussion and extract blood.
Then he said that he "Googled" the Mizrahi Jews and he found no significant cultural contributions that the Mizrahi Jews made to their native countries. What does that have to do with the value of Mizrahi Jews as humans?

In his statement above, AzeriLoveIran also said that in addition to philosophical depth, Judaism also lacks spiritual depth. From context, it is clear that there are some serious gaps in his spirituality.

See the problem here?

[Ibrahim]

.

.

.

Deciding that one philosopher is better than another is a matter of taste, no ?

.

True it is a matter of taste

but

respectfully, Parodite

issue not which philosopher better

issue, there is no Hebrew tribe Jewish philosopher of world caliber in all Middle East last 5000 years that will show up in a WiKi search .. if there is , please name ONE


.

Moses, Maimonides, Jesus Christ,

.

will not comment about Moses or Jesus , but they no philosophers rather revolutionary

This is Ye Olde True Scotsman fallacy. Jesus and Maimonides are certainly pertinent examples.