[skinster]

Yes, ZN, the Palestinians know that the terrorist organization, the IDF, will kill them, whether they protest about being forced to live in a concentration camp or whether they don't; every child under 10 who is still living there has experienced three large-scale and horrific wars upon them. They know Gaza is a factory for the IDF terrorist org to test its weapons on. It has no future for the people living in it, so Palestinians who are imprisoned there have chosen to die whilst standing up, why expect them to die laying down?

I see you edited your "Yes" answer to include "it's their own fault / fuck them". Well, actually it's not their fault. 80% of the people living in Gaza are refugees, who were driven to that strip of land after zionist militias ethnically cleansed them from their homes in Palestine in the 1940s. Most of the people living there or their parents at least have had their homes stolen by people like you. They are refugees and they didn't make themselves refugees, the terrorist orgs that had other names back then but now call themselves 'The IDF' drove them out.

[colliric]

Goddamn it ZN.

And you wonder why I feel like quoting Jesus all the time whenever you and @Ter talk like that.

Stop being so supportive of widespread Eye For An Eye plain Murder of children....

[danholo]

Nobody is supporting eye for an eye (except Hamas). ZN is calling for decicive victory and that's called scorched earth. But for Israel it's realpolitik. If someone attacks you, you eliminate the threat. In war, you protect your own. In some cases it might be more eyes, equal eyes or less eyes but I guess you haven't thought that far as what constitutes military tactics and what some certain operational goals might be? Of course not because all you can read is "eye for an eye" when that wasn't the argument at all.

Very simple and Jesus agrees 100%.

Israel is valuing its citizens more than enemy civilians

Fortunately indeed. Can't say that for the more "civilized" countries who saceifice their own citizens for others.

[colliric]

Very simple and Jesus agrees 100%.

Nope. Jesus said "Suffer not the Children(and clearly loved children both Jew and Goy) and failed to support the Sicario and Zelotes in their desire to remove the Romans from power violently even after the Romans had already done the Thousand Crucifixions incident in Jerusalem. Of cause he literally destroyed the Sanhedrin ideologically "from within the Jewish community itself".

He also said to ignore military news from foreign lands.

If someone attacks you, you eliminate the threat

Jesus said "If someone hits you, turn and offer them the other cheek" and "you must love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you".

So no he wouldn't agree. If the Jews followed his advice admittedly the IDF would be disbanded and Mossad would cease to exist. The Kinneret would also be gone. The Jews would be living in foreign lands again. Which I admit they have a right to try and stay there at least, but they should at least try and not kill children(even if that child is holding a knife vs your guns) and certainly not celebrate it like ZN obviously was.

[Zionist Nationalist]

Jesus was an idiot

he got himself killed eventually so he wasnt very smart guy

turning the other cheek is bullshit

if someone beats me I need to let him beat me even more?

no way Im gonna beat the shit out of him until he begs for mercy

[colliric]

he got himself killed eventually so he wasnt very smart guy

He was clearly way way smarter than the Sanhedrin was....

The Sanhedrin were idiotic enough to arrest a Jew at 3AM and just plain murder a Jew Rabbi claiming to be the Messiah on Passover and break the no "hand a Jew to Goyim" Torah law. Then think they could get away with it. They clearly believed his Talmidim wouldn't act like normal Jews after their Rabbi was murdered(Crush forever the bastards who broke the Torah!) and that "no one would notice it anyway".

..... And then they wondered why the Temple was totally gone "brick by brick" for all eternity just as he said it would be.

[Zionist Nationalist]

I dont believe in any religion

all of this seem pointless to me whatever its Jesus Mohammed or Moses
same bullshit

[danholo]

Nope. Jesus said "Suffer not the Children(and clearly loved children both Jew and Goy) and failed to support the Sicario and Zelotes in their desire to remove the Romans from power violently even after the Romans had already done the Thousand Crucifixions incident in Jerusalem. Of cause he literally destroyed the Sanhedrin ideologically "from within the Jewish community itself".

OK but I don't see how this contradicts what I said: It was the Jews under occupation so wouldn't this teaching apply more to the Palestinians in this case? Or are there double standards here where Jews are supposed to be non-violent towards the occupier while non-Jews can be violent? Or was this teaching time-specific or not?

He also said to ignore military news from foreign lands.

He said a lot of things, yes, but he is no authority on halachic matters. He was and still isn't the only Jew to have been highly critical of what became of the Jewish people in those times.

[Patrickov]

I think the value of this thread has gone so low that I fear "those having views of ZN and ability of implementing so should just be annihilated" has become a good point.

[Patrickov]

Taiwan is the better example.

Taiwan is not actually that different from China. Rule of Law there is not as strong as Hong Kong (which was under British rule for many years)

[skinster]

If someone attacks you, you eliminate the threat. In war, you protect your own.

In which case Palestinians should be eliminating all of those zionists who came to their land and stole it along with their homes, amirite.

[Hindsite]

It does no good to misquote or quote Jesus out of context, because it makes the saying mean something different that originally intended.
Misquoting or quoting God out of context was also a trick of Satan to deceive mankind.

[colliric]

It does no good to misquote or quote Jesus out of context, because it makes the saying mean something different that originally intended.
Misquoting or quoting God out of context was also a trick of Satan to deceive mankind.

In the wilderness temptation, Satan misquoted scriptures without giving the correct context.

I agree with you, I was hopefully correcting Danholo's obvious errors. Jesus was against all violence.

Hallelujah. Amen.

[Albert]

That aspect is still up for a debate for me. Christ did use force in the temple to get rid of the money lenders. In his second coming he will arrive with a sword and his army.

I think there is a deeper meaning to turning the other cheek, I do not think Jesus mean not to defend oneself or to let injustice continue. Hence he did not use an example of; When someone stabs you with sword, let them stab you again.

Edit:
That quote as far as I remember Jesus was referring to justice. Whereas in Jewish tradition eye for an eye was punishment dealt for a crime. Jesus was trying to show another way with that metaphor or parable. Best example of that can be seen when he let a woman found in adultery go. Traditional Jewish punishment for that crime was death by stoning, yet Jesus let her go. But he did not sent her back to her husband for he said one can divorce his wife for adultery and one has to respect marriage.

So perhaps here it is shown what Jesus meant by turning the other cheek and forgiveness in practice.

[colliric]

I always interpreted it as Jesus preeching non-violent resistance. That's how it appears to be understood by most religious experts.

When he turned over the table of the money changes and drove them out, he wasn't objecting to their business, he was violently objecting to exactly where it was taking place. They were breaking the Torah. He had to forcefully remove them to make a point. He fashioned a whip from chords. This isn't talking about you getting attacked for standing up for what you believe in, it's referring to having to use force to enforce the Torah when they were corruptly breaking it.

There's also the fact Simon Peter carried a sword presumably during most of Jesus minstry (or at least when they were aware of the Sanhedrin's intentions to kill Jesus).

Fact is we are wading into Jewish culture ultimately and they have different standards of what comprises non-violence. I interpret this as the disciples being "prepared for all (Sanhedrin) eventualities, but preference being non-violent" and I think that is the correct way. Jesus clearly preached non-violent resistance, but it was in a very Jewish "be prepared anyway" manner.

[Hindsite]

Jesus was an idiot

he got himself killed eventually so he wasnt very smart guy

turning the other cheek is bullshit

if someone beats me I need to let him beat me even more?

no way Im gonna beat the shit out of him until he begs for mercy

As Albert pointed out "turning the other cheek" was a reference to forgiveness and an attempt to prevent the situation from escalating into a brawl.
Praise the Lord.

[Crantag]

Nettanyahu seems to have barely avoided a snap election.

The reason for the election threat?

The dissension of fascist Israeli politicians, who said he isn't right wing enough, and called for higher measures of Israeli state terror.

Nettanyahu managed to appease them, so expect a renewed round of Israeli war crimes soon.

[skinster]

Yup. Seems he's backed off carpet-bombing Gaza again, temporarily, for the sake of election bs. There were Israelis protesting in the street for more war in this last week. Israel is such a sick country.

[colliric]

It's very dissapointing to watch.

It's a clusterfuck at the moment. Intifada incoming I suspect.

[danholo]

In which case Palestinians should be eliminating all of those zionists who came to their land and stole it along with their homes, amirite.

What do you mean should? They already have, and still are. Palestinians have been fighting an imaginary foe ("thief") for decades, and then they complain when their violent campaigns are foiled time and again.