namelesstavern.net

I just ran across this great article that gave me that warm fuzzy feeling. Thought I'd share it with you.

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/publication ... _10/secret

Thank Zeus that my work server filter won't let me view it...

Agrajag wrote:Thank Zeus that my work server filter won't let me view it...

Why is that? It's just an article about a family of very intelligent, open-minded Jews. It's actually very interesting.

Narrock wrote:

Agrajag wrote:Thank Zeus that my work server filter won't let me view it...

Why is that? It's just an article about a family of very intelligent, open-minded Jews. It's actually very interesting.

Oxymoron

...you think Jews are close-minded, or unintelligent?

Jay wrote:

Narrock wrote:

Agrajag wrote:Thank Zeus that my work server filter won't let me view it...

Why is that? It's just an article about a family of very intelligent, open-minded Jews. It's actually very interesting.

Oxymoron

Wouldn't someone calling this an oxymoron, in fact, be an oxymoron?

I think he means it's an oxymoron calling an article about jews liking jesus being interesting

Which isn't an oxymoron at all.

Not because you aren't entitled to your opinion, mainly because you really need to learn what an oxymoron is.

Generally speaking, yes. I'm aware there's exceptions to the norm, but there is a norm. I know too many Jewish parents who would kill their kids for dating a non jewish guy. Their company is never diverse, always a bunch of other Jewish people. They killed Jesus. I mean hey, he might have been a bit loco thinking he was the son of god and the messiah but he was overall a nice guy AND one of them. What about food? There's so many stipulations to the food. No pork. You can eat meat, but not with it's corresponding animal product (ie cheese on a burger).

Intelligence. If you are a christian or catholic, then Jews look really dumb. Their messiah (Jesus) came forth and they'd been waiting so long for him. He finally comes and they nail his ass to a cross. All for what? Because he claimed to be the messiah. That really has nothing to do withmy view of their intelligence. I base that on the fact that every conversation I have with most Jewish adults they tend to change the subjct as opposed to thinking about stuff and responding.

I meant the statement "an open minded, intelligent Jewish family" is an oxymoron.

And I meant that not being open minded to the fact that there are open minded Jewish people was the oxymoron. Having an uninformed opinion may not constitute being open minded. But, I assumed Jay is an intelligent person and knew that not all Jewish people are not that way. I assumed he was intelligent because hes Asian.

Harrison wrote:...you think Jews are close-minded, or unintelligent?

no but I hear if you glue pennies to the freeway they'll run out there and get smacked by the cars and its entertaining.

Jay wrote:I meant the statement "an open minded, intelligent Jewish family" is an oxymoron.

Openminded is not the opposite of intelligent.

Openminded is not the opposite of Jewish.

Intelligent is not the opposite of Jewish.

Still not seeing it.

Donnel wrote:

Jay wrote:I meant the statement "an open minded, intelligent Jewish family" is an oxymoron.

Openminded is not the opposite of intelligent.

Openminded is not the opposite of Jewish.

Intelligent is not the opposite of Jewish.

Still not seeing it.

One person who is not open minded calling someone else not open minded is a hypocrite... Oops! I am wrong, you are right! There, I said it.

self

They killed Jesus

Hmm... I always thought is was the Italians (Romans) that actually killed Jesus. Anyway, with all this bickering back and forth, did anybody actually read the article?

Narrock wrote:

They killed Jesus

Hmm... I always thought is was the Italians (Romans) that actually killed Jesus. Anyway, with all this bickering back and forth, did anybody actually read the article?

Pilate gave Jesus back over to the jews who did the beating though the actual nailing was most likely done by romans.

Agrajag wrote:

Donnel wrote:

Jay wrote:I meant the statement "an open minded, intelligent Jewish family" is an oxymoron.

Openminded is not the opposite of intelligent.

Openminded is not the opposite of Jewish.

Intelligent is not the opposite of Jewish.

Still not seeing it.

One person who is not open minded calling someone else not open minded is a hypocrite... Oops! I am wrong, you are right! There, I said it.

self

I think YOU need to learn what true open mindedness is.

I doesn't mean that you allow yourself to be pushed back and forth like a branch in the wind.

It means allowing yourself to be presented with ideas without immediate dismissal. When an idea conflicts with my faith however then it leaves little room in my mind for legitimacy.

I am not close minded in the least. I just choose what I allow to stay in my mind.

Donnel wrote:

Narrock wrote:

They killed Jesus

Hmm... I always thought is was the Italians (Romans) that actually killed Jesus. Anyway, with all this bickering back and forth, did anybody actually read the article?

Pilate gave Jesus back over to the jews who did the beating though the actual nailing was most likely done by romans.

After that he was well known for creating a new method of exercising.

Donnel wrote:

Jay wrote:I meant the statement "an open minded, intelligent Jewish family" is an oxymoron.

Openminded is not the opposite of intelligent.

Openminded is not the opposite of Jewish.

Intelligent is not the opposite of Jewish.

Still not seeing it.

Let me break it down for you. Bear in mind, this is just apointof view.

I don't think Jewish people are open minded. When you say "An open minded Jewish person" to me, that's an oxymoron, like Jumbo shrimp.

Take that same sentence, replace "open minded" with "intelligent".

Jay wrote:I know too many Jewish parents who would kill their kids for dating a non jewish guy.

That happened to me a couple of years ago Met a young Jewish woman in Manhattan, and when her parents met me months later they reallllly weren't too keen on her dating a gentile.

Don't get me wrong, as there is nothing wrong with wanting to preserve cultures and traditions. It just would have been nice to have known ahead of time

Satirical comments lose their effects when you have to explain em btw.

Sorry to disagree with you Donnel, but rejecting new ideas, regardless of their merit, simply because they happen to disagree with whatyou already believe anyway is just about the definitions of close-mindedness.

I know you're one of the 4004 BC earth created crowd. However, to believe that, you have to ignore literally mountains of geologic and physical evidence against the concept. Likewise believing in a global flood, etc. etc. etc. That, to me at least, is being close-minded to reality.

You have every right to believe what you wish, of course, but...

-Arlos

I know you're one of the 4004 BC earth created crowd. However, to believe that, you have to ignore literally mountains of geologic and physical evidence against the concept. Likewise believing in a global flood, etc. etc. etc. That, to me at least, is being close-minded to reality.

I know that was directed at Donnel, but I need to put in my 2cp. Well, I'll take that with a grain of salt, since Radiometric and Carbon dating has been proven to be extremely inaccurate over and over and over again. And no, I don't want to get into a copy-n-paste contest.

Donnel wrote:I think YOU need to learn what true open mindedness is.

I doesn't mean that you allow yourself to be pushed back and forth like a branch in the wind.

It means allowing yourself to be presented with ideas without immediate dismissal. When an idea conflicts with my faith however then it leaves little room in my mind for legitimacy.

I am not close minded in the least. I just choose what I allow to stay in my mind.

First off, the not being open minded wasn't directed at you. Second, I admitted to being wrong, yet you keep on it. Dwell much?

Narrock wrote:

I know you're one of the 4004 BC earth created crowd. However, to believe that, you have to ignore literally mountains of geologic and physical evidence against the concept. Likewise believing in a global flood, etc. etc. etc. That, to me at least, is being close-minded to reality.

I know that was directed at Donnel, but I need to put in my 2cp. Well, I'll take that with a grain of salt, since Radiometric and Carbon dating has been proven to be extremely inaccurate over and over and over again. And no, I don't want to get into a copy-n-paste contest.

Its been said over and over that dating methods are not perfect. However when you date the same object over and over with different methods and you get roughly the same answer, you more or less know its at least close. We are not talking perfect but within thousands of years. If you date a rock to 100,000,000 years old with Radiometric dating using multiple different isotopes, and they are all within the same say 10,000 years, then the most likely case is that the rock is roughly 100,000,000 years old. Sure you can try and make cases that radioactive decay isn't constant but its very unlikely that all the different elements were breaking down at varying speed but just happened to all match up when the test was run. Possible? sure, but very unlikely.