1:00 Facebook
2:00 Analysing ideas through the written medium
3:00 The loneliness of the political activist with a revolutionary idea operating in a civilisation already degenerate, decadent, suffering from dementia and in decline
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2020/02/jon-vance-says-he-is-no-longer-secular.html
5:00 The cost of belonging
7:00 You don't have to be Muslim to support Secular Koranism.
10:00 Adopting Secular \Koranism would give you the First Amendment.
11:00 Muslims are afraid to discuss Secular Koranism.
13:00 The exchange Adassamad Clarke and Claire Khaw had on Secular Koranism
Abdassamad Clarke the Muslim scholar blocks Claire Khaw from his Facebook page
14:00 Manuel
15:00 Zakir Naik
15:00 Jon accuses me of being so naive that I think I will find a magic rabbi who will care about gentiles and confirm that the Islam is more Noahide than Christianity. Of course not. I know they would have to be incentivised to say the right thing.
17:00 Jon's accusation of me wanting to "fuse Judaism with Islam" without even having read the Torah. I honestly don't know what he is accusing me of or what he means.
18:00 Sexual offences under Secular Koranism
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2020/02/secular-koranism-loses-adherent-because.html
19:00 Religion and Recreational Sex: sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?
20:00 Verse in Koran implicitly accepts the existence of brothels
22:00 My Strategy
27:00 Philosophical discussion
28:00 Doooovid's category error that Secular Koranism is a sect of Islam. It is a New School of Sharia.
29:00 Secular Koranism alarms ordinary Muslims.
30:00 You don't have to be Muslim to support Secular Koranism.
31:00 Matriarchy
35:00 Facebook
Theological abstractions are not worth worrying about. In my experience they are a sort of placeholder for something real that is never discussed.
38:00 Christians always won the debate against Jews and Muslims with violence and state intimidation eg blasphemy laws, when they were of course the ones most guilty of blasphemy because Christians are supposed to affirm that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God. Saying this is not only Supreme Blasphemy, it is Ultimate Idolatry - worshipping a heap of lies that you created and, worst of all, forcing others with violence to believe in all that Trinitarian shit.
39:00 The corrupt bargain between Christians and their corrupt church
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2020/02/when-i-bumped-into-archbishop-of.html
41:00 Having principles
42:00 Idolatry
43:00 Abusing the meaning of words
45:00 The principle of the thing
46:00 Jewish joke about God
49:00 Am I Jewish?
51:00 The nature of faith
52:00 Matriarchy
53:00 Patriarchy
54:00 Sexual corruption leads to moral corruption.
55:00 The Bubonic Plague
56:00 The atheist Chinese with only one child
57:00 Demographics is destiny.
58:00 Pestilence
59:00 Dietary restrictions
1:00:00 Global Secular Koranism
1:01:00 Islamic rules of warfare
1:02:00 Christianity is the odd one out of the Abrahamic faiths.
1:03:00 New Testament
1:04:00 The corruptible priesthood
1:05:00 Jews and Muslims should jointly declare Christianity kaput.
Proposed joint letter from Jews and Muslims to Christians warning them of the abomination of idolatry
1:07:00 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shituf#Medieval_Jewish_views
Jewish views, as codified in Jewish law, are split between those who see Christianity as outright idolatry and those who see Christianity as shituf. While Christians view their worship of a trinity as monotheistic, Judaism generally rejects this view.
The Talmud warns against causing an idolater to take oaths. The commentators living in Christian Germany in the 12th century, called Tosafists, permitted Jews to bring a Christian partner to court in partnership during a breakup even though the Christian would take an oath by God, which to Christians would include Jesus, by saying that so long as another deity is not mentioned explicitly, there is no forbidden oath taking place, but only an association. Although all of the Tosafists agreed that partnerships that may lead to such an oath may not be entered into originally, they disagree as to once such a partnership exists whether or not one may go to court in order to not to lose his portion of the partnership and even though such an oath is a side-effect. In a terse comment, they wrote:
It is permissible to [cause a gentile's oath through litigation with one's non-Jewish partner because] today all swear in the name of the saints to whom no divinity is ascribed. Even though they also mention God's name and have in mind another thing, in any event no idolatrous name is actually said, and they also have the Creator of the world in mind. Even though they associate (shituf) God's name with "something else", we do not find that it is forbidden to cause others to associate (shituf), and there is no issue of placing a stumbling block before the blind (see Leviticus 19:14) [by entering into litigation with the non-Jewish business partner, thereby causing him to take an oath] because Noachides were not warned about it.
In the 16th Century, the terse comment is explained as follows by Moses Isserles, where it is seemingly expanded to allowing partnerships in the first place:
Today, it is permitted [to form a partnership with Christians], because when they swear on their holy scriptures called the Evangelion, they do not hold it to be divine. Even though when they mention God they mean Jesus, they do not mention idolatry since they really mean the Creator of heaven and earth.
Even though they mention jointly (shituf) God's name and another name, there is no prohibition to cause someone to jointly mention [or associate] (shituf) God with another... since this association is not forbidden to gentiles.
1:08:00 Would it be permissible for a Jew to go to the top of Florence Duomo
1:09:00 The Ten Commandments do forbid idolatry.
1:10:00
No comments:
Post a Comment