[[Labret]]

one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...

Secular?

"the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty"

Zionism advocates theocracy plain and simple. Theocracy is the opposite of secular.

One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.

A secular state justified in the Torah? Why would it be? You do know what secular means right?

One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord.

Propagation of a religion via force. The brand of Christianity you see today was a result of the early church's complete and total annihilation of competing sects, such as the Gnostic, the Monophysites et all. After the Council of Nicaea, anyone group that did not adhere to the Nicean Creed was outlawed and dealt with by force. Christianity had its warlord, he was called "The Pope". You did things his way, or no way. Remember a guy called Martin Luther's reaction? Xtianity was spread by force, period. Judaism was not concerned with spreading the faith at all. Judaism belonged to the Jewish people and them alone. You did not convert the defeated, you destroyed them entirely. The Torah is replete with stories of God demanding genocide of entire peoples. No interest whatsoever in converting them. In the early days you did not convert to Judaism, you were born into Judaism. Although they did seem to have an affinity for little virgin girls.

Point being, all monotheism has its roots in force of one kind or another. Hence why I have an intense dislike of it. "mono", one. There can be only one, everyone else must die.

My favorite quote:

Numbers 31:1-18: "...And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded moses, and they slew all the [adult] males. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones...And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses...And Moses was angry with the officers of the host And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Ba'laam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Keep the little girls for yourself after you wipe out the entire population. Nice. Elohim is a god of looooove.

It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...

I'll go for that I guess, although social darwinism is a tough point to argue. I can use your argument to justify slavery as well. You are walking a slippery slope with social darwinism.

is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.

I think it is a combination of a whole lot of factors. I think it is largely theological. The Quran makes it quite clear what should happen to those that attack Islam.

Lock some Catholics in a room with a bunch of good ol southern boy evangelical Christians and lets see who comes out alive. I am not even quite sure what the point of your last comparison was.



Last edited by [Labret] at Sep 18 2003, 02:44 AM