[abu_rashid]

No, you can't ...
The original covenant was with Abraham, it was subsequently renewed with Israel himself ... Hagar's child was an after thought.

The sign of the covenant was circumcision, Abraham & Ismael (pbut) were circumcised together to seal the covenant, this is from the Torah itself!

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised
...
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. (Genesis 17:10,14)

And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son. (Genesis 17:25-26)

The replacing of Ismael with Isaac (pbut) was the after thought, that the Jews later did to restrict the covenant to themselves. This is also clear in the story of Abraham's (pbuh) sacrifice, where it originally said he took his only son (which could only ever have been Ismael (pbuh)), but was later reworked to insert Isaac (pbuh) in there. The Bible is replete with these kinds of later replacements, whenever a certain linage fell out of favour, all of a sudden the scribes started writing them out or even making them enemies. In fact this the entire story of Judaism.

It's kind of a Judaism lite ... hits on all the popular highlights and fills in the blanks with lots of prayer ...

What is "lite" about it?

[Zamuel]

No, you can't ...

Hagar and Ishmael Sent Away

8 The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast. 9 But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, 10 and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.”

11 The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 12 But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring[a] will be reckoned. 13 I will make the son of the slave into a nation also, because he is your offspring.”

14 Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the Desert of Beersheba.

15 When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went off and sat down about a bowshot away, for she thought, “I cannot watch the boy die.” And as she sat there, she[b] began to sob.

17 God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, “What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. 18 Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation.”

19 Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink.

20 God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. 21 While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt.

Abraham's covenant was subsequently renewed with Israel himself ... Hagar's child was an after thought. he had no role in this project. He was supperflous and he knew it and maybe he resented it. Yes he was cared for, and protected if need be, as his father was promised

Ishmael was not PLANNED as part of the development of Israel, he and his mother introcuced unacceptable distraction and possibly errant interference that could not be forseen ... They had to go and so they went, without any of the elaborate promises of ruling the stars in the sky or obligation to serve Yawah devoutely ... The Israel project involved a lot of teaching and breeding and strange circumstances before it found itself living next to gods tent in the desert for 40 years ... Guess who wasn't in on any of that ? Gods promise regarding Ishmael was separate. Ishmael was NOT part of the Judaic development plan. AND Ishmae; knew this and most likely resented it. you take it from there ...

Zam

[Syph]

From inventing the javelin, killing all the big game, and then going on genocidal rampages, the continent of Europe has provided the most cannibalistic ideologies ever seen.

You are a fool if you think this is unique to Europeans. Violence and especially mob mentality is a part of human nature and a massive problem wherever humans live.

What is truly unique about Europe was the Great Divergence. Europe and Europe alone overcame the pre-modern growth constraints to form the most advanced civilisation compared to its competitors in human history surpassing Qing China, Mughal India, Tokogawa Japan and the Ottoman Empire.

If said miracle had happened anywhere else the consequences would have been broadly similar.

They are destroying the earth with pollution and social alienation (which causes misery, poverty, and resource waste) and spreading industrial disease to the four corners of the earth.

Again, short term human thinking due to a 80 year lifespan. The outcome would have been broadly similar under any other pre-eminent power.

Let's take a really clear, cold look at all the evil that has come out of Europe...

You can't examine the evil in isolation to the good. Without the Great Divergence it's likely we'd still be living in a world as industrialised as the Victorian Era.

[Harmattan]

The USA and Israel are two of Europe's Frankenstein monsters. That so much of our media is made by dr. Frankenstein, keeps us dumb and distracted from our own survival.

Let's take a really clear, cold look at all the evil that has come out of Europe...

So why didn't you move to a more civilized country such as Saudi Arabia or Iran already?

I am lobbying my government to allow French citizens to forgo their rights to their nationality. This way I will publicly offer money to any French citizen who wants to stop being French and leave France, and I will make sure to ease their departure and their integration in their new home country. All western countries should do the same.

I am also suggesting them a temporary ban on new mosques and on Muslim events. The ban will be lifted ten years after the latest religious murder attempt (i.e. never). All of this in order for Islam to prove that it can peacefully coexist in the west.

[Besoeker]

No, you can't ...
The original covenant was with Abraham, it was subsequently renewed with Israel himself ... Hagar's child was an after thought.

The sign of the covenant was circumcision, Abraham & Ismael (pbut) were circumcised together to seal the covenant, this is from the Torah itself!

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised
...
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. (Genesis 17:10,14)

And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son. (Genesis 17:25-26)

The replacing of Ismael with Isaac (pbut) was the after thought, that the Jews later did to restrict the covenant to themselves. This is also clear in the story of Abraham's (pbuh) sacrifice, where it originally said he took his only son (which could only ever have been Ismael (pbuh)), but was later reworked to insert Isaac (pbuh) in there. The Bible is replete with these kinds of later replacements, whenever a certain linage fell out of favour, all of a sudden the scribes started writing them out or even making them enemies. In fact this the entire story of Judaism.

It's kind of a Judaism lite ... hits on all the popular highlights and fills in the blanks with lots of prayer ...

What is "lite" about it?[/quote]

What is the point of circumscision, particularly these days?

[Pants-of-dog]

I am also suggesting them a temporary ban on new mosques and on Muslim events. The ban will be lifted ten years after the latest religious murder attempt (i.e. never). All of this in order for Islam to prove that it can peacefully coexist in the west.

Unfortunately for you, the French constitution explicitly states that the French governemtn cannot restrict religious expression like this.

[Harmattan]

Unfortunately for you, the French constitution explicitly states that the French governemtn cannot restrict religious expression like this.

It is a matter of interpretation of the law: exceptions are always acceptable provided they are legitimated by superior constitutional interests. And we are only talking about a temporary ban; after all Islam just has to stop killing people, is it so much to ask? Are not we already restricting freedom of speech to prevent violence?

If things come to worse and the constitutional court rejects it, we can change the constitution. What we cannot do however is to let this intolerant and morbid ideology prosper in our countries. Islam is mutually exclusive with freedom, just like Nazism was. We have to make a choice between the religious freedom of Muslims and the freedoms of those oppressed by Islam.

[Pants-of-dog]

Seeing as Islam has little to no power in France to oppress anyone, it seems obvious that you do not need to engage in illiberal practices such as restricting freedom of religion.

And I also think you would have a very hard time to argue that a peaceful Muslim worship service is endangering anyone.

[Harmattan]

Seeing as Islam has little to no power in France to oppress anyone, it seems obvious that you do not need to engage in illiberal practices such as restricting freedom of religion.

And I also think you would have a very hard time to argue that a peaceful Muslim worship service is endangering anyone.

I proved to you that many people are oppressed and killed by fanatics of Islam in France, but you deny it.

And the problem is not the religious service itself but the indoctrination: Islam always brings religious violence and intolerance. It cannot exist without oppressing women, gays, Jews, and critics of Islam. Which is not surprising given its teachings are deemed incompatible with liberal values according to the vast majority of Muslims.

[The Sabbaticus]

Seeing as the Italian mob has little to no power in Italy to oppress anyone, it seems obvious that you do not need to engage in illiberal practices such as restricting freedom of enterprise.

And I also think you would have a very hard time to argue that a peaceful security arrangement between Italian mobsters and private business enterprises is endangering anyone.

[Pants-of-dog]

I proved to you that many people are oppressed and killed by fanatics of Islam in France, but you deny it.

And the problem is not the religious service itself but the indoctrination: Islam always brings religious violence and intolerance. It cannot exist without oppressing women, gays, Jews, and critics of Islam. Which is not surprising given its teachings are deemed incompatible with liberal values according to the vast majority of Muslims.

1. You use the word "proved" incorrectly. It would be more correct to say that you have provided evidence to support your claim.

2. No, you have not supported such a claim with evidence.

3. Even if you did, the fact that extremists kill people is not oppression.

4. Islam does not always bring violence. If it did, my Muslim co-worker would have beheaded me for taking some of his Irish Cream flavoured non-dairy creamer without asking. Or the local Muslim grocery would have stoned my bare headed wife when she went to buy a roast chicken.

5. Restricting religious expression is incompatible with liberal values.

------------

Sabb, are you really incapable of distinguishing organised crime from religion?

[The Sabbaticus]

France shuts three mosques

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve told journalists on Wednesday that three mosques had been closed over the past two weeks during the state of emergency - marking the first time France had taken such action against places of worship.

On Wednesday, police shut down a suspected radical mosque east of Paris and arrested the owner of a revolver found in related raids as part of the crackdown, Cazeneuve said.

Security officers found "jihadist" documents in the raids at the mosque and related premises in Lagny-sur-Marne.

They placed a total of nine people under house arrest and banned another 22 from leaving the country, Cazeneuve said.

The assets of Imam Mohamed Hammoumi, who ran the mosque and the cultural associations until he left to live in Egypt in 2014, were frozen in April, AFP reported.

The other two mosques closed last week were in Gennevilliers, northwest of Paris, and in the southeastern city of Lyon, Cazeneuve added.

France has so far raided 2,235 homes and buildings, taken 232 people into custody and confiscated 334 weapons, 34 of them war grade, the interior minister said.

[Agencies]

"According to official figures and our discussions with the interior ministry, between 100 and 160 more mosques will be closed because they are run illegally without proper licenses, they preach hatred, or use takfiri speech," he said.

Takfiris are classified as Muslims who accuse others of the same faith of apostasy, an act which has become a sectarian slur.

"This kind of speech shouldn't even be allowed in Islamic countries, let alone secure countries like France," El Alaoui, who became the first Muslim prison chaplain-general in 2005, said.

AlJazeera

[QatzelOk]

Islam is essentially a poor imitation of Judaic tradition that lacks the authority of the Abramic covenant.

Abramic Covenant sounds like mafia talk.

Have you read all of their texts? If you had, the Quran would have impressed you.

But most Abrahamics limit themselves to one text, for the same reason that the citizens of colonialist nations usually limit themselves to one language: to force their own onto others.

Limiting yourself to one is a strategy of domination, not of knowledge (of god or of reality).

[Zamuel]

The original covenant was with Abraham, it was subsequently renewed with Israel himself ... Hagar's child was an after thought.

The replacing of Ismael with Isaac (pbut) was the after thought, that the Jews later did to restrict the covenant to themselves.

The Jews had nothing to do with the removal of an illegitimate son whom the covenant had no interest in. "But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."

Isaac was the project from the very beginning. As is most poignantly Illustrated in the scriptural record ..."And God said, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son indeed; and you shall call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto you at this set time in the next year. " Ishmael was a wildcard, with no intended purpose, cared for as a courtesy and an afterthought.

It's kind of a Judaism lite ... hits on all the popular highlights and fills in the blanks with lots of prayer ...

What is "lite" about it?

It dispenses with a lot of the Judaic symbolism and ceremony, not to mention religious traditions and the entire concept of the temple. It lacks the esoteric constructions that are inherent in the Torah. It's a cheap knock off created from impressions gleaned from outside observation and lacks the inner core that vivifies Judaism.

What is the point of circumscision, particularly these days?

A sign of civilized intent and a rejection of primitivism.

Zam

[Zamuel]

Islam is essentially a poor imitation of Judaic tradition that lacks the authority of the Abramic covenant.

Abramic Covenant sounds like mafia talk. Have you read all of their texts? If you had, the Quran would have impressed you.

I wouldn't know ? Kind of Ludlumic maybe ? Do you talk to the Mafia a lot? or have you just seen to many movies? I read the Quoran back when we still spelled it with a "K" I found it very poetic in places. I think it achieves a unique realization if taken simply, without all the garbage the Arabs have loaded on top of it ... Given the restrictions on it, I much prefer the Bahia version, which offers less disciplined access but requires greater devotion.

I've read most of the texts for the major religions ... Currently delving a little deeper into the Popol Vuh.

But most Abrahamics limit themselves to one text, for the same reason that the citizens of colonialist nations usually limit themselves to one language: to force their own onto others. Limiting yourself to one is a strategy of domination, not of knowledge (of god or of reality).

Well, I can accept the thought about texts ... but not about language ... The abstractions that language represent don't vary much in my experience, there may be slight nuances that are more easily seen from certain perspectives, but they are still accessible from English. I find Latin a helpful tool on occasion and I do think a second language broadens awareness. But I find no inherent dominant, aggressive, factors in any language.

Zam

[abu_rashid]

The Jews had nothing to do with the removal of an illegitimate son whom the covenant had no interest in. "But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."

Interesting that you ignored my post, but then answered it when Besoeker accidentally quoted it as his own

Anyway Ismael (pbuh) was not an illegitimate child. I don't blame you for thinking so, as it's repeated so often, even most Bible believers think it's the case.

"And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife." (Gensis 16:3)

The fact you and even most Bible believers actually think he's illegitimate when the Bible clearly states otherwise, vindicates the claim that the Jews did indeed fill the Bible with a lot of other negative stuff about Ismael (pbuh), not to mention others like Moabites, Edomites etc. who were also their fellow clansmen, but who fell out of favour and so had to be rubbished.

In fact the Bible speaks quite positively about Ismael (pbuh) in several places, I suspect in the "Elohim" threaded texts, which were then later interspersed with the anti-Ismael stuff in either the J or P texts. In the following verse noting he will bless him and make him fruitful:

"And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation." (Genesis 17:20)

It dispenses with a lot of the Judaic symbolism and ceremony, not to mention religious traditions and the entire concept of the temple. It lacks the esoteric constructions that are inherent in the Torah. It's a cheap knock off created from impressions gleaned from outside observation and lacks the inner core that vivifies Judaism.

It dispenses with the innovated rituals the Jews had invented themselves that weren't even prescribed for them, praise be to the Lord for that. Don't think I could handle having to have two kitchens in my house just to make my food religiously edible.

[Zamuel]

Interesting that you ignored my post, but then answered it when Besoeker accidentally quoted it as his own

What can I say, you're easily ignored ...

Anyway Ismael was not an illegitimate child. I don't blame you for thinking so, as it's repeated so often, even most Bible believers think it's the case. - The fact you and even most Bible believers actually think he's illegitimate

Legitimacy is not an issue ... Abraham disowned him and his mother, that ended any claim to legitimacy and separated him from any blood debt.

Jews did indeed fill the Bible with a lot of other negative stuff about Ismael, not to mention others like Moabites, Edomites etc. who were also their fellow clansmen, but who fell out of favour and so had to be rubbished.

The point of Israel's creation was to enhance and separate them from the nominal population ... Then a generation was trained in Isolation. So, YEAH ... weren't no "falling out of favor" about it.

It dispenses with a lot of the Judaic symbolism and ceremony, not to mention religious traditions and the entire concept of the temple. It lacks the esoteric constructions that are inherent in the Torah. It's a cheap knock off created from impressions gleaned from outside observation and lacks the inner core that vivifies Judaism.

Don't think I could handle having to have two kitchens in my house just to make my food religiously edible.

Funny stuff, mana ... But then so's gefilte fish ... I do like the pickled herring though ...

Zam

[abu_rashid]

What can I say, you're easily ignored ...

Either that or you have little idea what you're actually doing.

Legitimacy is not an issue ...

Do you ever admit when you post absolute fabricated nonsense and then it gets exposed? Or do you just move on to the next concocted claim?

Abraham disowned him and his mother, that ended any claim to legitimacy and separated him from any blood debt.

Abraham (pbuh) did not disown him at all, and in fact both he and Isaac (pbuh) together buried Abraham (pbuh) when he passed away, again clearly noted in the Biblical text, but few bother to actually read it. More testament to the distorted view you have gleaned from the corruptions of the scribes.

Funny stuff, mana ... But then so's gefilte fish ... I do like the pickled herring though ...

Zam

I'm just curious how they all managed to eat without two kitchens whilst they wandered the desert for 40 years.

Clearly the religion practiced by those who call themselves Jews today is very far removed from that of Semitic desert dwellers of the 2nd. millennium B.C.E. So Islam is not "Judaism-Lite", Islam is the original religion they've corrupted and left behind for their thousands of years of innovations.

[Besoeker]

What is the point of circumscision, particularly these days?

A sign of civilized intent and a rejection of primitivism.Zam

What exactly is civilised about this ancient, barbaric practice?

[Zamuel]

I'm just curious how they all managed to eat without two kitchens whilst they wandered the desert for 40 years.

They didn't wander, they "sojourned" moving Gods Tent around was a major undertaking ...

Clearly the religion practiced by those who call themselves Jews today is very far removed from that of Semitic desert dwellers of the 2nd. millennium B.C.E.

Sorry, your ignorance is showing through again ... The Jews were not "practicing" religion in the desert, they were learning it. "Straight from the horses mouth" in the modern parlance ... Isolated for an entire generation under tutelage.

Why is it do you suppose that nothing of that order was necessary with the Heathen, Idolatrous, Arabs ?

What is the point of circumscision, particularly these days?

A sign of civilized intent and a rejection of primitivism.

What exactly is civilised about this ancient, barbaric practice?

It differentiates MAN from the Animals ...

Zam