The Jews need to do better

 The most recent sovereign border changes, both recognized and unrecognized by the UN are noted below. Note that the last recognized change took place in 2011. This is not as frequent as you allege.

1. The Russian Annexations (2022): Russia formally claimed annexed regions of Ukraine (including Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson) in late 2022, though these borders are widely unrecognized internationally and heavily contested on the ground.
2. South Sudan [2011] gained independence from Sudan, creating a new sovereign boundary recognized by the U.N.
3. Kosovo (2008): Declared independence from Serbia, creating a new European boundary, though it lacks universal UN recognition.
4. Montenegro and Serbia (2006): Peacefully split their state union into two fully independent, recognized countries with distinct borders. 

As I alleged, "permanence' depends on depth of field. By historic perspective, in photographic terms, you're an f2 [shallow depth of field]; I'm an f32 [deep depth of field]. You are bothered by the risk of border change, and perceive that as a frequent occurrence. Yes, risk is an ever-present factor, but, as I noted, the last actual sanctioned border change was 15 years ago. You act like that was yesterday.

RemyBrown wrote:

And yet you accused me of being anti sematic.

General context: An animal that kills you vs a strange man that says, "Shalom". Women choose the bear and David (or whatever his new name is) doesn't care because leftist empathy and equality is a facade.

How is that antisemitic? It's much more antisemitic to claim that a wild animal would be better at contract negotiations than a Jew, you're basically calling all Jews sub-animal retards. Not that I'm surprised.

There are times to turn the other cheek and there are times to do eye for an eye.

You're not getting back at anybody by having false beliefs or unproductive conversations, you're just making yourself dumber. Eye for eye has nothing to do with this.

How am I supposed to know what you understand and don't? How can I speak but in terms I know I understand, without assuming I deal with a bunch of three-year-olds? Contrary to your apparent belief, we have little capability of being in one another's heads, but some sure like to think they can. f-stops are the aperture settings on a camera to allow long or short field of sharp focus from foreground to background while still allowing enough light through the lens. It's the mechanical means of duplicating the function of the human [and some other animals] eye's iris relative dialation, an autonomic function in living creatures, as well as, now, in many digital cameras.

I am not compelled.

The Jewish women need to do better. All the Bible mentions is the Jewish men’s circumcised pricks and God’s exposed Bible that Moses was allowed to see. But women are totally absent in these public discussions.

Who said I'm angry? Your assumption

All the Bible mentions is the Jewish men’s circumcised pricks and God’s exposed Bible that Moses was allowed to see

Apparently, you have not read the Bible cover-to-cover. I have, and it contains just a little more information than you acknowledge, but I understand the tight restriction of your effort. Try again after reading all. I do, still, having already been c-to-c more than a handful of times, and in four languages.

Excuse the typo.All the Bible mentions is the men’s circumcised pricks and God’s exposed backside that Moses was allowed to see. Exodus 33:18-23. But women were totally absent in these public discussions.

First, have you read c-tro-c.

Second, you have to understand that not all who consider themselves Israelites are Jews. The House of Israel, the man, not the modern country, consists of twelve tribes, including the House of Judah [Jews]. So, to whom, really, is your claim that "the Jews must do better?" And, in fact, does not every person need to do better? So, why single out the Jews?

Read, then re-word your charge, and then I'll answer your question.

The Jews need to do better by not killing their prophets to not deserting their homeland and fleeing to Europe. Europe and America are given to the Christians. The Jews should try to restore David’s kingdom which was a tiny cow town village according to Israeli historian Shlomo Sands.

It’s paradise for the poor.

The Jews throughout their history feared their neighbours, Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia. Today they fear Iran, Syria and Lebanon. It a national paranoia.

be a poor virgin who never looks at women, and you go to heaven!!!

For alleging to have read from the Bible [not in agreement with the advice to read cover-to-cover], this conclusion is absurd, but expected. Here's why:

 it's mostly a boring anti trans anti gay book which advices you to poke out your eyes and cut off your arms so you dont sin.

Show me the verse that says the Holy Bible is "anti-trans anti-gay." [definitive quote] Nope, not there. Apparently, you also never read that we are to "multiply and replenish the earth." [definitive quote] That means bearing children. No gay/lesbian will, honest with one's behavioral choice, engage in childbearing, a process that both a man and a woman participate in by separate biological and cooperative roles.

The passage in Matthew 5:29 regarding cutting out eyes is not literal, but metaphoric. This is well within the Sermon on the Mount, which draws many examples of metaphor to describe our proper attitudes and actions about various challenges we face. The parable, a particular style of writing/speech that is not limited to biblical text, but is used throughout the world as exemplary advice to follow a proper path, uses metaphor to describe a wide range of serious spiritual infractions we are advised to avoid. Exaggeration is a meaningful element of metaphor to explain a point of advice.

Thus, the advice in a few verses earlier that a man who sees a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery in his heart. This is because the sin is not conceived by the physical act, but by the initial thought of its commission. Sins originate in the heart and mind, not in the act by any bodily part.

Also, the book seems to advice people to live in poverty.

This is a common fallacy to read this passage that way. Matthew 19 records an actual encounter by a young, wealthy man who asks Jesus how to get to heaven. Many interpret that all who would go to heaven must give all they have to the poor. No, if they give all they have, assuming they are charitable, they do it once, and it's all over for them. They have nothing left for next week, next month, next year, unless they can make another fortune and have the same charitable heart.

No, this advice was for that man, and any others who are like him. By reading his heart, Jesus knew the man was jealous of his wealth, and knew the man was incapable of giving a farthing, let alone all. Again, Jesus used exaggeration to drive home the point that each person should be charitable according to their ability rather than expect that they give all, or that Caesar do it for them. Government is too often too far distant from the needs and the hour of need of the poor to be better at charity than individuals with whom we traffic daily, which is why Pres. Johnson's "War on Poverty" was a failure. Government does not function 24/7. We, individually, can, on necessity.

Conditions in heaven are a perfect application of the Sermon on the Mount, which is why it is the best socio-political, and not just religious, platform ever conceived.

Debby:

It’s paradise for the poor.

No, Heaven is better than mere paradise. Paradise is an Eden-like existence. Temporary, with the elements of sin still present, only advantaged because we will not have its direct influence/suggestion. And the folk/rock phrase from the 60s - "We've got to get ourselves back to the Garden..." from the song, "Woodstock" [Joni Mitchell, 1969] is myopic and backward. We do not need to return to Eden, but should progress forward toward Heaven. Both rich and poor will be there, except no one is poor anymore beneath their need, and no one is wealthy beyond their need.

So, you're admitting people can change. Why leave anyone out of that effort?

Debby: [to your #86]

Anciently, it was more than Jews who "feared their neighbours, Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia." It was the entirety of the House of Israel; all 12 tribes,

I suggest the same is true today.