Someone recently passed this article on to me, which I posted on another board. It was promptly removed. So sad . . .

Frightening News from France

Once again, the real news in France is conveniently

not being reported as it should. To give you an idea

of what's going on in France where there are now

between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews,

here is an email that came from a Jew living in

France. Please read! Will the world say nothing - again - as it did in Hitler's time?

"I AM A JEW -- therefore I am forwarding this to

everyone on all my e-mail lists. I will not sit back

and do nothing." Nowhere have the flames of

anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France:

Lyon, a car was rammed into a synagogue and set

on fire. In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center

was firebombed; so were synagogues in Strasbourg and

Marseilles; so was a Jewish school in Creteil - all recently.

A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with

Molotov cocktails, and on the statue of Alfred

Dreyfus in Paris, the words "Dirty Jew" were

painted. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a

Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars. The

bus that takes Jewish children to school in

Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months.

According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen

10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past

30 days. Walls in Jewish neighborhoods have been

defaced with slogans proclaiming "Jews to the gas

chambers" and "Death to the Jews."

A gunman opened fire on a Kosher butcher's shop

(and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse , France;

a Jewish couple in their 20s were beaten up by five

men in Villeurbanne , France . The woman was

pregnant; a Jewish school was broken into and

vandalized in Sarcelles , France . This was just in

the past week.

So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a

friend, or merely a person with the capacity and

desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do,

at least, these three simple things:

First, care enough to stay informed. Don't ever let

yourself become deluded into thinking that this is

no t your fight. I remind you of what Pastor

Neimoller said in World War II: "First they came for

the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I

wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and

I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they

came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up,

because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me,

and by that time there was no one left to speak up

for me".

Second, boycott France and French products. Only the

Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and,

unlike them, France exports more than just oil and

hatred. So boycott their wines and their perfumes.

Boycott their clothes and their foodstuffs. Boycott

their movies. Definitely boycott their shores. If

we are resolved we can exert amazing pressure and,

whatever else we may know about the French, we most

certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a

hurricane in the face of well directed pressure.

Third, send this along to your family, your friends,

and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of

good conscience that you know and let them know

that you and the people that you care about need

their help. The number one best selling book in

France is "September 11: The Frightening Fraud,"

which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon."

I honestly thought that, if anything, you were trying to say an "-ed" word, such as "blasted" or "truncated", but accidentally deleted everything except the suffix.

That's pretty much what I thought, too. That, or those keys were hit accidentally.

I said I was in ministry, which is not the same as claiming to be a ministry which implys that I oversee a church. You could not be any more wrong. Can you own up to it??

Actually Ron, anyone who owns a ministry or participates in a ministry is a minister. They aren't necessarily ordained ministers that are sanctioned by a church, but they are ministers.

Ron, I didnt even know what you were trying to say, I skipped it.

However you said

For most study the NIV is good.

How can you say a particular translation is "ok enough" for some study and not all?

Why would one bible be the "gold standard" yet you choose to look at another verision?

That makes no sence to me at all.

Why bother to look at the shorthand, when the longhand is "perfectly fine"

Oh, and there isnt much you can say about the Church that will offend me.

I, however, reserve the right to defend it.

As I do about my entire faith. I am defending my faith.

I have brought facts to the table, heck, I even clarified a quote YOU pulled out of the bible that even you were short in defending on homosexuality.

Then you went on say that I took part of it "out of context".

Which I wanted, I guess, "to nit-pick" you on answers to my questions.

I do not accept anyone's beliefs on faith. I do not cower to anyone's brow beating, unless they can hold true to facts and answer the questions I have.

Yes, I "nit pick". When I took my senior biology thesis to my professors, they 'nit-picked' the bloody hell out of it. They wanted to know where I got my facts, show them my research data, show them the calculations where I drew my conclusions. It was not enough for me to take a line out of a text book and say, 'here is the truth.' I had to prove it was.

SEE BELOW!

[/color]Thank you! I was asking seriously, and I appreciate you taking the time to provide (finally) an explanation.

But where is it safe to go from there? Some of your explanation doesn't make sense. If I question it to gain deeper understanding, I'm tearing it apart. And if I don't question it, I either make assumptions about what the answers are (which does not further my understanding), or I just walk away as confused as ever, which has no gain for me.

So in your opinion, what's the right course of action here? Be sincere, and I will answer any questions and if I don't know the answer, I will say so. But whe everythime I give you an answer you come back with something to the effect that I am being deceptive or evasive, etc. Have you ever considered that not having a background in biblical studies that maybe you are not comprehending what I an saying?

[/color]So do I understand correctly, that it frustrates you for people not to take what you say as the face value truth, and instead try to analyze it and gain a deeper understanding? No, wrong! What fustrates me is when people ask questions, not to get an understanding, but to try to trap me or find needless fault. I have spent a lot of time on this thread, and I also write articles for Christian newspapers, opinionsLiberal Daily newspapers in their religion column, teach Bible studies, and a lot of other things, plus work a full time job, so my time is very important and limited. I don't like wasteing it.

My typos are the result of sever arthritus in my hands which I shared several time before. Of course, that you conveniently forget.

Umm no, see post #1809 where I stated very clearly: truly am sorry that you have physical challenges in being able to type, or other challenges in being able to spell. (And BTW, keep in mind that not everyone reads every post. It would be easy for someone to have not seen your posts re: arthritis, but you should not be so angry toward them for doing so).

So again, you're wrong. But when I'm wrong, it's a matter of whether or not I will own up to it (and if you'd read beyond this read, you would have seen me owning up to it several times).

I said I was in ministry, which is not the same as claiming to be a ministry

I never said you were a ministry. :)

Umm no, see post #1809 where I stated very clearly: truly am sorry that you have physical challenges in being able to type, or other challenges in being able to spell. (And BTW, keep in mind that not everyone reads every post. It would be easy for someone to have not seen your posts re: arthritis, but you should not be so angry toward them for doing so). The I apoligize! I took it to be sacrcasm.

So again, you're wrong. But when I'm wrong, it's a matter of whether or not I will own up to it (and if you'd read beyond this read, you would have seen me owning up to it several times).

I never said you were a ministry. :)

Go back and read you recent post wher you said I "claimed to be a minister"! Now, you are wrong! Will you own up to it?

Yeah, I was baffled by eD, too. I can sort out Cusano's misspellings but eD was right off the map.

Have you ever considered that not having a background in biblical studies that maybe you are not comprehending what I an saying?

Have you ever wondered why you would assume I don't have a background in biblical studies?

No, wrong! What fustrates me is when people ask questions, not to get an understanding, but to try to trap me or find needless fault. I have spent a lot of time on this thread, and I also write articles for Christian newspapers, opinionsLiberal Daily newspapers in their religion column, teach Bible studies, and a lot of other things, plus work a full time job, so my time is very important and limited. I don't like wasteing it.

You're, again, making a lot of assumptions about my intentions.

I have said things like 4 or 5 times now, and you still don't seem to get it. What else should I do? Are you a visual learner? Is there a better means of communication for you other than the written word, e.g., diagrams?

The King James is or was the "gold standard" for accuarcy, but it was written in the "King's English" which some have a problem understanding, and some of the terminology in todays English has different meanings.

They came out with the "New King James" version which is in todays English, without the Thee's and Thou's!

A recent addition has been the New American Standard Bible which is touted to be the most accuarate word for word translations in modern English ever done.

There are other Bibles out ther call "pharaphrased" Bibles, such as "The Living Bible" which gives you what the writed say's the passaage means, but is not a literal translation.

And them there is the Strong's Concorrdance that give you the exact, literal translation of every single word in the Bible from the original Greek and Hebrew root, when you what to know what a specific word means. This is helpful when you find a word or reference that is clearly not meant literally by context.

I would be happy to explain context in any given sitution, bit a Bible study is a more apporiate forum because it take a lot of time and discussion.

I am trying real hard here to give you a serious answer.

Ron, I didnt even know what you were trying to say, I skipped it.

However you said

For most study the NIV is good.

How can you say a particular translation is "ok enough" for some study and not all?

Why would one bible be the "gold standard" yet you choose to look at another verision?

That makes no sence to me at all.

Why bother to look at the shorthand, when the longhand is "perfectly fine"

Oh, and there isnt much you can say about the Church that will offend me.

I, however, reserve the right to defend it.

As I do about my entire faith. I am defending my faith.

I have brought facts to the table, heck, I even clarified a quote YOU pulled out of the bible that even you were short in defending on homosexuality.

Then you went on say that I took part of it "out of context".

Which I wanted, I guess, "to nit-pick" you on answers to my questions.

I do not accept anyone's beliefs on faith. I do not cower to anyone's brow beating, unless they can hold true to facts and answer the questions I have.

Yes, I "nit pick". When I took my senior biology thesis to my professors, they 'nit-picked' the bloody hell out of it. They wanted to know where I got my facts, show them my research data, show them the calculations where I drew my conclusions. It was not enough for me to take a line out of a text book and say, 'here is the truth.' I had to prove it was.

Because you said and I think I am quoting you, "I am an atgiest and am not a Bible scholar." or something to that effect.

Have you ever wondered why you would assume I don't have a background in biblical studies? [/color]

You're, again, making a lot of assumptions about my intentions.

I have said things like 4 or 5 times now, and you still don't seem to get it. What else should I do? Are you a visual learner? Is there a better means of communication for you other than the written word, e.g., diagrams?

And you don't condiser that sarcastic??

Go back and read you recent post wher you said I "claimed to be a minister"! Now, you are wrong! Will you own up to it?

Wow, it's a big deal for you that I'm wrong, eh? Will I own up to it? Is this about proving me wrong? Because that sounds very much like a challenge. Why make it that way? Why "us v them"? I have no problem owning up to it when I am wrong. If that's something you're craving, just spend some time persuing different threads and you'll find plenty of instances. More than enough to satisfy whateever it is you're after, I'm sure. And yes, I accidentally misrepresented what you had said. You said you were in christian ministry, and over the month and a half that passed since I read that post, I remembered it as you were a minister. That is my bad.

But you may have missed my point. Your words to me were "I said I was in ministry, which is not the same as claiming to be a ministry". And I never made the claim that you were a ministry.

First, no one ownes a ministry. A ministry, if organized, must be non-profit and run by a board of directors. A ministry can have a director, but never an owner.

Likewise, many people can contribute and be part of a ministry, bit in the common understanding withing the church, that are not ministers. And church ministers can be called ministers without beinf part of a ministry, aside from their own personal ministry.

The usual understanding of the title of minister means to be the minister of a congregation. By someone saying that I claimed to be a minister, they were giving a false statement and picture of my role.

Actually Ron, anyone who owns a ministry or participates in a ministry is a minister. They aren't necessarily ordained ministers that are sanctioned by a church, but they are ministers.

No! But you had just gotten done raking me over the coals claiming that I don't admit when I am wrong, even thought I have done so several times. I wanted to see if you hold yourself to the same standards. You vare persuiing different threads, and I an discussing/debating usually several people at once and doing other things, so my time and attention is stretched at least as much as yours is.

Wow, it's a big deal for you that I'm wrong, eh? Will I own up to it? Is this about proving me wrong? Because that sounds very much like a challenge. Why make it that way? Why "us v them"? I have no problem owning up to it when I am wrong. If that's something you're craving, just spend some time persuing different threads and you'll find plenty of instances. More than enough to satisfy whateever it is you're after, I'm sure. And yes, I accidentally misrepresented what you had said. You said you were in christian ministry, and over the month and a half that passed since I read that post, I remembered it as you were a minister. That is my bad.

But you may have missed my point. Your words to me were "I said I was in ministry, which is not the same as claiming to be a mnistry". And I never made the claim that you were a ministry.

And you don't condiser that sarcastic??

No, not at all. You obviously are not acquainted with any of the "what do you do for a living" threads, or any of the countless other threads where I have shared (including one BJean had up not that long ago).

A large part of what I do professionaly is to understand the different ways that people assimilate and process knowledge and information. Part of this is understanding that not everyone communicates or learns in the same way. For example, some people learn visually and cannot process information without some visual stimulation, whereas others might process kinestheticaly, and could find visuals distracting. Of course it goes much deeper than that, but that's another thread.

I had said the same thing something like 4 or 5 times, if not more, and you were not understanding it. Hence, the possibility that you do not assimilate well through the written word, and that something graphic, associative, contratative, etc. might better get the message across.

No! But you had just gotten done raking me over the coals claiming that I don't admit when I am wrong, even thought I have done so several times. I wanted to see if you hold yourself to the same standards.

I certainly hold myself to the same standards. I'm fairly certain I've either stated I was wrong in this thread before, or at the very least made references to other threads where I had.

You vare persuiing different threads, and I an discussing/debating usually several people at once and doing other things, so my time and attention is stretched at least as much as yours is.

I'm sorry, I don't understand the first part of what you said, so if it has impact on my reply, don't hold it against me. But yes - I'm sure your time is stretched. I've never questioned that. But if you question whether or not something happens, and you're told it has in other threads, then sometimes the onus is on you to check it out of you doubt the message.