is the Christian concept of the One from a philosophical point of view true?

[Gary Childress]

The Holy Land isn't "holy." And Israel is not special.

By the way, what does "holy" mean in your mind?

From the link I gave you, it is clear that those religious Christians are not hindered by a scientific view of the Bible from considering it holy.

What does "holy" mean?

[Gary Childress]

Holy: dedicated or consecrated to God or a religious purpose; sacred.

That's the dictionary definition.

If that is the case, is it to say that some people or things are "holy" and some are not?

[Immanuel Can]

According to Christianity, Christ is the "one" true path to the "king"dom of "god"? But for who? For everyone?

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

What about the Buddha?

Do you see any 'exception clause' in that? If there is any God, there is but one. And if there is any way of salvation, it is only the way that God has made.

[Gary Childress]

According to Christianity, Christ is the "one" true path to the "king"dom of "god"? But for who? For everyone?

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

What about the Buddha?

Do you see any 'exception clause' in that? If there is any God, there is but one. And if there is any way of salvation, it is only the way that God has made.

No. I don't. Should I die a heretic or go find another book on the matter?

[Immanuel Can]

The Holy Land isn't "holy." And Israel is not special.

By the way, what does "holy" mean in your mind?

I'm using the Torah definition.

"The Hebrew word kedosh , meaning “holy,” implies separation; a distinction must be made between the Jewish approach and a secular approach to any particular matter, as is stated at the conclusion of our Torah reading: “You shall be holy unto Me, for I, G‑d, am holy, and I have separated you from the nations to be Mine.” (The Rebbe.org)

"Separate," particularly separated to the service and uses of HaShem, is thus the correct literal definition. By derivative implication, "sacred," and "that which belongs in an exclusive sense to God."

From the link I gave you, it is clear that those religious Christians are not hindered by a scientific view of the Bible from considering it holy.

Well, I think you can see pretty easily that that's wrong. Firstly, the site you provided is nicely debunked by the one I sent. But were it not, you can see the obvious implication: that Israel is then nothing special among peoples of the world, and the Holy Land isn't "holy" because it was not given to them by God, He did not save them out of Egypt or lead them through the wilderness, or provide them with Moses or the Law (for those things would be more miracles), or have a Tabernacle among them, or give them any "promised land." And then Jerusalem is no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit...

Can you live with those corollaries? If you can, then I guess you're committed to your view. But if you find them distasteful, then ask yourself why you do. For you should not, if, indeed, God did no miracles for Israel.

[Immanuel Can]

According to Christianity, Christ is the "one" true path to the "king"dom of "god"? But for who? For everyone?

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

What about the Buddha?

Do you see any 'exception clause' in that? If there is any God, there is but one. And if there is any way of salvation, it is only the way that God has made.

No. I don't. Should I die a heretic or go find another book on the matter?

I think you should probably consider the claim. And then you can reject or accept what Jesus Christ says. But then, if you want to look at some "other book", then by all means, go ahead. See if it helps.

[Gary Childress]

The Holy Land isn't "holy." And Israel is not special.

By the way, what does "holy" mean in your mind?

I'm using the Torah definition.

"The Hebrew word kedosh , meaning “holy,” implies separation; a distinction must be made between the Jewish approach and a secular approach to any particular matter, as is stated at the conclusion of our Torah reading: “You shall be holy unto Me, for I, G‑d, am holy, and I have separated you from the nations to be Mine.” (The Rebbe.org)

"Separate," particularly separated to the service and uses of HaShem, is thus the correct literal definition. By derivative implication, "sacred," and "that which belongs in an exclusive sense to God."

From the link I gave you, it is clear that those religious Christians are not hindered by a scientific view of the Bible from considering it holy.

Well, I think you can see pretty easily that that's wrong. Firstly, the site you provided is nicely debunked by the one I sent. But were it not, you can see the obvious implication: that Israel is then nothing special among peoples of the world, and the Holy Land isn't "holy" because it was not given to them by God, He did not save them out of Egypt or lead them through the wilderness, or provide them with Moses or the Law (for those things would be more miracles), or have a Tabernacle among them, or give them any "promised land." And then Jerusalem is no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit...

Can you live with those corollaries? If you can, then I guess you're committed to your view. But if you find them distasteful, then ask yourself why you do. For you should not, if, indeed, God did no miracles for Israel.

Who finds the notion that Jerusalem is "no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit" "distasteful" other than someone who lives in Jerusalem and doesn't want to ever visit any other city?

[Gary Childress]

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)


Do you see any 'exception clause' in that? If there is any God, there is but one. And if there is any way of salvation, it is only the way that God has made.

No. I don't. Should I die a heretic or go find another book on the matter?

I think you should probably consider the claim. And then you can reject or accept what Jesus Christ says. But then, if you want to look at some "other book", then by all means, go ahead. See if it helps.

Thank you. Spending the rest of my life reading the Bible is the worst torture I can think of. It's like being condemned to only read tabloids from the supermarket in which to form my knowledge with.

[Immanuel Can]

Who finds the notion that Jerusalem is "no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit" "distasteful" other than someone who lives in Jerusalem and doesn't want to ever visit any other city?

Anybody who believes Jerusalem is holy.

[Gary Childress]

Who finds the notion that Jerusalem is "no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit" "distasteful" other than someone who lives in Jerusalem and doesn't want to ever visit any other city?

Anybody who believes Jerusalem is holy.

Maybe that too, I guess. Is Jerusalem "holy" though? And if Jerusalem is "holy" then is it the only place that is "holy"?

Do you find other places in the world "distasteful"?

[Immanuel Can]

Who finds the notion that Jerusalem is "no better than Shanghai or Manchester or Detroit" "distasteful" other than someone who lives in Jerusalem and doesn't want to ever visit any other city?

Anybody who believes Jerusalem is holy.

Maybe that too, I guess. Is Jerusalem "holy" though? And if Jerusalem is "holy" then is it the only place that is "holy"?

Ask God.

[Gary Childress]

Anybody who believes Jerusalem is holy.

Maybe that too, I guess. Is Jerusalem "holy" though? And if Jerusalem is "holy" then is it the only place that is "holy"?

Ask God.

Sure, where is God that I can ask him?

[Immanuel Can]

Maybe that too, I guess. Is Jerusalem "holy" though? And if Jerusalem is "holy" then is it the only place that is "holy"?

Ask God.

Sure, where is God that I can ask him?

Try consulting what He's already said. Work from there.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Yes. And presumably, your wife also wants to "annihilate" any "mate concept" you have, apart from her. She's just that "intolerant."

Reasoning with you is quite impossible. You are so limited in the range of ideas you can consider.

The “Jealous God” is an example of a priest-class employing a manipulative psycho-religious tool to keep people in-line. Over the months, of course, you try to avail yourself of the same manipulative tool. I regard it as a form of sickness — you know this — and something that can be — should be — transcended.

I'm being facetious, of course. But obviously, there's no benefit to a false "god-concept." And the "annihilation” of one such is no loss. Whatever the truth about God is, that's the only thing worth knowing. The rest is rubbish and distractions.

Here, you justify your core absolutist mind-set. It is fundamental to strict Orthodox Judaism and that is my point.

So my advice: get used to that sort of "intolerance." You'll find that reality itself has just the same kind of "intolerance" of falsehoods.

What I will say, by way of retort, is that I don’t in any sense trust you to be capable of distinguishing truth from falsehoods, given your Bible literalism. Your arrogance is noted, and that too is part of the point I make.

The god-concept you have is like a mental infection.

If transcendence of such limitation is defined as something necessary, the next thing is to define what the transcendence entails.

Not a territory for you of course. But for others, certainly.

[Gary Childress]

Ask God.

Sure, where is God that I can ask him?

Try consulting what He's already said. Work from there.

Did God tell any of the authors of the Bible that Jerusalem is "the only place that is holy"? If not, then books don't answer questions or elaborate more clearly when a reader talks back to them you know.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯