Yes, you can be both anti-Putin and anti-Israel!
Cocksuckers are 100% pro-Israel, no matter what Netanyahu does. Because if you care, you are pro-Hamas. But one can be anti-Putin and anti-Bibi at the same time. That’s now the case with the ICC, a court unrecognized by the United States.
- Euronews: ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas leader Deif
- The Guardian: ICC issues arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu for alleged Gaza war crimes
- AP: International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Hamas officials
- NYT: I.C.C. Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant
- The official press release: Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejects the State of Israel’s challenges to jurisdiction and issues warrants of arrest for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant
Today, on 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), in its composition for the Situation in the State of Palestine, unanimously issued two decisions rejecting challenges by the State of Israel (‘Israel’) brought under articles 18 and 19 of the Rome Statute (the ‘Statute’). It also issued warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant.
…
Warrants of arrest
The Chamber issued warrants of arrest for two individuals, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant, for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024, the day the Prosecution filed the applications for warrants of arrest.
The arrest warrants are classified as ‘secret’, in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of the investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing. Moreover, the Chamber considers it to be in the interest of victims and their families that they are made aware of the warrants’ existence.
At the outset, the Chamber considered that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant falls within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Chamber recalled that, in a previous composition, it already decided that the Court’s jurisdiction in the situation extended to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Furthermore, the Chamber declined to use its discretionary proprio motu powers to determine the admissibility of the two cases at this stage. This is without prejudice to any determination as to the jurisdiction and admissibility of the cases at a later stage.
With regard to the crimes, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu, born on 21 October 1949, Prime Minister of Israel at the time of the relevant conduct, and Mr Gallant, born on 8 November 1958, Minister of Defence of Israel at the time of the alleged conduct, each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.
The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population.
Alleged crimes
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine applied. This is because they are two High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and because Israel occupies at least parts of Palestine. The Chamber also found that the law related to non-international armed conflict applied to the fighting between Israel and Hamas. The Chamber found that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant concerned the activities of Israeli government bodies and the armed forces against the civilian population in Palestine, more specifically civilians in Gaza. It therefore concerned the relationship between two parties to an international armed conflict, as well as the relationship between an occupying power and the population in occupied territory. For these reasons, with regards to war crimes, the Chamber found it appropriate to issue the arrest warrants pursuant to the law of international armed conflict. The Chamber also found that the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza.
The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The Chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organisations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza. The aforementioned restrictions together with cutting off electricity and reducing fuel supply also had a severe impact on the availability of water in Gaza and the ability of hospitals to provide medical care.
The Chamber also noted that decisions allowing or increasing humanitarian assistance into Gaza were often conditional. They were not made to fulfil Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law or to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied with goods in need. In fact, they were a response to the pressure of the international community or requests by the United States of America. In any event, the increases in humanitarian assistance were not sufficient to improve the population’s access to essential goods.
Furthermore, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that no clear military need or other justification under international humanitarian law could be identified for the restrictions placed on access for humanitarian relief operations. Despite warnings and appeals made by, inter alia, the UN Security Council, UN Secretary General, States, and governmental and civil society organisations about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, only minimal humanitarian assistance was authorised. In this regard, the Chamber considered the prolonged period of deprivation and Mr Netanyahu’s statement connecting the halt in the essential goods and humanitarian aid with the goals of war.
The Chamber therefore found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.
The Chamber found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and specific medical supplies, created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, which resulted in the death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration. On the basis of material presented by the Prosecution covering the period until 20 May 2024, the Chamber could not determine that all elements of the crime against humanity of extermination were met. However, the Chamber did find that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of murder was committed in relation to these victims.
In addition, by intentionally limiting or preventing medical supplies and medicine from getting into Gaza, in particular anaesthetics and anaesthesia machines, the two individuals are also responsible for inflicting great suffering by means of inhumane acts on persons in need of treatment. Doctors were forced to operate on wounded persons and carry out amputations, including on children, without anaesthetics, and/or were forced to use inadequate and unsafe means to sedate patients, causing these persons extreme pain and suffering. This amounts to the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts.
The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that the abovementioned conduct deprived a significant portion of the civilian population in Gaza of their fundamental rights, including the rights to life and health, and that the population was targeted based on political and/or national grounds. It therefore found that the crime against humanity of persecution was committed.
Finally, the Chamber assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza. In this regard, the Chamber found that the material provided by the Prosecution only allowed it to make findings on two incidents that qualified as attacks that were intentionally directed against civilians. Reasonable grounds to believe exist that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant, despite having measures available to them to prevent or repress the commission of crimes or ensure the submittal of the matter to the competent authorities, failed to do so.
Today, on 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), in its composition for the Situation in the State of Palestine, unanimously issued a warrant of arrest for Mr Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, commonly known as ‘Deif’, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes committed on the territory of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine from at least 7 October 2023.
The Prosecution had initially filed applications for warrants of arrest for two other senior leaders of Hamas, namely Mr Ismail Haniyeh and Mr Yahya Sinwar. Following confirmation of their deaths, the Chamber granted the withdrawal of the applications on 9 August 2024 and 25 October 2024, respectively. With respect to Mr Deif, the Prosecution indicated that it would continue to gather information with respect to his reported death. On 15 November 2024, the Prosecution, referring to information from both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities, notified the Chamber that it is not in a position to determine whether Mr Deif has been killed or remains alive. Therefore, the Chamber issues the present warrant of arrest. The Prosecution also noted that it continues to investigate the crimes in the ongoing conflict and envisions that further applications for warrants of arrest will be submitted.
The warrant of arrest for Mr Deif is classified as ‘secret’ in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing, in particular the holding of a number of hostages captive. The Chamber considers it is also in the interest of victims and their families to be aware of the warrant’s existence.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that MrDeif, born in 1965, the highest commander of the military wing of Hamas (known as the al-Qassam Brigades) at the time of the alleged conduct, is responsible for the crimes against humanity of murder; extermination; torture; and rape and other form of sexual violence; as well as the war crimes of murder, cruel treatment, torture,; taking hostages; outrages upon personal dignity; and rape and other form of sexual violence.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Deif bears criminal responsibility for the aforementioned crimes for (i) having committed the acts jointly and through others and (ii) having ordered or induced the commission of the crimes, and (iii) for his failure to exercise proper control over forces under his effective command and control.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict (between Israel and Palestine) and non-international armed conflict (between Israel and Hamas) applied. The Chamber also found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack directed by Hamas and other armed groups against the civilian population of Israel.
Alleged crimes
With regard to the crimes, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that on 7 October 2023, shortly after a large number of rockets triggered the ‘Tzeva Adom’ alarm in several communities in Israel around 6:20-6:30 am, armed men entered these communities, as well as the site of the Supernova festival, a music event with a few thousand participants (‘7 October Operation’). Members of Hamas, notably fighters of the al-Qassam Brigades, carried out mass killings at and/or around the communities of Kfar Aza, Holit, Nir Oz, Be’eri, and Nahal Oz, as well as at the Supernova festival. The attackers, for example, fired at people while they were seeking shelter and throw grenades at them. Hamas fighters followed similar patterns in other locations and killed further persons. These killings qualify as the crime against humanity and the war crime of murder.
The Chamber also found that in some locations, namely at the site of the Supernova festival and in the vicinity thereof, attackers fired at people with semi-automatic weapons and/or rocket-propelled grenades. In light of this, the Chamber concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against civilians was committed.
In light of the coordinated killings of members of civilians at several separate locations, the Chamber also found that the conduct took place as part of a mass killing of members of the civilian population, and it therefore concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of extermination was committed.
Furthermore, in the context of 7 October Operation, the Chamber found that a large number of persons were seized from various locations in Israel, including Kfar Aza, Holit, Nir Oz, Be’eri, Nahal Oz, and the Supernova festival. The victims were civilians, including children and elderly people, as well as members of the IDF (Israeli Defence Forces). After being taken to Gaza, most of them were detained in secret locations, including apartments and underground tunnels. A number of groups participated in seizing and detaining these persons: the al-Qassam Brigades, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad al-Quds, and other Palestinian armed groups. The Chamber found that Hamas was in control of the hostages as of the start of their detention in Gaza, irrespective of the group affiliation of the individuals initially seizing the hostages. The Chamber also found that hostage taking in the context of the 7 October Operation was conducted with the aim to negotiate their release in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. In light of the above, the Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the war crime of hostage taking was committed.
The Chamber further found that, while they were held captive in Gaza, some hostages, predominantly women, were subjected to sexual and gender based violence, including forced penetration, forced nudity, and humiliating and degrading treatment. On the basis of the material presented, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes of torture as a crime against humanity and war crime, rape and other forms of sexual violence as crimes against humanity and war crimes, cruel treatment as a war crime, and outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime were committed against these persons during the relevant period.
With respect to Mr Deif’s individual criminal responsibility, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that senior leaders of Hamas, comprising of at least Mr Deif, Mr Sinwar, and Mr Haniyeh, agreed to jointly carry out the 7 October 2023 Operation. The plan included targeting military and civilian objects in Israel and other acts of violence against Israeli persons. The material presented by the Prosecution indicated that several senior members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad al-Quds joined the plan in the morning of 7 October 2023 at the latest, and that other Palestinians armed groups participated in the Operation.
Mr Deif, in his role as the commander of the al-Qassam Brigades, and through his actions prior to, during and after the 7 October Operation, is responsible for the commission of these crimes. In addition, the Chamber considered that Mr Deif ordered or induced the crimes or is responsible as a military commander for the criminal conduct of his subordinates.
This is the same court that issued a similar warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, with regard to war crimes in Ukraine.
In reply, last month a Moscow court ordered the arrest in absentia of International Criminal Court’s Vice-President Reine Alapini-Gansou. Tit for tat.
The US has previously welcomed ICC war crimes warrants against Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials for atrocities committed in Ukraine, while denouncing the court’s pursuit of Netanyahu and Gallant, a mixed stance which has exposed the Biden administration to accusations of double standards from many UN members, particularly from the global south.
The problem with the US’s hypocrisy is that the US itself does not recognize ICC’s jurisdiction!
The US signed the Rome Statute in 2000 under President Bill Clinton, but did not submit it for ratification. In 2002, President George W. Bush’s administration formally “unsigned” the treaty, signaling a rejection of ICC jurisdiction over US nationals.
Moreover, the American Service-Members’ Protection Act of 2001, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act,” has such provisions (full text):
(A) prohibits the International Criminal Court from seeking to exercise jurisdiction over the following persons with respect to actions undertaken by them in any capacity:
(i) covered United States persons;
(ii) covered allied persons; and
(iii) individuals who were covered United States persons or covered allied persons; and
(B) ensures that no person described in subparagraph (A) will be arrested, detained, prosecuted, or imprisoned by or on behalf of the International Criminal Court.…
(b) Prohibition on Responding to Requests for Cooperation.–Notwithstanding section 1782 of title 28, United States Code, or any other provision of law, no United States Court, and no agency or entity of any State or local government, including any court, may cooperate with the International Criminal Court in response to a request for cooperation submitted by the International Criminal Court pursuant to the Rome Statute.
…
(d) Prohibition on Provision of Support to the International Criminal Court.–Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no agency or entity of the United States Government or of any State or local government, including any court, may provide support to the International Criminal Court.
…
(f) Restriction on Assistance Pursuant to Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties.–The United States shall exercise its rights to limit the use of assistance provided under all treaties and executive agreements for mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, multilateral conventions with legal assistance provisions, and extradition treaties, to which the United States is a party, and in connection with the execution or issuance of any letter rogatory, to prevent the transfer to, or other use by, the International Criminal Court of any assistance provided by the United States under such treaties and letters rogatory.…
(a) Policy.–Effective beginning on the date on which the Rome Statute enters into force pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, the President should use the voice and vote of the United States in the United Nations Security Council to ensure that each resolution of the Security Council authorizing any peacekeeping operation under chapter VI of the charter of the United Nations or peace enforcement operation under chapter VII of the charter of the United Nations permanently exempts, at a minimum, covered United States persons participating in such operation from criminal prosecution or other assertion of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court for actions undertaken by such personnel in connection with the operation.
…
(a) Authority.–The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.
(b) Persons Authorized To Be Freed.–The authority of subsection (a) shall extend to the following persons:
(1) Covered United States persons.
(2) Covered allied persons.
(3) Individuals detained or imprisoned for official actions taken while the individual was a covered United States person or a covered allied person, and in the case of a covered allied person, upon the request of such government.
Yeah. Atta wonderful example of international co-operation. And then we talk about Germany’s withdrawal from the League of Nations in October 1933.
Still, what happened today is the proof that one can condemn both the crimes perpetrated by Russia in Ukraine, and the crimes perpetrated by Israel in Palestine.
The question of all of those signatories and ratified countries how many would actually arrest Netanyahu? In the West absolutely none. And if an individual person (remember, any police officer or civilian can act on their own to arrest him), the state would come with some excuse and release him instantly with some “legalistic” provision. That is what makes the ICC a scam; it is a court to criminalize people of parties the West does not like, period.
Also, as much I consider Putin in the same light as Biden, I find it laughable that his ICC’s indictment (of course, forced primarily by the US based on a report by a US’s funded agency) is about the “abduction of Ukrainian Kids”. The report ICC’s Putin arrest warrant based on State Dept-funded report that debunked itself exposed the ‘concentration camps’ where these Russian-speaking orphans (or parents requested it) were placed on. I wish Israel would take all those orphans Palestinians and give them Israeli passports. This, reflect how different nature these two wars are, both aggressor countries see their wars as an existential threat, but one sees the enemy’s position as just ideological and its people as people, the other is genocidal and sees them as rats.
This is not true. They have not criminalized you. They have not criminalized me. 😛
NOBODY REQUESTED IT. You refuse to understand that it was truly an abduction. In occupied territory, after they killed their parents (à la guerre comme à la guerre, but nobody deserved to die just because Vladimir “small-and-soft-dick” Putin felt insecure), they removed those children and sent them to Russia proper.
I couldn’t be bothered to watch that video. You should read more about Potemkin’s villages. I suppose you also trust all propaganda video productions of the DPRK? You 1,111% have not watched anything from that video channel that relays the DPRK state TV (the only channel that exists there).
I have lived in Ceaușescu’s Romania of the 1980s. I know how people “honestly and truthfully” answer to questions under a dictatorial regime. Any such video produced in Ceaușescu’s Romania would have depicted a sugar-coated, overly rosy, and sanitized reality!
Grow up, man!
Do you realize the orphan kids in Donbass were made orphans since 2014 by Ukrainian troops, don’t you? What do you think Kiev thinks of Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the East since 2014? They are traitors the least, when not “orks” The majority are orphans, but there is a component that were petitioned by immediate relatives to be taken to safe places in Russia.
The video was produced by American journalists… Russia probably furnished a bit the thing but I doubt a single kid there were forced against the will of their most immediate families in Donbass. Many of those kids have returned back to Donbass since now that the conflict is heavily localized on the outskirts of the region.
I understand what happened in the soviet block areas in the 80s, but now with people with mobiles it would be impossible to hide the discontent of such amount of “abductions”. My gosh, their relatives would be parading in the western media day and night with pictures of the kidnapped kids.
Also, think of the genocide against millions Uyghurs in China… do you think in today’s world with internet on your hand (and many, many Chinese knows well to use VPNs), with thousands of westerners visiting the province at any given moment, with satellite cameras that China can heavily oppress millions of Uyghurs? Its just preposterous! The only thing I have seen is demolitions of a few mosques and replaced with new ones with more Chinese architectural touches rather than Arabic ones put in place; by the way, all these genocide claims based on a report of, yet another, single US State Department’s funded one. We really have to be critical here. China is no saint, but US is playing very hard too and our media is playing along.
NO, YOU FUCK-UP, THIS IS ABOUT THE ORPHANS MADE SINCE FEBRUARY 2022!
Oh, I so very much believe this! Did I tell you that I have a bridge for sale? Je vais vous faire un prix d’ami.
THEIR RELATIVES ARE DEAD, THAT’S WHY THEY ARE CALLED ORPHANS.
Now, you really are an idiot. Indeed, there is no genocide of the Uyghurs. But so many of them are put in reeducation camps where they are brainwashed with propaganda they have to repeat as a mantra. There are so many videos of that. Yes, even filming inside. This doesn’t make this labor-camps-cum-political-reeducation less atrocious, even if no physical torture seems to exist, or at least not in a systematic way. Yes, they’re more tolerant than the Inquisition.
My patience has limits, you know.
“THIS IS ABOUT THE ORPHANS MADE SINCE FEBRUARY 2022.” Most are, true… again, still made by Ukrainian troops… Russia does not tend to bomb civilians in Russian-speaking Donbass… don’t you think? Russia does not have any Hannibal directive like some other country does.
Your lens comes from a repressive Soviet era… I find today’s Russia quite repressive too, but is a completely different nature. I base my lens in what I have witnessed in the Yugoslavian wars that are more relatable to Ukrainian’s conflict.
I visited China 4 times, in 2 I talked with 3 Uyghurs (it might surprise you but I am Muslim) and their only complaint was the government no doing more investment in their province.
Oh… wow… just read the “idiot” part and you running out of patience… Don’t say more… I see the problem is not my perspective, but me. Thanks for all the good teachings, Béranger.
THEY FUCKING DID AND DO! It has nothing to do with “tendencies” or Hannibal directives.
You really want to see Russia (and China) through colored lens.
Al Jazeera English: Start Here | What’s happening with China’s Uighurs?
VICE News: China’s Vanishing Muslims: Undercover In The Most Dystopian Place In The World
Journeyman Pictures: Uncovering China’s Detention And Torture Of Its Muslim Minority
Vox: China’s secret internment camps
ICC doesn’t criminalize “what the West doesn’t like,” because the collective West loves Netanyahu. Only Josep Borrell Fontelles, Ireland, Spain, and France complained about him.
Al Jazeera English: Inside Story | What do the ICC arrest warrants mean for Israel and its allies?
Guests:
Francesca Albanese – UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Ori Goldberg – political commentator and former academic specialising in Middle East Studies.
Professor Stephen Zunes – professor of politics at the University of San Francisco.
Look at the title you gave to the article: anti-[Dictator’s Name] and anti-[State’s Name]. The rest matters less; you simply don’t believe in the State of Israel.
You’re perceptive, and you made a point. Currently, two leaders of Israel have been indicted by the ICC. I’m sure that not the entire Israeli society stands by the official policies of their government, but Israel is a democratic country, and its people should have had a different government by now if they so strongly disagreed. In contrast, Russia is not a true democracy. Putin cannot be removed from power democratically.
Moreover, Israel’s discrimination against Arab Palestinians has not started with this government. It actually started even before the State of Israel has been created; right under the British Mandate. Therefore, unless and until a future government of Israel changes course, Israel is a rogue state as a whole. It always had been.
Sure thing, Russia is a rogue state as a whole, too, but I still maintain the hope that there’s a chance for this to change in a couple of decades. I don’t believe anymore that the State of Israel will ever change. It was a Nazi state from day zero; I just wasn’t aware of the fact.
Trust can only be lost once; the same is valid for faith (the verb “believe” suggests faith). I’m not entirely confident that the legitimacy of the State of Israel can still be justified. Nobody will dismantle the State of Israel; but there’s going to be an eternal war there, even after our deaths. And, guess what? It will be well-deserved. For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.
Jewish sages in Europe once prohibited theological debates with Christians, as these almost always led to Jewish pogroms—back when the IDF didn’t exist. However, Jews have been passionately debating all sorts of topics among themselves for thousands of years. I was born into a Jewish family in Chișinău (copy-pasted) almost fifty years ago, and theoretically, I’m eligible for Romanian citizenship. So I assume you’re Romanian-Jewish, and we can engage in theological debates 🙂
The State of Israel is the only country in the world where the same faith is practiced, the same traditions are followed, and the same language is spoken as three thousand years ago. Moreover, all of this is documented and has been more or less accurately adopted by the peoples practicing Christianity and Islam.
How did Arabs from Saudi Arabia end up in the Land of Israel in the first place?
The problem with Jewishness (does it sound less “anti-Semitic” than if I said “with the Jews”?) is that it’s the only major religion (or, at least, among the Abrahamic religions) that mixes faith and ethnicity in the most noxious way. Let me explain it.
Suppose you have been baptized as a Christian by your parents. You had no saying in this at the time. Once a grown-up, you can assert your atheism. But you could feel otherwise.
Say you agree with the Old Testament, but you just cannot accept Jesus for what they claimed He was. You look in a dictionary at “monotheistic” and, for your life, you cannot understand a God that can’t just say “let this guy be,” but He needs a Holy Spirit to inseminate a virgin, then the world has to wait three decades before Jesus can deliver God’s message to them. To date, I still don’t understand how billions of people have chosen to believe in such an absurd thing. Ask any Christian how is this Trinity making any sense, and they won’t be able to explain a thing.
“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” (Exodus 20:3) But who is this jealous (Exodus 20:5) “Me”? Is this about “Our Father, Who art in heaven”? Is it about the whole trinity?
In real life, people pray to: (1) “our Father”; (2) Jesus; (3) “Holy Mary, Mother of God.”
Oh, wait, whatever happened to the Holy Spirit? Why, Spiritus Sanctus was only needed for one thing and one thing only. Then It wasn’t needed anymore! How crazy is that?
And Mary? Her special role isn’t consistent with anything. OK, there are plenty of saints and angels and whatnot. (Kids have the Angel of God prayer in which they pray to their Guardian Angel.) But if we’re to name “the real Trinity” people consider, it’s not “the official one.” You see, “the real one” looks more like a true family. But, again, in this sacred family there’s no Holy Spirit, but only Our Father.
So what are one’s choices, starting from the Old Testament, but not on Jesus being God, or one third of God, or “God’s Son, but also God” etc.?
In theory, there should be two choices: Judaism and Islam.
But one cannot just convert to Judaism! I suppose this is possible, especially if one marries a Jewish woman. But one who was not born Jewish will never be a “full Jew,” because Jewishness is not just a religion; it’s an ethnicity, and it stems from one’s mother. (The mother is the only 100% certain parent; the father can only be assumed. Not to mention that in Jesus’ case…)
But anyone can convert to Islam, by simple declaration of faith! And I suppose this is how it works with any other religion. I’ve never tried to convert to anything, say, Buddhism, but I didn’t hear of any religion tied to one’s genealogical tree.
So, back to the interconfessional dialog. When Christians weren’t killing Jews (or when Catholics weren’t killing Protestants), they were talking to each other. But they never truly mixed.
Ghettos were imposed to Jews; but when the segregation wasn’t imposed by the State and religious authorities, or by the local (Christian) communities, Jews self-imposed them.
An anecdotal version of history says that when Napoleon started elaborating the laws that emancipated to a certain degree the Jews (his laws were questionable, and his intentions, unclear), the Rabbis opposed some more liberal changes. Say, they wanted to still restrict interfaith marriages between Jewish girls and Gentile men. Wow. Tell me more about openness.
So Judaism is segregationist by design. “The State of Israel is the only country in the world where the same faith is practiced, the same traditions are followed, and the same language is spoken as three thousand years ago.” Not exactly true. Hebrew has rather been imposed to people who, coming from Europe, were speaking Yiddish. And so many people coming from abroad, a great deal of them might be more familiar with their mother tongue, which could be Russian, Polish, French, Spanish, Romanian, etc.
There are many things wrong with the State of Israel. There are many things wrong with Zionism. Both make a disservice to Jews worldwide (and to Jews in Israel, too!).
So instead of having a peaceful global coexistence of people of different religions (including those not affiliated with any organized religion), what we have is a conflict between Arabs and Jews (and between Jews and Arabs), and a conflict between fundamentalist Arabs and Christians. Antisemitism coming from Christians against Jews used to have decreased to historic minimums, only to be rekindled by the various conflicts that took and take place in the Middle East.
I’m afraid we’ll never be able to fully agree on Zionism and all that. But that’s OK, because you should bear in mind that there are many anti-Zionist Jews, too! Not in Israel, I’d say.
I forgot to mention that, as a Gentile, being friends with a Jew is typically a frustrating experience. You’ll never be trusted enough, you’ll never feel like fully accepted as a friend. There are exceptions to that, but I’m just saying. Old habits perpetuate over centuries. I suppose there’s no such thing as Rabbis teaching Jews to never fully trust and never fully confide in Gentiles; but it’s not common to get more than respect and cooperation. Again, more closeness surely exists in some cases, because interfaith marriages do exist.
“How did Arabs from Saudi Arabia end up in the Land of Israel in the first place?”
How did people from other continents end up in the Americas?
How did people end up in another country than the one they were born in?
How did migrations ever occur?
The “Land of Israel” implies that there’s a divine Land Registry or a Cadastre somewhere that says “this land, from the river to the sea, belongs to this people, identified through their maternal line.” It ain’t no such thing.
There was never any “predefined” territory with fixed borders for any people, anywhere. Ever.
But religions were and are the source of most wars.
Other dogmas and ideologies added to a religion only make things worse. Zionism is one such ideology. It wasn’t based on cooperation, but on a dictate. “Move your ass outta here, as this belongs to me.”
The result is obvious. We’re living with it right now.
I just stumbled upon your blog today and have been enjoying reading it for over an hour and a half. I don’t know how the comment system works, hopefully this one won’t get lost.
One of the things that stands out most from your typings is that you, like me, don’t have a high opinion of the intelligence of the crowds. So I can’t understand why you believe that “most people don’t pray to the Holy Spirit” is a fair critique of Christianity. Just like there are many distributions of Linux, there are many variations of Christianity. In Byzantine Catholicism we start every mass and every rosary with a prayer to the Holy Spirit; we are encouraged to pray to the Holy Spirit daily.
Is it really so absurd to believe that the Father decided “I’ll let this Guy be at T minus 3 decades from the time I need Him to deliver His message so that He can have the experience of being a human”?
Byzantine Catholicism, wow. Why can’t people just be “plain Catholics” in the East?
But yes, it is absurd. It doesn’t make sense. The entire God “model” is absurd. On the one hand, people pray and believe that He (with or without His beard) would intervene and help individual people (which is a sort of arrogance: who are you, with your petty problems, in the eyes of God, and why would He care for each of the 8+ billion people?). On the other hand, He obviously did not and does not prevent or stop cataclysms, wars, acts of terrors, atrocious accidents, awful diseases that keep people in pain for too long before they die. OK, evil must be left to exist, otherwise there would be no free will. But really, not doing anything when millions of innocent people die, while tyrants are having a luxurious life? (Voltaire: God made the world, then stopped caring about it, or at least about people.) This is sadistic. If He existed, He would be more evil than Hitler, Stalin, Pol-Pot, Mao and Putin together!
And if God doesn’t care about our life on Earth, why would He care to judge us in the afterworld? And, pray tell me, when our bodies decay and our minds become feeble (if not senile), and we eventually die, what part of our souls gets to the Heavens: the very little left, or the best mind we ever had, be it at the age of 18 or 48? It’s reassuring to believe in an afterlife, but it’s intellectual masturbation.
After the 1755 Great Lisbon earthquake, Voltaire wrote Poème sur le désastre de Lisbonne.
Otherwise, take this:
– Mais, mon révérend père, dit Candide, il y a horriblement de mal sur la terre.
– Qu’importe, dit le derviche, qu’il y ait du mal ou du bien ? Quand Sa Hautesse envoie un vaisseau en Egypte, s’embarrasse-t-elle si les souris qui sont dans le vaisseau sont à leur aise ou non ?
(Voltaire, Candide, Chapitre XXX)
I gave the reason above, right, it’s the same answer as to the question “why can’t people just use ‘plain Debian’?”
I’m not looking to get into a long debate, I outgrew that phase years ago. I’m of the opinion now that if someone is open to having their mind changed they’d do the research themselves and find the plethora of explanations for their objections, the simplest to yours being that God is concerned with the spiritual well-being not the physical.
I’ve typed the above not to dismiss your complaint, don’t get that impression. It is a valid objection that philosophers spend tons of time discussing. Agreed.
But my point is that I had only commented because you made those two unfair objections towards Christianity a few months ago. I suppose you’ve conceded given that you didn’t bother defending them.
I don’t defend any [anti-]religious opinion. When people choose faith, it’s not the reason that’ll make them think and feel differently.
What I don’t get: does God care about your Christian denomination? Are there several “right” ways of being a Christian? Or it’s just a matter of taste, like with everything else in life?
Theologians are debating differences in doctrines, but laypeople couldn’t care less. Does God care? Can I say “sola Scriptura” instead of having to choose between different traditions, rituals, and subordinations?
That is, supposing that Christianism is the “right” path to God and salvation and whatnot.
I posted a reply but it’s not showing up. This comment system doesn’t let me reply to your last comment, and the other two times I posted it showed pending moderation, now it’s not showing at all, so I’m posting it again. Forgive me if it results in duplication.
The Bible tells us to be without division in our faith, so yes, God does care. Of course theologians will debate because they believe it is their responsibility to teach the truth, not to compromise in order to avoid division. What do you mean when you type “right” way of being a Christian? If you mean “pleasing to God”, then yes, there are many denominations that are pleaseing to God. If you mean “100% accurate”, then no, there isn’t a single denominaiton that is 100% accurate. As a Catholic, I believe that the Church is accurate only on official declarations regarding faith and morals, if that’s what you’re getting at.
Is the choice of denomination a matter of taste? I read an article of yours about the problems with Fedora. Having read that, it would be pretty stupid to choose to use Fedora. That’s no longer a matter of taste, that’s making a correct choice. Now, of course, most people haven’t read your article, and most people don’t research the arguments for and against their choice of denomination. I once read a post about how someone decided to become Catholic because he decided he was too old for “Protestant rock concerts” – definitely a matter of taste.
I’m not sure what your last question about Sola Scriptura is asking? God won’t send you to hell just for being Protestant. Or are you asking specifically about the Catholic teaching? – it teaches that when those who are faithful Catholics and who, without any ignorance, choose to rebel against the Church and become Protestants – it teaches that this is a mortal sin. Because of the condition of ignorance it applies to few.
The ICC explicitly negates diplomatic immunity for individuals it indicts under Article 27 of the Rome Statute. However, I argue that the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) takes precedence. Here’s a talk with ChatGPT about this delicate issue: https://chatgpt.com/share/67488f0b-d494-800c-8701-0f2a129ab253
You sound anti-Semitic in almost every opinion you express about Jewish people or the State of Israel. No worries—I don’t care much about Romanians either.
When I used the expression «theological debates», I was referring to our differing views on Israel. By the way, Israel is another name for our patriarch Jacob, also known for the Ladder of Jacob…
Regarding your thoughts on Christian practices, I’d say much has been lost in translation. The term «Mother of the Messiah» in Hebrew simply refers to a young woman, betula, which also implies virginity since every young woman was assumed to be a virgin. That’s all, folks! No mystery. A virgin cannot be a mother, hence this messiah is false.
You’re welcome, it is called giyur. After the process, you’re 100% Jewish. You’re right about proselytism, it is restricted in Judaism.
Yes, because the Europe was a jungle. The sane island in the jungle were Jewish ghettos. In our days Prague, Budapest, Paris all have Jewish cemeteries and quatars in the middle. Thank you and goodbye.
Most Yiddish-speaking people were killed in Europe in the 1940s. The majority of Jews who came to Israel are Sephardis, speaking Ladino, Arabic, and other languages.
You’re kidding, just check Wikipedia. We have people of all religions. Otherwise, why aren’t there any Jews in Arab countries?
I’m your friend. I constantly read your never-ending blog 🙂
Well, tell this to the Pope. Or to all those Christians. But lots of things were lost in translation. Muslims still dream of virgins instead of white grapes or whatever it was supposed to be!
Oh, but this is not just about Jesus! The Holy Ghost is also fake! 👻
This sounds like you’re hating Europe.
Well, there are several levels of friendship, as I’m sure you very well know.
I don’t hate Europe—that would be a bit silly. In fact, I enjoy traveling there. Just last year, I toured London, Paris, and Prague. Poetically speaking, I revisited the doorposts where the mezuzahs once hung.
Good, so Israel started cutting ties with Europe! Israel will close its embassy due to the “extreme anti-Israel policies of the Irish Government,” foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar said in a statement on Sunday.
I’m glad to hear that someday the state of Israel will likely cease to exist; and this, thanks to fundamentalist Orthodox Judaism: Top rabbi calls on unemployed Israelis not to join army:
Israel Loosened Its Rules to Bomb Hamas Fighters, Killing Many More Civilians (barrier-free):
There is a reason why there’s absolutely no fucking chance of peace in Palestine. Israel is a rogue state, very much like Russia.
The pre-1967 borders of Israel made sense, if you want to accept a Hebrew state in the Middle East. The current ones don’t.
Hamas killed 1200 Jews. In response, Israel killed 46500 Palestinians.
If the Jews had applied the same measures to avenge the Holocaust, they would have had to kill more than half the population that Europe had in 1945.
I am astonished that no one has done the math so far.
The comment system doesn’t let me reply to your last message, so I’m replying here.
In the Bible it is written that we are to be without division, so God obviously does care. What do you mean when you type the word “right”? If you mean “pleasing to God”, then yes there are many denominations that are pleasing to God. If you mean “100% accurate”, then the answer is no, there are so many unkowns that I’d guess not a single denomination is 100% accurately teaching the truth.
Too personal, but I’ve already typed it up – as a Catholic, I believe God is guiding our Church so that she does not err on the important issues (of which she tries to rule as little as possible). Why? Because 1) she has not contradicted herself on any important ruling, and 2) I believe God loves us enough to give us an institution with sufficient guidance. Matter of taste? I read one of your articles where you laid out several reasons why Fedora is a poor choice. Knowing what I do now, it would be pretty stupid to use Fedora – I wouldn’t call that a matter of taste, I’d call that the correct choice. If someone has no clue about those things, and they just say, “hmm Catholicism is the largest denomination, and it has the pretty paintings, I guess I’ll join that one” – then yes, agreed, that is a matter of taste.
I’m not sure what your question is on Sola Scriptura? God won’t send you to hell for being Protestant, if that’s what you’re asking. That said, I suppose that if Catholicism is correct, then the Church’s decree that faithful Catholics who become Protestants not out of ignorance (but out of rebellion) go to hell is true.
Sorry I’ve taken a while, I’ve had a guest come over as I was typing this up. I can get back to you in a few hours if you want to continue, but really most of these questions are already answered online.
Eastern Orthodoxy claims that it’s the only “true” form of Christianity.
Catholicism too claims that it’s the only “true” form of Christianity.
Various other denominations (“old-school” Protestants and Neo-Protestants) believe they “know God better.”
To add insult to injury, each religion, Christianity included, claims to be “the only true one,” so if you don’t embrace it, you go to Hell (or you don’t reincarnate, whatever).
This approach makes all religions a complete crap. Whatever you do, a majority of people on Earth go to hell. How can you make sure you’re on the good side?
Of course, there’s always the excuse that you were born in a religion, and you stick to it.
On a side note, stupid people believed that “God needed to be defended against blasphemy,” and that had led to killings in the name of God. For fuck’s sake, you morons, you say that God is omnipotent, yet He needs YOU to have YOUR religion defended through brutality and killings, under the pretense that you defend God? Let Him punish those who deserve punishment! (As usual, He’s a little late with Putin, Trump, Netanyahu.)
George Carlin: God loves you!
I’ve explained that God won’t send you to hell just for becoming a Protestant out of ignorance. The same way, He won’t send you to hell just for becoming a Muslim out of ignorance. I don’t know what you mean by “true”, but Catholics do believe that Orthodox churches are apostolic, and vice versa. Obviously those who use Ubuntu believe it’s the best choice, right?
Stupid people believe stupid things, that’s not a surprise. Look, like I said I’m not looking to get into this, I just wanted to answer your questions. If you are curious about why evil men, disasters, etc… exist, you can research it.
And if you want a good Carlin video, watch the one where he taunts God to “strike him down” – look how that turned out.
But how do you know what or how God thinks? Jesus never addressed such questions, because there weren’t “Christian denominations” back then. So, whenever people say that they know how God thinks on matters that are not in the Bible, they’re hallucinating. They are, simply put, arrogant liars.
Anyway, what is to “become a Protestant out of ignorance”? As opposed to becoming a Protestant out of choice? Really?
Oh, right, everyone knows “God’s plan” and God’s thoughts. Cool. Anyway, why pray if God still allows literally all evil acts on Earth? Prayer is “soul masturbation.”
You lack intellectual honesty. You’re lying to yourself and betray your faith. You should admit there are things you don’t know, you’ll never know, because you can’t possibly know. That would be an honest Christian.
It didn’t turn out in any way. We’re all mortals. And he didn’t die on the spot, the same way such a thing never happened to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Putin, etc.
Had to think about this for a bit, but yes, you’re half right – it is arrogant to think you know what God thinks (only half because that doesn’t necessarily make someone a liar). That’s why I’m not Protestant. Catholics believe that God loves us so much that He continously guides our Church to never make a mistake in an official doctrine. Protestants believe that God loves us so much that He guides each and every Protestant to accurately interpret the Bible. Supremely arrogant, right? And when we apply logic to the above – most every Protestant denominations contradict each other in their interpretations, but the Church has never contradicted itself on official doctrine. That’s my rationale. And the same applies to Catholics, if a Catholic says he knows how God thinks on a matter that is not in the Bible and not in an official Church doctrine – such as predestination – yes, that person is “hallucinating”.
Becoming a Protestant out of ignorance – the simplest example is one you’ve already mentioned: being born into it. Another example – someone stupid falls for anti-Catholic propaganda and he lacks the critical thinking skills to refute it. A comparison with a real world example – I’m sure many voters who voted for Trump last year really believed (out of ignorance) “this time it’s going to be different, he’s really going to build a wall and deport all the illegal aliens!” This is in contrast to someone who leaves the Catholic Church because he, for example, hates the Catholic teaching on contraception, or someone who votes for Trump because he supports the genocide of the Palestinians.
But the Church did make mistakes, even as the Pope is infallible. Think of the Holy Inquisition. And think of how Pope Francis is the most liberal Pope of all, meaning that previous Popes were too rigid. Benedict XVI had strong conservative theological views; John Paul II was also known for his conservative stance on Church doctrine; Paul VI’s encyclical “Humane Vitae” opposed contraception. I believe we’re too many at 8.3B anyway.
Not necessarily, and not per se. The Holy Book is the only valid reference. And not all Protestants believe that they themselves, without the guidance of scholars, theologians and priests, should interpret it. But indeed, they all emphasize the authority of Scripture, which is how things should be. The Pope himself should manifest more humility. Not Francis, but Popes as a rule. There has never been a Pope like Francis before!
BTW, does it make any sense to pray for Pope Francis, now that he’s with bilateral pneumonia? This won’t make God change anything. You said that God doesn’t save lives, but souls.
But after the Great Schism of 1054, Eastern Orthodoxy considered itself to be the true Church, the same way the Vatican asserted its legitimacy. There is no way to know which one is right.
I don’t like in Eastern Orthodoxy the abundance of rites and traditions, like more form over substance. I’m not taking sides, just saying.
People believe what they choose to believe. It’s called faith, not reasoning or ratiocination.
Catholics believe that God guides the Church so that it does not make mistakes on official declarations regarding faith and morals. As a partly human institution, the Church does make mistakes in other decisions and declarations – as such, we are not obligated to believe in these declarations. Right, so when Pope Francis, for example, allows the blessing of homosexual unions in Europe but not in Africa, we can criticize him and claim that he’s made a mistake.
What does Scripture teach on free will? Some Protestants believe that it teaches we do have free will, some hold the opposite. From which group should the layman take guidance from? Should he read both, critically examine them, and with divine help come to a conclusion? Come on. Not 200 years ago most laypeople didn’t even know how to read. The Church does emphasize the authority of Scripture, but it specifically emphasizes its authority to interpret Scripture.
I tried to be careful to include qualifiers such as “most” and “primary” in my previous responses. There are plenty of examples recorded in the Bible of God saving physical lives and giving physical gifts.
If we take out the politics, what was the actual theological justification for the Schism in 1054? The Orthodox objected to the fact that a majority of Catholics added the filioque (“and the Son”) to the end of the prayer “I believe in the Holy Sprit, who precedes from the Father”. When the theologians met to argue, they discovered that both sides believed the same thing (the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son), they just worded it differently. Does that sound like a proper justification for a schism? Even many modern Orthodox agree, they’ll say “yeah it wasn’t that big of a deal but anyway we can’t join with Rome because now they believe in Papal Infallibility, that’s a much bigger issue.”
To me, that is proper reasoning, not just choosing one because I don’t know which is right.
Anyway, look, I told you I didn’t have time to debate and then I ended up spending two hours typing replies 🙂 And really, we’ve gone from discussing the Immacualte Conception and the Holy Spirit to Protestantism and Orthodoxy. I hope I’ve somewhat explained my position and at the very least demonstrated that it’s not absurd to be Christian and that there can be logic involved in choosing a denomination. If you want to keep going I might get back in a few days.
Nobody gave the Church this authority. It’s a self-proclaimed right.
The filioque is an important doctrinal aspect. Of course, normal people couldn’t care less. And, frankly, it’s not just wording. The Catholic view is plain illogical.
If the Holy Spirit had made Mary pregnant, it cannot stem from Mary’s son. It’s like telling someone, “Your father inseminated your mother, and you were born. But your father isn’t only the creation of his parents (your grandparents), but also your creation. Yes, you contributed to the creation of your father before you even existed!” How can an entire Catholic Church stand by such mental insanity?
But the Holy Spirit per se is 100% illogical, which makes Christianity an extremely bizarre religion, with a schizophrenic God.
Didn’t see you edited your comment:
I understand this seems crazy for an atheist, but like I said before, God cares more about spiritual health. So when a Christian prays, he doesn’t primarily pray for safety, healing, money, or other physical things, he primarily prays for faith, wisdom, (spiritual) mercy. You wouldn’t really understand unless you tried it.
I never claimed to know everything, you must’ve misread.
God gave it.
Those triangles are inaccurate, and, as I’ve said, the honest Catholics and Orthodox agree that they believe the same thing.
You seem to be making a Unitarian argument, similar to “Why did Jesus pray to Himself?” Although some believe it to be true, I wouldn’t make claim that Unitarians aren’t Christian, so really it’s beside the point. Anyway, you could look into Oriental Orthodoxy if you’re curious, your complaint was the reason that they split off from the Catholic Church in the fifth century (although again, honest Catholics and Orientals at this point agree that they believe the same thing, just with different phrasing).
Stop being ridiculous.
They are accurate, and no, they don’t believe the same thing.
No, I don’t. It’s pure logic. Mathematical logic.
Western Christians use the trick of saying that “the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, but this does not mean that the Holy Spirit was created by the Father and the Son”; in Churchspeak, the Holy Spirit “was involved” in Mary’s pregnancy (the “overshadowing” of Mary), but did not “inseminate” her. Also, the incarnation is about how “the already-existing second person of the Trinity” took on human nature through Mary, not about the Son being created. This is bullshit material.
What normal people would understand:
the Father + the Son → the Holy Spiritthe Holy Spirit + Mary → the SonAnd this is completely nonsensical.
What an Eastern Orthodox Christian would understand:
the Father → the Holy Spiritthe Holy Spirit + Mary → the SonAnd this makes sense even in a purely materialistic way.
Now, of course, neither the Son nor the Holy Spirit is considered “created” in any Christian theology, but that’s theological intellectual masturbation.
“Credo in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre Filioque procedit.” = “…who proceeds from the Father and the Son.”
There’s nothing unclear here. The presence of “Filioque” makes absolutely no sense, and the Catholics are completely retarded to insist that it makes.
Of course, conventional logic (influenced by biology) should not apply to the case of a “preexisting Jesus just not in physical form”; in such a case, any kind of intellectual masturbation would make sense.
No learned Orthodox would tell you that the Spirit is independent of the Son, that the Son does not play a role in the procession of the Spirit. Just like no learned Catholic would tell you that the procession of the Spirit originates from the Son. I’ve repeated myself a couple of times and you don’t believe me, so I don’t know what, do you want to start debating Bible interpretations now? The very first result on Startpage provides the following verses as evidence: John 15:26, Romans 8:9, Galatians 4:6, and many others that I didn’t bother to verify. And again, if you were curious and open to having your mind changed, you would have read about this.
Neither would a learned Orthodox tell you that the Son was created, or that He wouldn’t exist without Mary. You seem to have trouble understanding that the Son could have existed before, and could have played a role in, His own physical incarnation. You won’t succeed in understanding the Trinity until you stop thinking about it in a “materialistic way”. That should be obvious.
Regardless, you seem to have agreed that Christianity, at least in the Orthodox form, is not absurd? Great! I don’t see any use in continuing to debate Catholicism.
1. John 15:26, Romans 8:9, and Galatians 4:6 are complete BS, with Galatians 4:6 being the most nonsensical of all.
If by “learned” you meant “indoctrinated with such shit”… then OK.
The Spirit is not independent of the Son… How can people believe all this religious nonsense while not being on illegal drugs?!
2. You misunderstood me. All religions are absurd, and Christianity is the most absurd of all!
The differences between Eastern and Western Christianity are just different ways of practicing intellectual onanism.
I want to help you understand, but if all you reply with is “you’re stupid/retarted/indoctrinated/high” – that is, without any arguments of your own – there’s nothing more I can reply with.
If you reread our conversation, you’ve argued that Christianity is absurd for 4 reasons: 1) Most Christians spend more time praying to the Vrigin Mary than to the Holy Spirit; 2) God is all-powerful yet he spent 3 decades growing like a human; 3) God is all-loving yet he allows evil; 4) There are many different denominations and they all believe they are right, and there is no logic in choosing which denomination you belong to. Now, it seems to me, that I have provided at the very least a passable answer to all of your objections. It seems so especially since you’ve given up defending your arguments. Yet, even still you insist that Christianity is absurd, this time without argument! What can we conclude besides that you are being irrational in continuing to insist on the absurdity of Christianity?