The Exodus and Astrology

[Mole]

Depends on how much they can see of it.

For 200,000 years we believed the Sun moved round the Earth. And for a large part of that time, we believed in astrology. But today you and I know, that in spite of appearances, that the Earth goes round the Sun.

So we know today that believing the Sun goes round the Earth is a false belief. And we also know today that astrology is a false belief.

We also know that astrology is a confidence trick - it is a way of manipulating others.

And it looks like you have learnt to work a confidence trick - and you are as pleased as punch.

 

[Mole]

Victor, please.

There is nothing genuinely religious about the politicians' words. "God bless America" is more like a meaningless catch phrase that only offends atheists, who for some reason want everyone and everything to follow their rules. What politicians say and what they mean are two different things.

Even granted that the politicians are genuine in such rhetoric, since when does referencing God imply religion? A belief in God is not exclusive to one creed, or even to Christianity.

I don't know how things work in Australia, but it is rather obvious that you aren't really up to snuff on understanding the history, culture, and politics of the US.

Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue. And your hypocritical politicians only attest to the religious foundation of your country.

In the unconscious there are no negatives, so to say your politicians are not religious is the same as saying they are religious.

Look, it doesn't matter what you politicians believe or do, in fact they say the words, "God bless America', just as you have written on your currency, "In God We Trust".

It doesn't matter if you are hypocrites because you are religious hypocrites.

 

[Mole]

I don't know how things work in Australia, but it is rather obvious that you aren't really up to snuff on understanding the history, culture, and politics of the US.

We have been studying you for a long time. But naturally we see you from the outside, while you naturally see yourself from the inside.

These are two surprisingly different views.

So you might say, your view is subjective while ours is objective.

And as we are one of your closest allies, I would have thought you would welcome an objective view.

Certainly your government does, as we have officers within the Pentagon and at times within the White House.

 

[tinkerbell]

For 200,000 years we believed the Sun moved round the Earth. And for a large part of that time, we believed in astrology. But today you and I know, that in spite of appearances, that the Earth goes round the Sun.

So we know today that believing the Sun goes round the Earth is a false belief. And we also know today that astrology is a false belief.

We also know that astrology is a confidence trick - it is a way of manipulating others.

And it looks like you have learnt to work a confidence trick - and you are as pleased as punch.

LOL Victor

Are you speaking for all mankind again? Spoutting opinions based on thin air? Calling people names without ever understanding the issues that they are abour?

You know one of these days you might give it up and educate yourself, imagine the prospect of an informed conversation, now that my friend, would be somthing....

 

[Take Five]

Poetic as your language may be, when discussing facts, we should dispense with the high flung rhetoric. Your (poor) metaphors have led you far astray.

You say America was founded by an Exodus event, and that as such America is founded on religion. Wrong.

Sects of Christianity were fleeing England, true. Several separate groups fleeing from a place does not equate to one specific group going to a Promised Land. I also remind you that was never a religious homogeneity in America.

While the US provides religious freedom, it is clearly not a theocracy.

Aside from all that, this has gotten too off topic. And nothing you have written validates the original post.

 

[Take Five]

We have been studying you for a long time. But naturally we see you from the outside, while you naturally see yourself from the inside.

These are two surprisingly different views.

So you might say, your view is subjective while ours is objective.

And as we are one of your closest allies, I would have thought you would welcome an objective view.

Certainly your government does, as we have officers within the Pentagon and at times within the White House.

I forgot that Australians are always objective because they never act on self-interest. Of course, nobody in the US knows anything about the country. Duh.

 

[Mole]

I forgot that Australians are always objective because they never act on self-interest. Of course, nobody in the US knows anything about the country. Duh.

Of course we act out of self interest, national self interest. And we need to understand you objectively to pursue our national interest.

And normally you are interested in our objective view, particularly as it is different from your subjectvie view.

 

[Mole]

LOL Victor

Are you speaking for all mankind again? Spoutting opinions based on thin air? Calling people names without ever understanding the issues that they are abour?

You know one of these days you might give it up and educate yourself, imagine the prospect of an informed conversation, now that my friend, would be somthing....

Whenever I critique astrology, you spit at me.

 

[Take Five]

Of course we act out of self interest, national self interest. And we need to understand you objectively to pursue our national interest.

And normally you are interested in our objective view, particularly as it is different from your subjectvie view.

There's no valid reason to assume an Australian view of the US is more objective. That's an absurd claim.

Listening to Australia's opinion on things is not an acknowledgment of how valid and objective Australia is. It's to know what Australia thinks, so we can better maneuver ourselves diplomatically.

I've read some of your posts and am always skeptical, but this is really just too much. I don't think you are helping your cause by continuing to hold on to this argument.

 

[tinkerbell]

Whenever I critique astrology, you spit at me.

yea cos to date you've never given a balanced perspective.

Note that when I talk astrology I do give a blanced and informed picture. Not something you can claim

 

[Sniffles]

You're just two centuries too late. After Kant, metaphysics and theology have become completely obsolete

Are you seriously suggesting that there hasn't been a religious response to Kant in those two centuries? There's been considerable Kantian influence in the developments of Christian Personalism for example. One such Personalist, Nikolai Berdyaev, was well read in Neo-Kantianism.

 

[Totenkindly]

Whenever I critique astrology, you spit at me.

She might have tripped you up a bit, but she certainly didn't expectorate upon your personhood... nor did she even masticate upon your ankle.

... a critique would be good, though.

 

[Take Five]

Through access to member-only databases, I recently came across some articles by minimalists and non minimalists. Unfortunately I don't think I can link them because of copyrights laws, etc.

Anyone who's interested in non-minimalist perspective should definitely check out the work of Amnon Ben-Tor and Y. Yadin.

 

[Sniffles]

Can they be accessed through JSTOR?

 

[Take Five]

Can they be accessed through JSTOR?

Yes. Articles from Finkelstein (a leading minimalist) and Ben-Tor (a vocal opponent of Finkelstein), among others, can be accessed through JSTOR.

 

[Sniffles]

Yes. Articles from Finkelstein (a leading minimalist) and Ben-Tor (a vocal opponent of Finkelstein), among others, can be accessed through JSTOR.

That's what I figured. Maybe when I have time, I'll check some of them out.