brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight jwknight at polbox.com
Mon Sep 2 15:19:07 EST 2002


"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:2ua7nu04mm68iu981v6d3744jtqahnej84 at 4ax.com...
> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> >news:ebh6nu8khld0tjepb0hsoohdv0fqi81fgk at 4ax.com...
> >> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> >> >Our Holy Bible warned us.  Our Founding Forefathers warned us.  Our
> >> > common sense warned us.  God warned us.  Even our history books
> >> > warned us.
> >> >
> >> >But we did it anyway.  Again.  We let the jews into our midst, in
> >> > exactly the way that the Holy Bible said NOT to.
> >>
> >> What was that about our Founding Fathers?  You mean John Adams, who in
> >> 1820 offered an amendment to the Massachusetts constitution (which was
> >> the last remaining state with an established religion) guaranteeing
> >> complete religious freedom in the Commonwealth.  In particular, as he
> >> wrote, he wanted complete religious freedom for Jews.  He wrote to a
> >> New York editor named Mordecai Noah:
> >> > I have had occasion to be acquainted with several gentlemen of
> >> > your nation and to transact business with some of them, whom I found
> >> > to be men of as liberal minds, as much as honor, probity, generosity
> >> > and good breeding, as any I have known in any seat of religion or
> >> > philosophy.
> >> > I wish your nation to be admitted to all the privileges of
> >> > citizens in every country of the world.  This country has done much,
> >> > I wish it may do more, and annul every narrow idea in religion,
> >> > government, and commerce.
> >> quoted from _John Adams_, by David McCullough, 2001, p631, which
> >> cites:
> >> JA to Mordecai Noah, July 31, 1818, Adams Papers, Mass. Historical
> >> Society, Reel #123
> >>
> >> So not only does Adams not WARN against Jews, he compliments them for
> >> being liberal, having high moral character, and urges that they be
> >> given full citizens in ALL nations of the world.
> >>
> >> In other words, precisely the OPPOSITE of what the nincompoop thinks.
> >>
> >> So much for his knowing the sentiments of the Founders %^)
> >>
> >> lojbab
> >
> >Which is proof that you DO understand the difference between jews and
> >Israelites,
>
> Since nothing in the above mentioned Israelites, and you were talking
> about the Founding Fathers' attitudes about Jews, I have no idea where
> you would get that baloney.
>
> > and that you DO know that they can't coexist on the same
> >continent, and that you DO realize that Adams and Jefferson disagreed on
the
> >issue.
>
> I am quite aware that Jefferson said much that was bad about the Jews.
> The problem for you is that when you look in detail at what he
> criticized, he clearly would not distinguish between your "Israelites"
> and the "Jews".

You're arguing with yourself, and nobody else.  Wasn't it you who
proclaimed:  "school prayer has not been banned" and "school prayer had
already been banned in several states"?

Your argument is with yourself.

Weren't you the one who said?:  "I know of many people who believe that
Christianity is something different from what you appear to believe it is.
I don't believe that anyone but God
is authorized to judge what is in our hearts, which is what determines
whether we are saved through Christ."

And now you're going to violate your own "liberal principles" and tell us
that Mr. Jefferson knew nothing of the Israelites?

You're arguing with yourself.


> >Howard, in his Contumes Anglo-Normandes, 1.87, notices the
> > falsification of the laws of Alfred, by prefixing to them four
> > chapters of the Jewish law, to wit: the 20th, 21st, 22d and 23d
> > chapters of Exodus,
>
> Jefferson explicitly railed AGAINST including Biblical law in the
> civil law.
>

He railed against establishing ONE Christian church as the national church,
not the establishment of Christian principles.  It was because of him that
your own state constitution still contains that oh-so nasty word
"Christian":

"That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of
discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force
or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free
exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it
is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and
charity towards each other."

> And indeed, when he condemns the Jews, he condemns the Israelites as
> well:
> >There are, I acknowledge, passages not free from objection, which we
> > may, with probability, ascribe to Jesus himself; but claiming
> > indulgence from the circumstances under which he acted. His object
> > was the reformation of some articles in the religion of the Jews, as
> >                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > taught by Moses. That sect had presented for the object of their
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > worship, a being of terrific character, cruel, vindictive, capricious
> > and unjust.
>
> The religion as taught by Moses of course includes your Deuteronomy
> verse.
>

But now you know Moses was an ISRAELITE, don't you?

> > Jesus, taking for his type the best qualities of the
> > human head and heart, wisdom, justice, goodness, and adding to them
> > power, ascribed all of these, but in infinite perfection, to the
> > Supreme Being, and formed him really worthy of their adoration. Moses
> >                                                                 ^^^^^
> > had either not believed in a future state of existence, or had not
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > thought it essential to be explicitly taught to his people. Jesus
> > inculcated that doctrine with emphasis and precision. Moses had bound
> >                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > the Jews to many idle ceremonies, mummeries and observances, of no
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > effect towards producing the social utilities which constitute the
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > essence of virtue; Jesus exposed their futility and insignificance.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > The one instilled into his people the most anti-social spirit towards
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > other nations; the other preached philanthropy and universal charity
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > and benevolence.
>
> So Jefferson clearly identifies Moses teachings as the Jewish religion
> that you have noted that he condemns,  And that last sentence tells us
> all what he would have thought of YOU and your racism.
>


Jefferson was the "racist" who decided to eliminate the Indians.  Had he not
made that decision, the White Race may not have survived on this continent.
He also considered the jews to be evil:

  II. JEWS. 1. Their system was Deism; that is, the belief of one only God.
But their ideas of him & of his attributes were degrading & injurious.

   2. Their Ethics were not only imperfect, but often irreconcilable with
the sound dictates of reason & morality, as they respect intercourse with
those around us; & repulsive & anti-social, as respecting other nations.
They needed reformation, therefore, in an eminent degree.


> ...
> >That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >men more learned than myself in that lore. But that he might
> > conscientiously believe himself inspired from above, is very possible.
> > The whole religion of the Jews, inculcated on him from his
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > infancy, was founded in the belief of divine inspiration.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > The fumes of the most disordered imaginations were recorded in their
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > religious code, as special communications of the Deity; and as it
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > could not but happen that, in the course of ages, events would now
> > and then turn up to which some of these vague rhapsodies might be
> > accommodated by the aid of allegories, figures, types, and other
> > tricks upon words, they have not only preserved their credit with the
> > Jews of all subsequent times, but are the foundation of much of the
> > religions of those who have schismatised from them.
>
> That's the Holy Bible he is talking about, when he talks about "fumes
> of the most disordered imaginations were recorded in their religious
> code, as special communications of the Deity".  Note also that he says
> that Christ was raised as a Jew.
>

If he understood the difference between jews and Israelites, he would have
had an entirely different opinion, wouldn't he?

What you proved is that the LYING jews did a great job of misleading all of
us, including Mr. Jefferson.  If he knew that the KJV translators
inappropriately inserted "jew" where it should have been "Israelite" or
"Judaea", it all would have made perfect sense to him.  This was his only
confusion.

> And remember that he likewise criticized Quakers and Calvinists, not
> to mention St. Paul for perverting Christ's teachings, which he
> considered at least as bad as anything the Jews did.
>

He suspected that both the Quakers and Calvinists were adversely influenced
by the jews--and he was dead nuts right on.

He just didn't know how the jews did it.

But we do, don't we?

> >Thomas Jefferson on the Talmud
> >
> >"What a wretched depravity of sentiment and manners must have prevailed
> >before such corrupt maxims could have obtained credit! It is impossible
to
> >collect from these writings a consistent series of moral Doctrine.'
Enfield,
> >B. 4. chap. 3. It was the reformation of this `wretched depravity' of
morals
> >which Jesus undertook.
>
> No.  Per the above quotes, it is clear that Jefferson felt that it was
> the reformation of the "wretched depravity" of the *Law of Moses* that
> Jesus undertook.
>

The conflict arises when the JEWS claimed that Moses was a JEW.

Since Moses was an Israelite, he could not have been a jew.



> >Thomas Jefferson on Calvinism
> >
> >"Calvin's character of this supreme being seems chiefly copied from that
of
> >the Jews."
> >
> >"The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are
those
> >calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for
the
> >structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without
any
> >foundation in his genuine words."
>
> That's YOU he's talking about.
>

He suspected that the jews had been involved in distorting the Holy
Scripture--HE WAS 100% CORRECT.

He just never figured out how the jews did it.

But we did.

> >Thomas Jefferson on Christianity
> >
> >Because of  his influence, the Virginia Constitution contains, to this
day,
> >the direct reference to Christianity
> >http://legis.state.va.us/vaonline/li1a.htm
> >
> >"That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of
> >discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by
force
> >or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free
> >exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that
it
> >is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and
> >charity towards each other."
>
> Notice "all men".  Not "all men excepts Jews and muds"
>
> lojbab

He didn't want the jews in the country at all,  he wanted to send the
niggers back to Africa, and he's the one who proposed that we KILL all the
Indians.

"All men" means all "all WHITE men", and nobody else, just like the Holy
Bible states so clearly.

You've been LIED to by the jews for so long that you don't even get it.  You
see half-phrases on monuments and ignore the rest of the paragraphs.  You
set up these straw arguments with yourself just so you can dispute my valid
points.

We knew you "liberals" are uneducable, eh?

John Knight





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list