The Bible - King James version review

[LEX]

Interesting Review (http://www.amazon.com/review/RNSHSIU8RCHUT/ref=cm_r8n_gvthanks_cont?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&Mx1UR45QNLNOS8UHelpfulDiscussionBoards2.s=SUCCESS&Mx1UR45QNLNOS8UHelpfulDiscussionBoards2.v=1&voteError=0)

LEX

[Devil_07]

I gotta tell ya Lex, of all the forums I visit in a day, you seem to find the most interesting stuff I read and watch on a daily basis. :icon30:

[TAFKAT]

This book doesn't work. I've tried the "praying" method to get a new Porsche 996 delivered but to no avail. There's nothing in the instructions about not wanting German sports cars but I tried praying for less ambitious things. I gave up when it didn't even get me a Big Mac. In the early part there's a bit about people crossing the desert and being sustained by manna from heaven, so you'd think that it would be able to manage at least a hamburger.

I'm disappointed and will contact the publisher. In the meantime I can't recommend this book as it is clearly faulty.



Try asking for the 997 as the 996 is currently out of production.


Prayer is the wrong method. You would have a lot more success by stealing the Porsche and then asking God for forgiveness.


You need to start praying to Joe Pesci. Unlike this fictional "God" character, Pesci is real and knows how to get @#$% done!


i have also noticed that the praying method recommended in this book is somewhat incomplete. although it ostensibly works wonders for sufferers of cancer, blindness, diverticulitis and so on (see the work of benny hinn and others), efficacy in amputees is not sufficiently documented.


The characters are quite undeveloped also many plotholes.


It's not entirely worthless dear. They were very thoughtful with manufacturing this piece by putting extra sheets of blank paper in the back. Some might claim these are for "note taking", however they make a great substitute when you run out of cigarette papers! A doobie does make this read a little more, entertaining!


I tried praying for money to no avail.
Then in a divine call from god he told me how to use the book.
I visited a bank then hit the teller over the head and in an instant he gave me money.
Praise the lord.


I've prayed to rid the world of religious dogma. How do you think that's working out so far?

Of course the whole thing is lost on some..


You are too dumb to be saved, I'm sorry to say that you will be spending an eternity in hell. I hope your kids have better luck.


ok so umm wow you guys are really ignorant i mean seriously your bashing on the bible ok wow thats NEVER been done before your sooooo original and sooo hillariously funny the only thing funny about it is how you think its so cool to sit at your computers thinkin your cool cus you can talk crap about a book of god while playing with yourself to cowboy butts seriously get a life and make something of yourself its pathetic how you have to get praise from ignorant people that have no lives sit at mommy and daddies playing world of warcraft all day and live off of the goverment cus your to fat and lazy to actually make something out of your life wow sadd what people have become now a days


ROTFLMFAO..

:pop_corn:

[D]

Of course the whole thing is lost on some..


ok so umm wow you guys are really ignorant i mean seriously your bashing on the bible ok wow thats NEVER been done before your sooooo original and sooo hillariously funny the only thing funny about it is how you think its so cool to sit at your computers thinkin your cool cus you can talk crap about a book of god while playing with yourself to cowboy butts seriously get a life and make something of yourself its pathetic how you have to get praise from ignorant people that have no lives sit at mommy and daddies playing world of warcraft all day and live off of the goverment cus your to fat and lazy to actually make something out of your life wow sadd what people have become now a days

Perhaps this one should be praying for some grammatical skills. :eusa_wall:

[Captain Caveman]

....while playing with yourself to cowboy butts...

Wow, is that the latest way of ensuring the faith and donations of the herd.... you're gay if you don't like jesus?

:piss2:brainwashing.

[D]

Wow, is that the latest way of ensuring the faith and donations of the herd.... you're gay if you don't like jesus?

:piss2:brainwashing.

I'd rather be gay than stupid.

[HowlingUlf]

I'd rather be gay than stupid.

Shut up, you stupid gay! :098:









:icon_redface: I'll get my coat ... :sulkoff:

[Captain Caveman]

I'd rather be gay than stupid.

I bet the average religious leader would rather you were stupid though.

[kdm]

I bet the average religious leader would rather you were stupid though.

That may be what much of the news media would like you to think by nature of only writing about "dirt" to sell news, but from personal experience, that isn't the least bit true 99% of the time.

People usually only hear about the 1% that make the news, not the 99% that never will.

You also hear about the 1% that make the news for anything but religion (murder, scandal, corruption, theft, etc), and the problem is the same - you have imperfect, failing human beings in every walk of life, even the higher echelons of "intelligent" thinking.

Personally, I like to hang out with a wide range of people regardless of their beliefs, as long as they respect mine equally.

[Captain Caveman]

That may be what much of the news media would like you to think by nature of only writing about "dirt" to sell news, but from personal experience, that isn't the least bit true 99% of the time.

Well that depends how far up the ladder you go in a religious orginisation. You can't say with any degree of firmness that religions are pro-homosexuality, pro-choice or pro-freedom of thought. The very nature of them discounts the latter and it is obvious that many of the Christian denominations and the Muslim faith in general are totally anti-gay. The very fact that the majority of Christians are Catholic means that the leaders of the majority of Christians condemn homosexuality.

I'm not saying that there aren't really nice people of all faiths all around us, including pastors, priests, rabbis and muftis, only that the institutions they represent have these issues.



Personally, I like to hang out with a wide range of people regardless of their beliefs, as long as they respect mine equally.

I take offense to that, being that I hold no beliefs to be respected or otherwise. Talk about being non-inclusive. :icon_rolleyes:

:D

[kdm]

That may be what much of the news media would like you to think by nature of only writing about "dirt" to sell news, but from personal experience, that isn't the least bit true 99% of the time.

Well that depends how far up the ladder you go in a religious orginisation. You can't say with any degree of firmness that religions are pro-homosexuality, pro-choice or pro-freedom of thought. The very nature of them discounts the latter and it is obvious that many of the Christian denominations and the Muslim faith in general are totally anti-gay. The very fact that the majority of Christians are Catholic means that the leaders of the majority of Christians condemn homosexuality.


I don't belong to a religious organization - just a church of Christians basically. My faith is between me and God. No pastor or priest required for that - our pastor is just a teacher and leader of the church, not part of a hierarchy of religion.

But, I assume you are referring to the Catholic church. There are millions of Christians that don't belong to the Catholic church. I never did. I don't mind some aspects of Catholicism such as the traditions of how the service is performed, the formality of the worship service etc, but the heirarchy isn't something I'm fond of, nor the impression it has given the world of Christianity as a whole. That impression is quite far from who Jesus really was.

As far as homosexuality, that's a live wire for sure and one probably left clear of this forum, but suffice it to say I don't have to agree with someone's choices to like them or befriend them. I'm sure you could say the same of anyone who has committed a crime as the state's or country's laws dictate.

As far as Christianity drawing lines of right and wrong based on what the Bible teaches (Jesus' life being a good example), there either is a superseding, encompassing line between right and wrong that applies to all for our own good (usually not as glamorous or as controversial as we think in our arrogance as human beings); or there is no right or wrong, and every law, rule, and social structure we follow are either weapons of power used to control weaker minds, or complete myth and fiction that we've created out of stupidity. But for some reason, regardless of beliefs, we humans have an innate desire for order instead of chaos, companionship and community instead of brutal individualistic survival. It isn't a matter of common sense or learned behavior since both of those are reactions instead of causal aspects of human nature.....



I'm not saying that there aren't really nice people of all faiths all around us, including pastors, priests, rabbis and muftis, only that the institutions they represent have these issues.


Organization does have a way of undermining its' own foundations from time to time. Why? Because people aren't perfect. The idea of bringing people together to share common beliefs, interests, etc and utilize shared resources to better the world around us is a good concept though. Christianity teaches grace and loving all people, but sometimes the organization does get in the way of that rather simple, profound tenet. But, forgetting that isn't relegated to Christians alone - most people in this world hate, despise, reject, scorn, ridicule, insult, or belittle someone else at some point.



I take offense to that, being that I hold no beliefs to be respected or otherwise. Talk about being non-inclusive. :icon_rolleyes:


Is it possible to believe you have no beliefs? ;-)

Anyway, that's my .02. Back to audio and music stuff. Cheers!

[TAFKAT]

:pop_corn:

[Captain Caveman]

Is it possible to believe you have no beliefs? ;-)

You need to have faith that I have no beliefs whatsoever! :)

The thing that I take issue with the Christian faith is that since I was baptised and brought up a Catholic/Christian and have turned my back on the teaching of JC I am condemned to eternal hellfire. I will never, ever believe any of it and so I am judged negatively by the whole religion (notwithstanding the fact that Scotland's weather is so bad that eternal heat sounds great (and I am sure that even the worst forms of torture would be bearable after 10,000 years or so)).

[TAFKAT]

But, I assume you are referring to the Catholic church. There are millions of Christians that don't belong to the Catholic church. I never did. I don't mind some aspects of Catholicism such as the traditions of how the service is performed, the formality of the worship service etc, but the heirarchy isn't something I'm fond of, nor the impression it has given the world of Christianity as a whole.



Hmm,

I was going to back a be a passenger on this , but I do need to voice this..

Its all so convenient to pick and choose what aspects of Christianity you feel most comfortable and to dismiss the aspects of Catholicism that doesn't sit well well with your particular model , the problem in that is that without Roman Catholicism , there would be no "Christianity", it was created by the Roman Authorities of the time by collating and canonizing selected works , which are highly questionable as historical documents of any validity that they are being portrayed.

The Vatican will always be the ultimate authority on interpreting what Christianity actually represents , by the mere fact that they created it.


That impression is quite far from who Jesus really was.

And who was Jesus exactly ?

There is not one shred of verifiable historical evidence that he even existed.

Perhaps he was actually a dude called Mithra , or was that Horus, or maybe it was Krishna , etc, either or, once you do a little digging outside the box, you will soon realize that the all of the narrative has a suspiciously repetitive nature , considering the other deities preceded the current by many thousands of years..

In the end, we all find our own truth..

:009:

[TAFKAT]

I found this news article quite entertaining... Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7818980.stm)

[D]

"Faith is the evidence for things unseen"

How is that for logic?

[D]

There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world

Then there must also be aliens who like to kidnap people, since many people have personally experienced this. :icon_rolleyes:

Suggesting that the complexity and interdependence of the natural world is evidence for a god is pure hubris.

[kdm]

Its all so convenient to pick and choose what aspects of Christianity you feel most comfortable and to dismiss the aspects of Catholicism that doesn't sit well well with your particular model , the problem in that is that without Roman Catholicism , there would be no "Christianity", it was created by the Roman Authorities of the time by collating and canonizing selected works , which are highly questionable as historical documents of any validity that they are being portrayed.


First, separate Catholicism from Christianity. You see Catholicism as the definition of Christianity, but it isn't. I've never been a Catholic, and only ever had a personal direct relationship with God, based on the Bible, not what any specific church tells me about it. Christianity as a defined religion started with Jesus and his disciples spreading the word. Faith in God started before that, but not separate from it. Catholicism unfortunately tried to categorize and institutionalize Christianity as a faith. It doesn't work that way, though for some people it works well enough.

I don't conveniently pick and choose aspects of Christianity, but some denominations do - Catholicism being one of the most well known. But more specifically, people do in fact, too often, pick and choose what to believe, but that can apply equally to all other beliefs or non-beliefs, not just Christians of convenience.

Vin, compare your comments to me a while back with Captain Caveman's. To me it's interesting (in terms of understanding your frame of reference) that both you and Captain Caveman were once Catholics. I say that to point out that you seem to have had similar bad experiences, for which I sympathize and understand your desire to walk away. We've talked about that. I wouldn't be a Christian if it were all about beating me up for what I do wrong, or making me follow rules and rituals. Christianity is about a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It's pretty simple at the core.

I have friends with similar stories, and are still Christians but no longer in the Catholic church - non-denominational churches mostly, as I am. I'm not a Catholic, but I am a Christian, and most Catholics are Christians as well.

Don't take Catholicism as the definition of Christianity - it isn't. Christian denomination (Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc) has nothing to do with the faith it is based around - they are only human derived, organizational subsets of Christian faith. The core concepts are the same across all of Christianity, or that sect or denomination wouldn't be considered "Christian". It's how people act on them that varies, and sometimes deviates from what Jesus taught.

The biggest denominational differences lie between Catholicism and Protestant churches (which seems a bit of an archaic term imho, but here Protestant would encompass Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc, and non-denominational churches as well).


The thing that I take issue with the Christian faith is that since I was baptised and brought up a Catholic/Christian and have turned my back on the teaching of JC I am condemned to eternal hellfire. I will never, ever believe any of it and so I am judged negatively by the whole religion ).

Why does that bother you? Were you told your decision was a one-way ticket, no second chance?

Outside of that, if you don't believe, then why would you believe there is any judgement that would be of relevance?

If it's how you were personally treated by people you once knew in the church, that's another matter. I don't support the idea of ostracizing people that leave "the church". It isn't a club. It's supposed to be about loving God, and all people - and that includes people who may never believe the same as we/I do.

Vin, Captain, D, etc:
Since this could get convoluted all too quickly, and before I go any further with this discussion with anyone, let me ask a basic question, if you want to keep discussing (no obligation - we all have other things to do :-):

Do you believe there is an overriding, pervading right and wrong? An "absolute truth" if you will?

[TAFKAT]

I find it always very interesting how the organised religions always make a stance in regards to their absolute authority on anything to do with God, GOD or G.O.D , when in fact their authority begins and ends at interpreting their own dogma, and what ever human element delivered it, nothing more.

I also find it interesting that they have such a polar perspective, if you don't believe in ........, fill in blank with what ever deity you prefer, you are either an infidel or an atheist .. ??

I like exploring all sides, and I find the atheist argument at times being just as polar in regards to a higher order, however , it is never presented in a manner to perpetrate fear and intolerance, so in that reagrd I have a higher tolerance for a lot of it.

I watched an interview with the female comedian that started the campaign this morning on the box, and it was both humorous and at the same time infuriating at the threats and responses that she has endured since the campaign started, from so called "believers" This campaign in London was apparently brought about in response to an opposing campaign by believers that warned of Hell Fire for the non believers, which I fight hilarious in this information age , but also quite horrifying that millions still ascribe to it..

I found another article Here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1079684/Theres-probably-God-slogan-carried-City-buses.html), with some quotes from Richard Dawkins that I have read and respect, which ring true, for me at least.


'Religion is accustomed to getting a free ride - automatic tax breaks, unearned respect and the right not to be offended, the right to brainwash children.

'Even on the buses, nobody thinks twice when they see a religious slogan plastered across the side.

'This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think - and thinking is anathema to religion.'

[Captain Caveman]

Why does that bother you? Were you told your decision was a one-way ticket, no second chance?

Outside of that, if you don't believe, then why would you believe there is any judgement that would be of relevance?

It actually doesn't bother me on a personal level in the slightest. What does trouble me somewhat is that this is accepted as being part of the religion in the first place and that I am judged, or deemed to be doomed by a text that people happily subscribe to. It's all about keeping people in the gang IMO.



Do you believe there is an overriding, pervading right and wrong? An "absolute truth" if you will?

Nope, people are the product of their upbringing and surroundings. Right and wrong depends on their upbringing, situation and values instilled by those who raise them.

You can train humans like dogs to be killers or good natured, it's how you treat and teach them. If Hilter had an identical twin raised by the Brady Bunch, then that kid would just be an annoyingly happy child and contented adult. If Churchill had an identical twin raised by a sicko SS member then he would have quite happily murdered women and children along with the other tragically brainwashed young men and teenagers.

Babies are completely blank canvases, but most people at any stage of their lives with the right surroundings can do "bad" things. There was an interesting psychological experiment on UK TV by a wonderful debunker of the occult and champion of mind-trickery, Derren Brown.

He got several law abiding citizens to mount an armed robbery (individually) on security vans. No hypnosis involved, just mind games and he got them to do that in a few days (or couple of weeks).

So right and wrong is circumstantial IMO.

[kdm]

So right and wrong is circumstantial IMO.

So why subject ourselves to laws and rules of society, countries, states, etc? Pretty random don't you think?

Why would anyone think that the armed robbery was "wrong" if it's just a matter of circumstances and upbringing?

[kdm]

I find it always very interesting how the organised religions always make a stance in regards to their absolute authority on anything to do with God, GOD or G.O.D

But is not the idea of even saying that Christianity doesn't have any answers, or for sake of argument, the answer, taking a stance that you have some degree of absolute authority to know?



I like exploring all sides, and I find the atheist argument at times being just as polar in regards to a higher order, however , it is never presented in a manner to perpetrate fear and intolerance, so in that reagrd I have a higher tolerance for a lot of it.


Where did you see fear or intolerance as a tactic or stance in Christianity?

[TAFKAT]

Christianity as a defined religion started with Jesus and his disciples spreading the word. Faith in God started before that, but not separate from it. Catholicism unfortunately tried to categorize and institutionalize Christianity as a faith. It doesn't work that way, though for some people it works well enough.

Dedric,

Historically, Christianity is not a defined religion started by Jesus Christ and his disciples, that is the whole basis of the argument, there is not one footprint anywhere in the historical record outside of the highly plagiarised NT, that a human entity named Jesus Christ existed at the time that the events are alleged to have taken place, it is a fabrication of the Roman authority and the factional groups preceding it based on earlier doctrine , and IMO, still the most obvious and blatant case of negationism to any who explore outside of the box.

Studying the genealogies and life stories of the any of the previous deities I listed in my other post , it becomes quite clear that there is absolutely nothing unique in the current passion being sold as the greatest story ever told, it is blatant plagiarism. So either all of the earlier historical records are wrong, or the current story is by some miracle, history repeating.

The Dark Ages and the destruction of the library of Alexandria were not vehicles of enlightenment by the ruling bodies, they were distinct actions to the opposite.


Vin, compare your comments to me a while back with Captain Caveman's. To me it's interesting (in terms of understanding your frame of reference) that both you and Captain Caveman were once Catholics. I say that to point out that you seem to have had similar bad experiences, for which I sympathize and understand your desire to walk away. We've talked about that. I wouldn't be a Christian if it were all about beating me up for what I do wrong, or making me follow rules and rituals. Christianity is about a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It's pretty simple at the core.

Being brought up Catholics has little to do with my current stance, as my parents being from Southern Italian descent had little to no understanding outside of the dogmatic fear passed down from generation to generation , they were not strict Catholics in any sense, going to church simply for Weddings and Funerals , and mum would go at X-Mas and Easter, dragging me along until I was old enough to know better, which was around 8-9 from memory. I was not mistreated in any way, but even at an early age I sensed an underlying motivation by the clergy that the almighty $ took precedent over the spiritual well being of the flock.

My disillusionment began from the church authorities not being able to answer the most simple and basic questions without invoking dogma and playing the faith card. One being, "If the earth is only 6 thousand years old, when did the Dinosaurs exist ?" Still waiting for an answer on that one.. :-)



Vin, Captain, D, etc:
Since this could get convoluted all too quickly, and before I go any further with this discussion with anyone, let me ask a basic question, if you want to keep discussing (no obligation - we all have other things to do :-):

Do you believe there is an overriding, pervading right and wrong? An "absolute truth" if you will?

"There are no absolutes , except that there are no absolutes... "

Do I believe in a form of Universal Law , of course I do , and I believe that all organised religions at a root level are based on the same laws, its only that the message gets lost on the mix. Does that mean I believe that there will be some form of judgement by a higher order when I cross over, only one of my own creation... :-)

You see I am not an atheist , but I am also not a theist in the terms bound by organised religions, I have a far deeper personal connection to what I feel religious people like to term GOD , and I do not need an assigned messenger either , I have found my own path, and my own truth based on decades of researching in and out of the box.., its not easy to verbalise because it doesn't follow any formalised doctrine, instead its a realisation from my own personal journey..

I did try and verbalise it for my sister in law , who follows alternate belief systems away from the mainstream as well.., for those that understand it , then cool, for those that don't equally..

"What we are in respect to "All That Is " begins and ceases at the point of I AM , as all that follows is simply the experience out of all of the infinite probable and parallel , that we are currently and collectively choosing to navigate in.. i.e our waking reality...

Notice I didn't say GOD, God, or G.O.D. "

:009:

[kdm]

I disillusionment began from the church authorities not being able to answer the most simple and basic questions without invoking dogma and playing the faith card. One being, "If the earth is only 6 thousand years old, when did the Dinosaurs exist ?" Still waiting for an answer on that one.. :-)


The Bible really doesn't literally say the earth only 6000 years old, but people interpret it that way based on extrapolations and adding age references that seem literal. Later in the Bible, God is "quoted" saying, "a day is as a thousand years" referring to his version of time vs. ours. To me that leaves the door wide open for the "6000" years to be a million, billion, 6000 billion, whatever. The people at the time likely just didn't have a grasp on a million or a billion years - maybe a thousand was like we might say today: "dude, it's like, 6 times forever" ;-)

I've run into the same thing from literalists. To me the time frame is irrelevant, and missing the point. The Bible leaves out a lot of details, but the relevant ones are really about that key point - the loving, grace-based relationship with God and how to love one another.

The dinosaurs don't change anything for me one way or the other any more than Pluto not being a planet does. lol
Should it change whether one would love their neighbor or hate them if dinosaurs existed or not? ;-)

But they do give my wife, kids and I something cool to visit at our local museums. We have quite a few fossils here in Colorado - pretty dang cool, and the lay of the land/mountains, etc suggest massive upheaval, sideways movement, massive water flows, etc, which I find fascinating... but I digress. :-)




"There are no absolutes , except that there are no absolutes... "


Which is a bit like the "This lie is true" paradox, only that it is completely and by definition, self-contradictory. ;-)

[TAFKAT]

The Bible really doesn't literally say the earth only 6000 years old, but people interpret it that way based on extrapolations and adding age references that seem literal.

Mate , you don't have to try and convince me of that, but there are millions of humans that believe that to be fact, simply because the religious leaders and institutions that they abide by ,continue to ram that down as an irrefutable fact..

BTW: Who says that Pluto isn't a planet ?

The ancient Sumerian's certainly did , who interestingly gave the designation of 7 to Earth , as in the 7th planet counting coming into the solar system , not the 3rd planet from the Sun.. , but what would they know... :icon_eek3:

You and I are not that different deep down Mate, we just have made slight deviations and dotted the i's a little differently..

:009:

[kdm]

Mate , you don't have to try and convince me of that, but there are millions of humans that believe that to be fact, simply because the religious leaders and institutions that they abide by ,continue to ram that down as an irrefutable fact..

I know - it's pretty funny in a lot of ways, and sad too, but hardly more than a technicality in the grand scheme - i.e. 6000 or 600 billion isn't going to make any of us a better person, but 6000 will make you miss out on some very cool museum exhibits and history docs. ;-)



BTW: Who says that Pluto isn't a planet ?


Scientists declassified (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060824-pluto-planet.html) it after it didn't make the cut of their new, or rather, finally specified definition. It's been benched and may be traded to another solar system eventually. ;-)

It's like losing a dark, distant, cold, icy, member of the family, sniff, sniff... :icon_cry: ;-)



You and I are not that different deep down Mate, we just have made slight deviations and dotted the i's a little differently..

:009:

Absolutely. Ditto on the :009:

[TAFKAT]

Scientists declassified (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060824-pluto-planet.html) it after it didn't make the cut of their new, or rather, finally specified definition.

Hey Dedric,

Oh I knew about it being no longer officially in the club, well according to the current egg heads , I was just noting that I consider the Sumerian account a little closer to the source.. :D

[Captain Caveman]

So why subject ourselves to laws and rules of society, countries, states, etc? Pretty random don't you think?

Why would anyone think that the armed robbery was "wrong" if it's just a matter of circumstances and upbringing?

Well I don't personally think that armed robbery is as wrong as the law makes it out to be - in proportion to other crimes.

I happen to think that someone who psychologically/physically/sexually abuses his wife and/or children for decades deserves a much longer prison term than someone who robs a bank. I think that the law should be stacked as equally towards the protection of the person as it is towards the protection of institutional wealth and the institutions that it was designed by - unfortunately this is a naive hope, the law isn't for "us".

Unfortunately the law sees child abuse as less serious as stealing insured money. It sees stealing millions from uninsured families in fraud scams as less serious as stealing tens of thousands of insured banking money because fraud isn't, in general, seen as a working class crime. Yes, the violence in armed robbery needs punished, but not disproportionately from the sentencing handed out in assaults of a similar nature as the ones that take place in a bank robbery, but where no institutional cash is involved.

Laws are there to protect "them" and "their stuff".

The very existance of statehood in the first place is just an extension of our tribal nature, the desire for power and a need to "piss on the tree" to mark out turf. Laws are needed to tell the people not to mess around with the status quo and religion also conveniently means that people can self govern within these standardised frameworks of acceptable bahaviour - from a leaders perspective, leading to less policing of the people. The laws are fairly standardised across the world because property and power is a common trait of the elite that needs protecting wherever a tree has been scraped.

Going back to right and wrong, we have been brought up with these laws and co-exist within them so it is fairly easy to see deviation from the norm within this framework. Move over to a more extreme situation, like the young SS guards in the death camps during WWII, the child soldiers in Sierra Leone or the oppressed suicide bombers of Palestine and you can see that desperate times lead people to have their views of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour changed - sometimes by choice but always through circumstance.

[D]

the oppressed suicide bombers of Palestine

Oppressed suicide bombers? Please, spare me.

[Captain Caveman]

Oppressed suicide bombers? Please, spare me.

If a cease-fire is reached and the two state solution is agreed on using todays map, then the Israelis should have the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and the Palestinians the rest of the land.

Happy with that? That seem fair? Ok.