Posted by Lou Pilder on February 9, 2015, at 10:23:41
In reply to Lou's reply -gumptukuncloo? » ed_uk2010, posted by Lou Pilder on February 8, 2015, at 7:49:02
> > >I do know how the passage has been used to defame Jews historically.
> >
> > I understand that you think that, but it seems to me that the overall impression of the post was very positive, and there was no intention to defame anyone.
> >
> > >The passage takes place in the Temple where the Jews are, so the moneychangers are likely to be Jews and could lead readers to think of Jews in a disparaging manner as {loving money while others went without}.
> >
> > To be honest Lou, if you weren't so insistent on drawing attention to it, I don't think anyone would be thinking anything about Jews at all.
> >
> > You seem quite paranoid. I hope you are not suffering.
>
> ed,
> You wrote,[...and there was no intention to defame anyone...].
> What criteria do you use, if any, to conclude that there was no intention to defame anyone?
> Loued,
You wrote,[...to me that the overall impression of the post was *very positive*...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting readers to mean by that. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly. True or False:
A. You can see, ed, that to you the post could cause a subset of readers to think that Judaism was corrupt during the time of the scene that Jesus said what He said to the moneychangers in the Temple and that is *very positive*.
B. You can see, ed, that the scene in the Temple with Jesus and the moneychangers could spread anti-Semitic thought in that the Jews were unworthy to retain God's love and were replaced by Christians and that is *very positive*.
C. The author misrepresented the facts in the passages with the moneychangers and the Temple, Lou.
D. The scene in the Temple with the moneychangers as told by the author of the post here in question could demean both Judaism and ultimately, Jews and that is very positive, Lou
E. The scene at the Temple with the moneychangers as stated by the author of the post in question here, {disgusted at their love for money} could cause readers to think of Jews as unethical business people and portray Jews {falsely} which could create and develop an anti-Semitic perspective of Jews and money from here by the nature that Mr. Hsiung states that he could leave anti-Semitic propaganda to be seen as supportive because in his thinking that will be good for this community as a whole.
F. Lou, I really did not know, for I am ignorant of the aspects of Judaism involved in the passages that the author of the post in question cites for readers to consider concerning the Temple and the moneychangers and his statement,{disgusted at their love for money} and how historically the passage has been used to induce anti-Semitic hatred and cause the deaths of Jews.
G. Lou, I really now see that a subset of readers seeing the statement by the author in relation to the Temple and the moneychangers being seen here as supportive, could not be a sound mental-health practice as by that the statement in question can be seen as supportive, it could be felt by Jewish readers as that Judaism is being insulted and then the Jews could be seen as being put down as being a Jew here because the statement in question can be seen as being good for this community as a whole by a psychiatrist and he wants readers to trust him in what he does here.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1075295
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1076161.html