I'm less familiar with American demographics, but I agree with the overall principal. Here in Canada we have IMO an even more severe segregation and unequal opportunity for Aboriginal peoples. It's severe enough up here though that not only are communities segregated by living on reserves with their own separate schools, but we have separate school divisions, and even their reporting and funding lines are different from all other schools.

That adds up to an enormous amount of differential treatment. Replacing that with equal opportunity though is much more desirable than 'waiting' till the school system has already failed kids and then 'lowering the bar' in one way or another to help them get into university.

In Canada I think our supreme court has done as at least 1 disservice greater than you guys though in making race a required consideration in sentencing. The appropriate section of sentencing:
"In sentencing an aboriginal offender, the judge must consider: (a) the unique systemic or background factors which may have played a part in bringing the particular aboriginal offender before the courts; and (b) the types of sentencing procedures and sanctions which may be appropriate in the circumstances for the offender because of his or her particular aboriginal heritage or connection."
The goal is to address the over-representation of aboriginal people in prisons. The effect however, is ultimately discriminatory as well. Before you dismiss the discrimination against whites as ok because it balances things out as is the 'goal', that's not the only affect. Another problem in Canada is the over-representation of Aboriginal peoples as the victims of crime, because most violent crime is between parties that are related. So on the whole crimes committed against Aboriginal people will on average be sentenced more leniently...

Failing to address the real underlying unequal opportunity can't corrected by more inequality later to balance the scales. In Canada, our attempt at it are too lesson the sentencing of people with unequal backgrounds, but the expense of victims that also faced those same unequal backgrounds...

And that 'corrective' inequality is also creating similar resentment amongst white people here too. People don't like their kids not getting into a school of choice potentially because of a race based distinction, but they like it even less to see a crime committed against them treated more leniently because of race.

each side is looking for a fight right now. No matter what the topic is, they are fighting in a no-compromise fashion. The news is spreading this fear mongering and they won't be happy till there are people dead.

I think I played "Tones on Tail" on cassette till the tape broke - great album.

Santa Clause Bernie.

Trumpism is winning on all fronts.

Free school, free healthcare, 15$/hr, Everyone will have a government job if they need a job.

Socialism works great till you run out of others people money.


Other than fixing the jail system this guy is dead wrong.

I agree until your last paragraph. They were waiting for their friend(s) and they were early.

I personally don't like Starbucks. I do have to meet my boss there yearly ( yearly reviews) and often sit waiting 30 -- 40 minutes till my turn. I do not buy anything, never had. The place is mostly full but I am never harassed.

The store clerk was wrong. And the interaction between the police and the men could have been wrong. I do not know how the interaction went down. If they said their piece and disrespectful to the police then then sure escort them out.. But I don't think they were. Cops should have mediated between the store and the men.

That's an insane interpretation imo. There's no reason for the 'till heaven and earth pass' part at all then except to confuse the meaning, which would be crazy.

The reason for the Heaven and Earth part is to reaffirm what He said in the previous verse, which is that He didn't come to destroy the law but to fulfill the law. He is saying the law cannot be destroyed. The reason He was strongly reaffirming that is because that is exactly what the Pharisees accused Him of doing.

As to pigs flying meaning 'never' you forget, in 2009....swine flu. ;-)

lol

I put them together because they are written together. You conflate fulfilling the law with "everything being fulfilled" for some reason, when it seems clear to me they are very different things. The Law is not "everything", right?

The law is not everything, but the context of that statement is that He is fulfilling the law. The "all" then is all that which is written for Him to fulfill. An example that ties in would be in Luke 4:21

Also, a main piece you are skipping over is where Jesus said He didn't come to destroy the law but fulfill it. That tells you the meaning of what He is talking about. He is definitely saying that the law can be fulfilled, and it can be fulfilled by Him. This is the meaning of the text, that He had come to fulfill it and would (and did) fulfill it.

Right then, Jesus opposed God's law, hardly moral by any religious standard. That Law was still in effect while he lived under any interpretation, something he reiterated in the passage.

He didn't oppose Gods law, He brought something into the situation that had never been there before, which is grace. Since He is the Lord, He can do that. That is exactly what He came to earth to do, which is to bring forgiveness and salvation by faith through grace.

You've ignored my question, or contorted around it. The Law during his life required killing infidels, either he followed it and murdered or not. If not, how is defying God and telling others to follow along not immoral, especially considering the passage where he said that's not OK for ANYONE?

I would venture to guess that the majority of the citizens of Israel had never killed anyone except perhaps if they were in the army. You make it sound like they were a bunch of barbarians running around and bashing peoples heads in. The reality is, everyone knew the law and knew the penalty of certain things was death. It probably would have been relatively rare that people were caught violating laws that led to the death penalty. Jesus followed the law perfectly but it doesn't mean He killed anyone. The only example we have in scripture of that situation is when He showed grace.

".....until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven,"
Edit: it seems you give him a 'do as I say, not as I do, I am bound by no law or rules because I am God so infallible' pass, which doesn't seem like him as he's usually described in the least (teaching by example), and goes against any interpretation of Mathew:18 since he definitely hadn't fulfilled "everything" yet.

It would have been right for Him to stone someone who broke the law but the person would be judged by the priests before that could happen. I just doubt that it ever did happen and nothing is mentioned about it in scripture.

I thought I answered, but I'll try again. As I recall, the stories, fables, and parables attributed to Aesop did a great job of not only listing and describing good morals and ethics, but explaining the why of them without resorting to supernatural whim as an explanation. Imo, a much better, clearer job than Jesus and the bible with it's cryptically described, contradictory, changing morals and ethics usually without any explanation. Granted, the man may be just another myth.

Jesus is not a myth, first of all. Even Richard Dawkins believes He was a real person. I enjoyed Aesops fables; my grandfather gave me a book of them as a child (I wish I could find it now). I haven't looked them over in awhile so I can't say what I do or don't agree with. The question is, how are they objectively good? By that I don't mean, something that appeals to you personally. What I mean is, what makes them transcendent above mere human opinion?

That's an insane interpretation imo. There's no reason for the 'till heaven and earth pass' part at all then except to confuse the meaning, which would be crazy.
As to pigs flying meaning 'never' you forget, in 2009....swine flu. ;-)

I put them together because they are written together. You conflate fulfilling the law with "everything being fulfilled" for some reason, when it seems clear to me they are very different things. The Law is not "everything", right?

Right then, Jesus opposed God's law, hardly moral by any religious standard. That Law was still in effect while he lived under any interpretation, something he reiterated in the passage.

You've ignored my question, or contorted around it. The Law during his life required killing infidels, either he followed it and murdered or not. If not, how is defying God and telling others to follow along not immoral, especially considering the passage where he said that's not OK for ANYONE?
".....until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven,"
Edit: it seems you give him a 'do as I say, not as I do, I am bound by no law or rules because I am God so infallible' pass, which doesn't seem like him as he's usually described in the least (teaching by example), and goes against any interpretation of Mathew:18 since he definitely hadn't fulfilled "everything" yet.

I thought I answered, but I'll try again. As I recall, the stories, fables, and parables attributed to Aesop did a great job of not only listing and describing good morals and ethics, but explaining the why of them without resorting to supernatural whim as an explanation. Imo, a much better, clearer job than Jesus and the bible with it's cryptically described, contradictory, changing morals and ethics usually without any explanation. Granted, the man may be just another myth.

You're not reading the verse correctly

Maybe this will help..here is 3/4ths of the verse:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,

Jesus is saying here that nothing in the law will be altered until Heaven and Earth pass away..which is basically a way of saying it won't ever happen. Its the same as saying that something won't happen until pigs fly. Now comes the exception:

till all be fulfilled

Jesus is saying here that the law can be done away with when all is fulfilled. You are putting the fulfillment together with Heaven and Earth passing away for some reason. It doesn't say Heaven and Earth passing away is when the law will be fulfilled, does it? He just said in the previous verse that He came to fulfill it!

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil

So if the law can't pass away until all is fulfilled, and He fulfilled it, that means He can establish a New Covenant, which He did. God told us this would happen in the Old Testament:

Jeremiah 31:31-32

31"Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.

The bible tells us that Jesus followed the law perfectly. It doesn't mean that He killed anyone. When the Pharisees brought a women caught in Adultery and told Him to stone her..He confronted them with their sins and then forgave the woman. Jesus is the Lord and can forgive sins.

Now that I've answered your questions, could you answer mine?

Why do you think Aesop can bear the weight of objective morality?

I didn't breeze over it, just pointed out that's not all it said. I addressed the labyrinthine decryption.
However, you breeze over the part that contradicts you that I went in depth on...."till earth passes". Heaven must pass, earth must pass, AND all must be fulfilled, not OR. That didn't happen. Law on. Ignore that at your peril, or do mental gymnastics to convince yourself that doesn't mean till earth passes, I think it's all nonsense so not my problem.

But...you said Jesus was perfectly moral, so he must have followed the Law, so how many heathens did Jesus stone? Even by your measure, he was obligated to murder infidels until he died or he would be immoral, so how many murders did Jesus perform?

I think that of Aesop because he did it. One need not be perfectly moral to recognize morality, imo.

You're right, it is 100 percent clear:

Matthew 5:17-18

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled

In verse 17 Jesus says He has come to fulfill the law. In verse 18 He says nothing shall pass from the law until it is fulfilled. So, if Jesus came to fulfill the law, the only reason we would have to follow the Old Covenant law is if He failed to fulfill it. He came to fulfill it and fulfill it He did by living a perfect life and satisfying all of its requirements. He became the sacrifice for all sin, which is why the sacrificial system was done away with and the veil in the temple was torn asunder. God did away with that system and now everything is through His Son. This is why Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him. This is also why He said on the cross "it is finished".

Now this doesn't mean that there aren't any commands for us to follow. However, we follow them under the New Covenant and we are justified by our faith rather than our obedience. This is called the law of Christ.

I went pretty in depth with my answer so it's a little bit disappointing to see you breezed right over it. If you study that more closely you'll understand the particulars of the hows and whys.

Why do you think Aesop can bear the weight of objective morality?

Watched till the end, definitely a *ftw

Thank you - from my entire being.

This year, from a year of effort, I'm in a better place financially, mentally, and in every way possible, looking at life with an improved outlook. It was a year of coping with change and improving on things. I would call this past year a success and a step forward. Which, for me, will make this Christmas that much better. I'll spend Christmas with my son and my daughter.

The best part is, I have more money for Christmas this year than any year previous, but I am spending the least and buying less gifts. The food will be less, but better quality. In my son's words, "You don't need to get me anything this year dad, with all you do for me through the year, every day has been like Christmas!" and from my daughter, I don't need a gift, what I want is to stay up all night with some snacks and play Game of Thrones RISK till the sun comes up".
Feeling blessed this year.

I hope your Christmas is the best ever. And your heart is filled with cheer.
Have an amazing "Holiday" Christmas season with what ever you choose and how you will celebrate it!

Cheers!

I thought I was born again till this.

I find it hard to believe that so many people are bitching about this.

The web was unregulated till 2 years ago when Net Neutrality was put into place.

Now the web is of government control again.

Did any one notice any difference?