>>106559614
>Now I see you are a brown subhuman
No I am not.
> schizo
"Someone who disagrees with you", gotcha
> who is incapable of reading
I can read just fine, and step through hebrew, greek, and latin just fine
> or having enough intelligent thought
I'm a programmer and a licensed New York attorney.
>to understand divine words.
They mean what they say. Not what you ADD. Devarim says "do not step to the left or the right". You, instead of reading YHWH's words, read it, don't like it, and then add your own stipulations that are not in that law.
>In fact you couldn't even understand my own words
I understood them fine. You are wrong.
> which if you read them again you would
You claim that Devarim 22 verse 28 allows the father to prevent the rapist from keeping the girl. It does not.
>understand that your your assertions do not even contradict my claims.
You believe in protestant-style construction. You take a piece of a law from numbers, regarding seduction, then split a piece of it off, and declare that a general principael ("fathers can deny the man"), then you apply that piece, from that seperate law in numbers, to this other law in Devarim, which is dealing with the rape of virgin unbetrothed girl children (tahpahs: to take a city: rape, forcible rape, not "may I fuck you" seduction)
>But I have no interest in speaking with a lifeless brown person,
I'm Irish/Swiss-German-Polish. I have blue eyes, I do not tan: I burn. I don't care if I "burn in hell" for reading and liking YHWH's actual law.
>the same way I would not speak seriously to an LLM or a dog.
My veins are Cyan.
> You should consider it an act of immense kindness that I spoke to you at all
Lying and bullshiting about YHWH's law, adding what is not there, denying what is, is kindness?
> and perhaps in 100 years maybe you would understand half a percent of it.
You understand your law because you made it up in your head.
I read YHWH's law and like it: because he's a rapist of girls;_asarehissoliders
>Now I see you are a brown subhuman
No I am not.
> schizo
"Someone who disagrees with you", gotcha
> who is incapable of reading
I can read just fine, and step through hebrew, greek, and latin just fine
> or having enough intelligent thought
I'm a programmer and a licensed New York attorney.
>to understand divine words.
They mean what they say. Not what you ADD. Devarim says "do not step to the left or the right". You, instead of reading YHWH's words, read it, don't like it, and then add your own stipulations that are not in that law.
>In fact you couldn't even understand my own words
I understood them fine. You are wrong.
> which if you read them again you would
You claim that Devarim 22 verse 28 allows the father to prevent the rapist from keeping the girl. It does not.
>understand that your your assertions do not even contradict my claims.
You believe in protestant-style construction. You take a piece of a law from numbers, regarding seduction, then split a piece of it off, and declare that a general principael ("fathers can deny the man"), then you apply that piece, from that seperate law in numbers, to this other law in Devarim, which is dealing with the rape of virgin unbetrothed girl children (tahpahs: to take a city: rape, forcible rape, not "may I fuck you" seduction)
>But I have no interest in speaking with a lifeless brown person,
I'm Irish/Swiss-German-Polish. I have blue eyes, I do not tan: I burn. I don't care if I "burn in hell" for reading and liking YHWH's actual law.
>the same way I would not speak seriously to an LLM or a dog.
My veins are Cyan.
> You should consider it an act of immense kindness that I spoke to you at all
Lying and bullshiting about YHWH's law, adding what is not there, denying what is, is kindness?
> and perhaps in 100 years maybe you would understand half a percent of it.
You understand your law because you made it up in your head.
I read YHWH's law and like it: because he's a rapist of girls;_asarehissoliders
