Question about Torah and Talmud
- Thread starter User2
- Start date
bob x
Well-Known Member
Talmud is a collection of comments on the Torah by rabbis filling in the broad picture with applications to specific cases. It stems from an interpretive tradition that goes back further than the specific commentaries found here; bananabrain could speak more definitely on the traditional understanding, but the viewpoint is that there was an "Oral Torah" revealed to Moses and passed down by the sages since his time which is quite as authoritative as the "Written Torah".User2 said:
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
have a read of http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm and then ask me anything this doesn't answer.
b'shalom
bananabrain
b'shalom
bananabrain
Susma Rio Sep
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 828
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
the good of religion amnesia
Torah and Talmud and Koran and Bible and what have you.
Imagine that we all suffer religion amnesia, losing all our religious attachments; so that we don't know what we are: Jews, Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, whatever. Wipe the religious slate clean.
Now we can all begin with a tabula rasa and read on religions, but with a very good grounding in genuine discernment, like reading about the ancient mummification practices of Egypt.
What will happen? We will all be better off.
Susma Rio Sep
Torah and Talmud and Koran and Bible and what have you.
Imagine that we all suffer religion amnesia, losing all our religious attachments; so that we don't know what we are: Jews, Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, whatever. Wipe the religious slate clean.
Now we can all begin with a tabula rasa and read on religions, but with a very good grounding in genuine discernment, like reading about the ancient mummification practices of Egypt.
What will happen? We will all be better off.
Susma Rio Sep
User2 said:
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
I agree. The unfortunate circumstance that many will never become un-yoked from the traditions of their forefathers, perpetuating a chaotic state is applicable to most monotheistic religions. They have become the culmination of their own dogma and politics.Susma Rio Sep said:
Kurt
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
kkawohl,
this is a *comparative religion* board. that means that blanket condemnations of all religion and simplistic attacks on "dogma" are not exactly designed to stimulate interesting discussion, let alone promote tolerance and understanding. i find it astonishing that you think that you can assume that i need to be "un-yoked from the traditions of my forefathers". my forefathers' traditions have lasted 3000 years. what are you offering me that's so great in comparison? why do you assume that those within a tradition cannot challenge things they find to be *unnecessarily* dogmatic?
if it makes you feel better to congratulate yourself on your ignorance of my spiritual context, feel free. just don't expect anyone to applaud you.
b'shalom
bananabrain
this is a *comparative religion* board. that means that blanket condemnations of all religion and simplistic attacks on "dogma" are not exactly designed to stimulate interesting discussion, let alone promote tolerance and understanding. i find it astonishing that you think that you can assume that i need to be "un-yoked from the traditions of my forefathers". my forefathers' traditions have lasted 3000 years. what are you offering me that's so great in comparison? why do you assume that those within a tradition cannot challenge things they find to be *unnecessarily* dogmatic?
if it makes you feel better to congratulate yourself on your ignorance of my spiritual context, feel free. just don't expect anyone to applaud you.
b'shalom
bananabrain
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
1. Blanket condemnations of all religion?bananabrain said:
In this 21st Century, the Age of Technology, we are still plagued by religious beliefs that may be a contributing cause of terrorism, killings and wars between nations. Belief in a God who causes catastrophes, punishes people and who created the universe out of nothing as if by magic was brought about by hysteria and superstition. This thought process needs to be reassessed and brought up to date. Open-minded people must use common sense to determine whether this God was incorrectly perceived, misinterpreted and misunderstood by the masses of a bygone era.
2. Simplistic attacks on "dogma" ?
Perception plays a major role in religions. There are numerous interpretations of the Scriptures, hence there are various sects who use the same source, the Bible or the Qur'an, but come to different conclusions. Religious differences are acceptable by the majority as long as fanaticism does not cause physical confrontations. The ironic fact is that the followers of these religions all claim to live by the Word of God. Many claim that God has personally talked to their messengers who have relayed these Words of God to others. Apparently the Words of God were either misinterpreted, God is contradicting himself, or we start all over again by each side claiming to live by and having heard the Word of God correctly.
3. Designed to stimulate interesting discussion, let alone promote tolerance and understanding?
Would you rather have religious beliefs remain stuck in the Middle Ages? If Jews, Christians and Muslims would ever come to the realization that their God is the same logical deity, rationality would dictate peace and eliminate borders. When peoples' concept of God is flawed, corrections, truth, logic and common sense thereof must eventually prevail. Human fallibility and misconceptions have labeled God for past millennia as one who interferes with the natural forces and free will of people by threatening punishment to those who disobey his bidding. The God of our ancestors had to be humanized in order to have the masses adapt the thought processes to that time period. God does not change with the times but our perception of who God is should change as societies eliminate their superstitious beliefs. God, the Ultimate Spirit consists of Supreme Purity, Pure Intelligence, Pure Logic, etc., is not encumbered by human attributes and has no needs, or a desire to be worshiped, prayed to, exalted, venerated, deified, or anything else that mankind has to offer.
4. You find it astonishing that I think that I can assume that you need to be "un-yoked from the traditions of my forefathers". my forefathers' traditions have lasted 3000 years? What am I offering me that's so great in comparison?
How about a rational, logical God who never has & never will interfere in the affairs of mankind? Human characteristics are to exercise upon others: power, control, dominance, destruction, punishment, revenge, judgment. Everyone is individually and personally totally responsible for his own soul's destiny. The destruction of civilizations, most sufferings and premature deaths are due to human frailties, stupidity or imperfections and are not God's doings. God, exists in a spiritual realm and never has and never will interfere with anything on earth or in the universe. God is interested in and is involved in humanity, but does not interfere in any way in our physical lives. God guides the development of the universe and everything thereon like a Master Planner. Our relationship and interaction of our spirit with the Spirit of God is for our, not God's benefit.
5. Why do I assume that those within a tradition cannot challenge things they find to be *unnecessarily* dogmatic?
In over 3000 years dogmatic religion has not been challenged.
Would a rational God:
1. Allow terrorism, killings and misery if he could prevent it?
2. Need to be idolized or worshiped?
3. Want to be a fascist ruler & promote slavery?
MY GOD IS RATIONAL. If everyone would accept a rational God, terrorism could be subdued. Islamic terrorists now are convinced that their actions will be rewarded by Allah. Rationality in religions MUST begin in the civilized world in order to be eventually accepted by barbarians.
I am not questioning your individual spiritual context. Most religions per se, or most religious rationality today is an oxymoron. Isn't it about time that religious rationality and logic were the norm?
Shalom & namaste,
Kurt
[Edit by I, Brian - font size's increased to make the post readable on larger resolutions.
]
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
Really? Would you rather remain yoked to the illogical, irrational perception of a God of our forebears? Do we not now have chaos because of the Islamic fundamentalist belief that Allah/God will reward their efforts to promote Islam by any means possible?I said:Throw off the yoke of our forebears? Sounds like a recommendation to chaos, dogma, and politics to me.
I prefer to be unyoked & have a rational, logical God.
Namaste,
Kurt
I enjoy a rather logical and rational God - but I think you'll find most people claim their view of God is indeed that.
In which case we're really in danger of rendering the point of this discussion as "my viewpoint is better than yours".
I really do believe that you're being just a little unfair with blanket pronouncements on other religions, though. You would actually be suprised by the degree of commonality in "logic and rationalism" of members of particular faiths.
After all, if we all see the same God, then it is merely our language - and the traditions that frame that language - that ultimately differ.
To berate other perceptions is as much a process of constructing our own prejudices, rather than demolishing others. IMO
In which case we're really in danger of rendering the point of this discussion as "my viewpoint is better than yours".
I really do believe that you're being just a little unfair with blanket pronouncements on other religions, though. You would actually be suprised by the degree of commonality in "logic and rationalism" of members of particular faiths.
After all, if we all see the same God, then it is merely our language - and the traditions that frame that language - that ultimately differ.
To berate other perceptions is as much a process of constructing our own prejudices, rather than demolishing others. IMO
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
Rationality and logic should eventually eliminates all superstition. Fear of an uncertain future has been instilled in many through conditioning. Truth and logic require a foundation, the foundation being our realization that our forefathers intentions for our soul's continuity was their conviction that God had personally spoken to his messengers and had instructed them in what God desired. What was considered the truth about God was whatever society adopted thereof during their time when presuppositions of the concept of God was compared to a required domination by a ruler who was capable of enforcing laws adaptable for the society of that time period.I said:
Where is the rationality of the Bible in the following instances?
God tells Moses that ANY work done on the Sabbath is punishable by death.
Exodus 31:14 Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
Numbers 15:32
15:35 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
Exodus Highlights:
God teaches Moses some magic tricks. 4:2-9, 7:8-11, 7:17-20
God hardens the Pharaoh's heart.4:21, 7:3, 7:13, 9:12, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10,14:8
God tries to kill Moses. 4:23-25
Moses has uncircumcised lips. 6:12, 6:30
God's first plague on the Egyptians: Rivers turned to blood. 7:17-22
(Pharaoh's magicians knew this trick, too.)
Second Plague: Frogs. (Pharaoh's magicians do likewise.) 8:2-7
Third Plague: Lice. (Pharaoh's magicians couldn't do this one!) 8:16-18
Fourth Plague: Flies. 8:21-24
Fifth Plague: God kills the cattle. 9:3
Sixth Plague: Boils. 9:9
Seventh Plague: Hail. 9:19
Eighth Plague: Locusts. 10:5
Ninth Plague: Darkness. 10:21
Tenth Plague: God kills firstborn children and animals. 12:29-30
God threatens to kill the Pharaoh's firstborn son. 4:23
God plans to murder the Egyptian firstborn humans and animals. 11:4-5, 12:12, 13:15
God murders the Egyptian firstborn humans and animals. 12:30
God plans to drown Pharaoh's army. 14:17-18
God drowns Pharaoh's army. 14:27-28
"The Lord is a man of war." 15:3
God punishes the children for the sins of their fathers. 20:5, 34:7
(unto the third and fourth generations)
Instructions for buying a slave. 21:2
Instructions for selling your daughter. 21:7
Instructions for taking a second wife. 21:10
Children who strike their parents are to be killed. 21:15
It's OK to beat a slave as long as he lives a day or two "for he is his money." 21:20-21
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." 22:18
You must kill those who worship another god. 22:20
If you misbehave, God will kill you with his own sword . 22:24
God's feet. 24:10
God's finger. 8:19, 31:18
Sabbath breakers must be killed. 31:14-15, 35:2
God repents. 32:14
God tells every man to slay "his brother, companion, neighbor." 32:27
God speaks to Moses "face to face." 33:11
God shows Moses his "back parts." 33:23
God's name is "Jealous." 34:14
Logic & rationality endorses a logical God. As long as religions persist on abiding by superstitions, irrationality will persist. The "Holy Books" (Bible, Torah, Qur’an) were written during a time when superstitions prevailed. Superstitions are an irrational belief that someone or something causes an action or circumstance not logically related to a course of events that influences its outcome. A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.
A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality.
I apologize if anyone feels berated by my comments. This is not my intent.After all, if we all see the same God, then it is merely our language - and the traditions that frame that language - that ultimately differ.
To berate other perceptions is as much a process of constructing our own prejudices, rather than demolishing others. IMO
It is my hope that eventually mankind will stop fighting for God. Throughout history men have killed each other & claimed that "God is on our side".
The Torah, Bible and the Koran need to be edited and brought into the 21st century where religion is not based on slavery to God.
Namaste,
Kurt
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
Litany of Disillusion
The Torah is the Hebrew name for the five books of Moses-the Law of Moses or the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible. The Torah is believed by Orthodox Jews to have been handed down to Moses on Mt. Sinai and transmitted by him to the Jews. It laid down the fundamental laws of moral and physical conduct. The Torah begins with a description of the origin of the universe and ends on the word Israel, after the story of the death of Moses, just before the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. In a wider sense the Torah includes all teachings of the books of the Torah were written over a period of about 1500 years by about 40 different authors on three continents in three languages.
The first 5 books, written by Moses about 1410 B.C. were accepted as authoritative by the people that initially received them. Transmission refers to the process of getting something written up to 3500 years ago to us. During transmission the documents are copied and errors are introduced. Some, who reject the truth of the bible argue that there errors are so many and so large that the bible is unreliable. Others, who accept the truth of the bible argue that the errors and alterations by copyists only slightly if at all diminish the reliability of the bible.
Jack Cargillis a Professor of Ancient History at Rutgers University, specializing in "Ancient Greece, the Near East, and Rome, and the interactions between them, with special interests in classical Greek epigraphy and historical issues related to the Bible and archaeology".
Quote:
...The Hebrew Bible is simply not a reliable source for the history of ancient Israel... If we are content to provide students with mythical, legendary, uncritical histories of ancient Israel, how can we have any legitimate grounds for complaint or criticism when others are willing to provide mythologized, fictionalized histories of other peoples and places?
Jack Cargill, "Ancient Israel in Western Civ Textbooks," The History Teacher (May 2001) (most Jewish historians agree with his conclusions)
Quote:
As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting
Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation...
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document...
The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all."
The rabbi offered what he called a "litany of disillusion" about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel - not one shard of pottery."
MICHAEL MASSING - The New York Times, March 9, 2002
The Torah is the Hebrew name for the five books of Moses-the Law of Moses or the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible. The Torah is believed by Orthodox Jews to have been handed down to Moses on Mt. Sinai and transmitted by him to the Jews. It laid down the fundamental laws of moral and physical conduct. The Torah begins with a description of the origin of the universe and ends on the word Israel, after the story of the death of Moses, just before the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. In a wider sense the Torah includes all teachings of the books of the Torah were written over a period of about 1500 years by about 40 different authors on three continents in three languages.
The first 5 books, written by Moses about 1410 B.C. were accepted as authoritative by the people that initially received them. Transmission refers to the process of getting something written up to 3500 years ago to us. During transmission the documents are copied and errors are introduced. Some, who reject the truth of the bible argue that there errors are so many and so large that the bible is unreliable. Others, who accept the truth of the bible argue that the errors and alterations by copyists only slightly if at all diminish the reliability of the bible.
Jack Cargillis a Professor of Ancient History at Rutgers University, specializing in "Ancient Greece, the Near East, and Rome, and the interactions between them, with special interests in classical Greek epigraphy and historical issues related to the Bible and archaeology".
Quote:
...The Hebrew Bible is simply not a reliable source for the history of ancient Israel... If we are content to provide students with mythical, legendary, uncritical histories of ancient Israel, how can we have any legitimate grounds for complaint or criticism when others are willing to provide mythologized, fictionalized histories of other peoples and places?
Jack Cargill, "Ancient Israel in Western Civ Textbooks," The History Teacher (May 2001) (most Jewish historians agree with his conclusions)
Quote:
As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting
Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation...
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document...
The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all."
The rabbi offered what he called a "litany of disillusion" about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel - not one shard of pottery."
MICHAEL MASSING - The New York Times, March 9, 2002
kkwahol -
You are using an age-old Atheist mindset that says that literal readings of the Bible in English render it ridiculous.
May I remind you that no single part of the Bible was EVER written in English (unless you're a particularly odd streak of fundamentlist - they do exist! ) - in which case, all you are doing is spreading your own ignorance, prejudices, and presumptions about how to interpret these texts.
You pasted a lot of quotes from the OT and infer they are illogical and irrational - but at no point have you ever referred to any form of context, let alone actually explored the original interpretations from Hebrew.
You speak of logic and rationality, but your won comments are illogical and irrational, because you insist on making quick judgements on the most superficial readings of rather complex texts.
Although that may be your prerogative to go through life building such prejudices, I'd actually recommend you open your eyes from the superficial black and white perception you have of religion in general, and maybe read some real religious history, rather than live on the tabloid version.
You are using an age-old Atheist mindset that says that literal readings of the Bible in English render it ridiculous.
May I remind you that no single part of the Bible was EVER written in English (unless you're a particularly odd streak of fundamentlist - they do exist!
) - in which case, all you are doing is spreading your own ignorance, prejudices, and presumptions about how to interpret these texts.You pasted a lot of quotes from the OT and infer they are illogical and irrational - but at no point have you ever referred to any form of context, let alone actually explored the original interpretations from Hebrew.
You speak of logic and rationality, but your won comments are illogical and irrational, because you insist on making quick judgements on the most superficial readings of rather complex texts.
Although that may be your prerogative to go through life building such prejudices, I'd actually recommend you open your eyes from the superficial black and white perception you have of religion in general, and maybe read some real religious history, rather than live on the tabloid version.
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
I submit that after several thousand years of irrationality applicable to the Judeo-Christian antiquated fundamentalism their beliefs are still mostly based on superstitions and they are stuck in a inescapable chasm that is deeper than most holes.
Our earth is just a tiny speck in the universe, yet its people specify and argue about what God, the spirit entity should be called, who more correctly worships this entity and who thereby is more apt to win its favor.
Our knowledge of our surroundings entails less than 2% of the entire universe. Let’s project a scenario of three aliens visiting earth from another planet. Their view of God is entirely different than ours. The Christians, Jews & Muslims each convert and brainwash one poor fellow and the 3 aliens carry then take this message of salvation to their own people. Their people who all had a similar perception of God now start annihilating each other because each claims that their God is correct. Our small earth has achieved its objective of spreading “The Word Of God” to another world.
My spirit has seen the face of God and if I'm lying I'm risking the survival of my soul...and I KNOW that my soul will be with God...God is spiritual and is the progressive and accumulative spiritual intelligence of the universe; of all the righteous souls who have passed into the spiritual realm. God does not and never has meddled in the tangible universe.
It is of no importance during our physical life whether God exists or not if one so chooses. Whether or not one believes in a spirit or God really makes no difference to God. Righteous living will determine the continuance and destiny of our spirit/soul. One's life can be enhanced by receiving solace and being comforted during life's trials and tribulations by having our spirit inspired and blessed by the Spirit of God. This is normally man's only connection with God except when God’s Spirit interacts with a person’s spirit directly; God’s messenger. As humanities eliminate their superstitious beliefs, civilization will have to rely on their own morals and their own self-worth to be candid, truthful and frank.
Our earth is just a tiny speck in the universe, yet its people specify and argue about what God, the spirit entity should be called, who more correctly worships this entity and who thereby is more apt to win its favor.
Our knowledge of our surroundings entails less than 2% of the entire universe. Let’s project a scenario of three aliens visiting earth from another planet. Their view of God is entirely different than ours. The Christians, Jews & Muslims each convert and brainwash one poor fellow and the 3 aliens carry then take this message of salvation to their own people. Their people who all had a similar perception of God now start annihilating each other because each claims that their God is correct. Our small earth has achieved its objective of spreading “The Word Of God” to another world.
My spirit has seen the face of God and if I'm lying I'm risking the survival of my soul...and I KNOW that my soul will be with God...God is spiritual and is the progressive and accumulative spiritual intelligence of the universe; of all the righteous souls who have passed into the spiritual realm. God does not and never has meddled in the tangible universe.
It is of no importance during our physical life whether God exists or not if one so chooses. Whether or not one believes in a spirit or God really makes no difference to God. Righteous living will determine the continuance and destiny of our spirit/soul. One's life can be enhanced by receiving solace and being comforted during life's trials and tribulations by having our spirit inspired and blessed by the Spirit of God. This is normally man's only connection with God except when God’s Spirit interacts with a person’s spirit directly; God’s messenger. As humanities eliminate their superstitious beliefs, civilization will have to rely on their own morals and their own self-worth to be candid, truthful and frank.
You seem to be joining the same argument, though - arguing a point about what is God.kkawohl said:
More to the point, though, you seem to have an extremely narrow view of world religions. I suspect your experience of people of these faiths might be rather narrow. Hopefully, though, members here will be able to educate you that not every Jew, Christian, or Muslim, is a hate-breathing narrow-minded fundamentalist.
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
Muslim Ideology
How can we change Muslim religious ideology to stop terrorism?
A fanatic passion to please God has been demonstrated throughout the Ages. We have seen vast destruction and useless killings by religious zealots that have followed us into the present century whereby even technology is unable to quell its tide. Muslims have been led to believe that they must expand Islam in order to please Allah/God. Since Judaism created the present perception of God, it is the duty of Judaism, the originator to bring rationality to a belief in Allah/God if Israel and Judaism wants to live in peace with Muslims.
If all the events that occurred as written in the Bible, Qur’an and Torah now, today, would humanity be as gullible now and accept all miracles and God as portrayed then? If the context entails incorrect exegeses and the vast tradition of hermeneutics and the translation is illogical, it is illogical whether it is by my interpretation or by any logic.
Mankind has progressed past a need for a God who desires and requires servitude. We can eliminate servitude and still have a closeness and love of God. It was man who placed restrictions on himself for the good of mankind and attributed this to God. Most of us now live in a lawful society. Now laws are proposed and enforced by governments. God does not, and never has meddled in our affairs.
If we take rationality completely out of context when establishing an association with present day problems between Jews, Christians and Muslims, we can come up with numerous solutions. Reality however dictates that if there were no distinctions between Muslims, Jews, and Christians, strife would be nonexistent. The major distinction is religion.
The best weapon against irrationality is logic. If logic is implemented in religion, eventually the inference of reasoning has to predominate and the illogical will be considered inferior and will ridicule itself out of existence. Today we have at our disposal the means whereby the media can reach even the farthest corners of our world.
How does one confront the passions of people with a logical entreaty to abandon faith? How does one convince a young man that his self-immolation in a bombing will not bring redemption from Allah to his soul and rewards to his people or honor to his family?
If logical reasoning lodges doubt into the mind of a martyr that his soul will be destroyed as a punishment for being the cause of cutting short another soul's ability to attain a bond with Allah/God, eventually the act of self-sacrifice ceases. This is the only effective way that man will eventually attain peace.
We can spend billions of dollars in an attempt to annihilate groups of people who have an adamant fanatical goal to destroy anyone who hinders the path of spreading their religion. They believe that this has been commanded by Allah. The end result will always be the same. The fanatics who are destroyed fuel the hatred of a new group with the same or an even fiercer fervor to die for their Allah if the need arises.
How do we solve this problem? The pen is mightier than the sword. To the illiterate, visual projections via film is the greatest tool. The media and film producers have always shied away from the possibility of offending religious organizations. A fear of the fundamentalists' wrath has even stifled the desire for the truth. Can the real truth be revealed? Will this end strife? Maybe not, but unless we try, we will never know; will we?
True logic is the science of inference and reasoning.
Kurt Kawohl
How can we change Muslim religious ideology to stop terrorism?
A fanatic passion to please God has been demonstrated throughout the Ages. We have seen vast destruction and useless killings by religious zealots that have followed us into the present century whereby even technology is unable to quell its tide. Muslims have been led to believe that they must expand Islam in order to please Allah/God. Since Judaism created the present perception of God, it is the duty of Judaism, the originator to bring rationality to a belief in Allah/God if Israel and Judaism wants to live in peace with Muslims.
If all the events that occurred as written in the Bible, Qur’an and Torah now, today, would humanity be as gullible now and accept all miracles and God as portrayed then? If the context entails incorrect exegeses and the vast tradition of hermeneutics and the translation is illogical, it is illogical whether it is by my interpretation or by any logic.
Mankind has progressed past a need for a God who desires and requires servitude. We can eliminate servitude and still have a closeness and love of God. It was man who placed restrictions on himself for the good of mankind and attributed this to God. Most of us now live in a lawful society. Now laws are proposed and enforced by governments. God does not, and never has meddled in our affairs.
If we take rationality completely out of context when establishing an association with present day problems between Jews, Christians and Muslims, we can come up with numerous solutions. Reality however dictates that if there were no distinctions between Muslims, Jews, and Christians, strife would be nonexistent. The major distinction is religion.
The best weapon against irrationality is logic. If logic is implemented in religion, eventually the inference of reasoning has to predominate and the illogical will be considered inferior and will ridicule itself out of existence. Today we have at our disposal the means whereby the media can reach even the farthest corners of our world.
How does one confront the passions of people with a logical entreaty to abandon faith? How does one convince a young man that his self-immolation in a bombing will not bring redemption from Allah to his soul and rewards to his people or honor to his family?
If logical reasoning lodges doubt into the mind of a martyr that his soul will be destroyed as a punishment for being the cause of cutting short another soul's ability to attain a bond with Allah/God, eventually the act of self-sacrifice ceases. This is the only effective way that man will eventually attain peace.
We can spend billions of dollars in an attempt to annihilate groups of people who have an adamant fanatical goal to destroy anyone who hinders the path of spreading their religion. They believe that this has been commanded by Allah. The end result will always be the same. The fanatics who are destroyed fuel the hatred of a new group with the same or an even fiercer fervor to die for their Allah if the need arises.
How do we solve this problem? The pen is mightier than the sword. To the illiterate, visual projections via film is the greatest tool. The media and film producers have always shied away from the possibility of offending religious organizations. A fear of the fundamentalists' wrath has even stifled the desire for the truth. Can the real truth be revealed? Will this end strife? Maybe not, but unless we try, we will never know; will we?
True logic is the science of inference and reasoning.
Kurt Kawohl
No matter where you look through history, there is conflict. Long before Christianity, Europe was savaged by war, long before Islam, the Middle-East was savaged by War; long before Judaism...well, that's getting pretty early - but there was almost certainly war.
Religion and politics have often been so terribly intertwined that to some they have become indistinguishable. But this applies to any religion.
For example, here in the UK we underwent various violent invasions: the Celts, the Romans, the Saxons, the Vikings - not a single one motivated by monotheistic traditions, but polytheisic traditions. Whilst certain apologetic Neopagans will try and play down the extent of violence involved, the fact remains that these were not generally peaceful migrations - where people migrate into new and populated territory it almost never is.
- but there was almost certainly war.Religion and politics have often been so terribly intertwined that to some they have become indistinguishable. But this applies to any religion.
For example, here in the UK we underwent various violent invasions: the Celts, the Romans, the Saxons, the Vikings - not a single one motivated by monotheistic traditions, but polytheisic traditions. Whilst certain apologetic Neopagans will try and play down the extent of violence involved, the fact remains that these were not generally peaceful migrations - where people migrate into new and populated territory it almost never is.
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
*grin* stone him! stone him! obviously you have established that you speak with an authoritative opinion on these matters. deary me. the above statement rests on several assumptions, any one of which i find highly questionable:
a) that *you* get to define what is rational and irrational
b) that there is such a thing as "judeo-christian" (one of my bugbears. i tend to answer that there isn't, because there usually isn't much "judeo" involved)
c) that *you* get to define when something is "superstitious"
d) that the "j-c" chasm is "deeper" than most holes (a rhetorical point if ever i've seen one)
as brian says, quoting vast chunks of badly translated literal english doesn't prove you know anything about the Text in question, its context or use. furthermore:
ahem. such certainty sounds rather more fundamentalist than the sort of stuff that i come out with. i don't *know* any of this stuff to the same degree that you appear to claim to know. belief is not the same thing as knowledge. you seem awfully certain that you know what G!D has Done or not Done.
you claim to be a rationalist. if that is really what you are, which seems somewhat dubious given the sort of stuff you claim to know, which cannot, of course, be rationally proved.
the "logic and rationality prove that G!D exist" is a really old argument. if they do, why aren't more logicians and rationalists convinced by these proofs? more to the point, how do you know what makes G!D "happy"? the only people i know who have this sort of certainty are people like osama bin laden, jerry falwell and the like.
if you want to select *one* of the above quotes from a jewish text, i am more than happy to study it with you when i have a moment, but please have the courtesy to avoid rushing to judgement - that is the mark of the bigot.
b'shalom
bananabrain
kkawohl
Well-Known Member
Temporarily hold off on the stoning until it is deserved, if you please.bananabrain said:
I accept your challenge. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Orthodox Jews believe God taught the Oral Torah to Moses, and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained in oral form only until about the 2d century C.E., when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah.
Moses is described as the only person who ever knew God face-to-face (Deut. 34:10) and mouth-to-mouth (Num. 12:8), which means that God spoke to Moses directly, in plain language, not through visions and dreams, as God communicated with other prophets.
I stated "My spirit has seen the face of God". I say, "God is spirit & our spirit is the only one capable of interacting with the spiritual existence".
Christians claim that Jesus physically talked to God & Muhammad physically received God's mesage.
Do you believe God spoke to Moses directly, in plain language, not through his spirit?
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
you can assume that there's no need to repeat stuff like this for me.
ok - the sages posit a hierarchy of prophetic experience. note that when they do so, they are talking only about prophecy in the jewish context, not referring to comparative prophetic experiences to validate it. (there are non-jewish prophets in the bible, incidentally, like balaam as well as people like the false prophets of baal who cop it at the hands of elijah) moses is at the top of this hierarchy of prophetic experience, followed by the prophets and patriarchs, followed by some of the great mystics. moses is described as hearing the teaching direct, as opposed to the other prophets who had visions or dreams or the sages and mystics who heard "batei qol", heavenly voices, or possessed ruakh ha'qodesh - literally the "holy spirit", but this is not what christians mean by that english phrase, but it means that they are on a higher level of spiritual development.
it is important to be clear that the phrase "face to face" (PeH EL-PeH) and so on do not denote physical relations or any kind of literal understanding. the standard commentary on this text, RaSh"I (C12th France) says:
"This 'vision' is a vision of speech, that G!D explains the *statement* to him with its "frontal view", rather than obliquely, or making it vague for him with riddles, in the manner that was said to Ezekiel, 'compose a riddle, etc..' One might be able to think that Moses was shown the vision of the Divine Presence. To teach us different, the Torah says, 'You shall not be able to see My face.'"
in other words, moses saw the *message*, not the face of G!D - rashi quotes the second half of that verse "and at an Image of G!D you shall gaze", reconciling it like this: "this is a view of the back, like the matter which is said, 'and you will see My back.'" (exodus 33:23)
the "mouth to mouth" statement is sometimes also interpreted to mean that moses separated himself from his wife in order to commune directly with the Shekhinah or Divine Presence in this manner, as it were. for this reason, there is a tradition that his actual death came about by the "kiss of the Shekhinah".
with all this said, there is nothing i have seen that indicates that G!D used "plain language", as you put it. we explain this through the idea that moses was the only prophet able to understand *all the implications* of the Divine Speech, in other words all the levels of both the Written and Oral Laws and that which exists within them in potentia. however, this is of course belief - extrapolated from the same laws by the principles of jewish exegesis and hermeneutics. the actual mechanics of what happened are, naturally, beyond our understanding.
it is also the position of our tradition that the "prophetic facility" ended with the destruction of the Temple, as did the "impulse to idolatry" as a category of Torah law. the rough always went with the smooth even then. however, there exists a large body of laws for recognising jewish prophecy should it ever reappear.
well, i dare say. the point is, we're on a website. i could tell you i was ten foot tall with wings if i felt like it. now, although this claim could be disproved visually, what your spirit gets up to in its own time cannot because of what philosophers call "privacy of experience". so arguing about the mechanics of what did or didn't happen is a bit of a waste of time IMHO. we are more interested in how people actually behave in real life.
b'shalom