Deism is rejected by Judaism. As the Jewish Encyclopedia itself states at the end of its entry on the subject: "Judaism is theistic, not deistic."
David_Jay
JoinedPosts by David_Jay
-
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty insometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.
various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.
i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
-
-
-
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty insometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.
various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.
i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
-
-
David_Jay
If the god of christian theism did exist a lot of simple things would just make more sense.--Cofty.
Thanks for saying this.
This could be the problem. You might have made or have been handed a golden calf of sorts and been expecting it to be this great God that Christianity claims it is, and when it doesn't live up to the Christian claims you declare: "See, there is no God." But a golden calf, even if it be made out of the most precious stone, and even if you aren't the one who made it, is still an idol. It was never God to begin with.
I will not argue that you leave behind atheism for theism. As a Jew I find this a ridiculous demand and, to be honest, against my religion to think atheism is something bad. As long as you are a moral person and you do not worship false deities then you are perfect just as you are. In fact, by being an atheist and speaking about it to others you may be helping turn others from worshipping false gods. In Jewish theology you are neither required to be a Jew or a theist to have a place in the World to Come, you need only be just and moral.
The God of Abraham according to Jews is not something that can be fully grasped by the human mind, defined by religious doctrine, nor guaranteed by all the faith a man can muster. In fact, the word "God" was merely borrowed by the Jews to describe what they understand to be the Great Cause of the universe. Because people have come to accept that a deity is the highest being that must exist, then we use that word to describe the Great Cause. But in reality that are no such things as gods.
Our God is not a being that exists floating around somewhere in heaven, like the fairytale interpretations Gentiles have stuck to our ancient legends and traditional fables with moral lessons. Prophecies are not ambiguous phrases that can only by understood "in the light of Christ" and have to deal with the future of the Gentile world's history. And our God doesn't match the idealistic "all-loving" hippie picture Christians have painted him over with, making him out as if God is some kind of Santa Claus that you ask things of and, if you're good, you will get the toys you've requested on Christmas morning.
The Great Cause of the universe may even be less personal than Christans claim God is. This Great Cause may be the scientific mathematical center of laws that governs all to be as it is. Some Jews see this Cause as the universe itself and all its secrets yet to be tapped and discovered by science. Some see God as greater than all this yet, but whatever God is, Judaism has one thing it knows for sure about God: something that Great will defy understanding and demands of doctrine that humans can possess and invent. God may not even be as perfect as Christianity says God has to be.
Yet, our God gets blamed when the Christian golden calf fails to speak. When its prophecies don't become reality, our God gets blamed. When Christian interpretation get exposed as fraud it's is our Jewish Scriptures that get blamed.
I am glad Cofty made a purposeful differentiation between the Christian view of God in the very beginning. It is important to keep this in mind. Jewish monotheistic though has advanced, no...EVOLVED like everything else does in nature to become something far more advanced and logical than the static views of Christianity. So I thank Cofty for making this point clearly from the beginning.
We say the Bible is our history in allegory and mythology, Christians often say it's genuine history and use the writings of our prophets as a crystal ball that is supposed to be concerned with foretelling the future for Gentiles. We say it contains Jewish religious truths and they say it contains scientific facts. We say it contains lessons that must be adjusted to meet future needs and they say we must adjust our present lives to match its ancient, outdated demands.
So please continue to differentiate between Scripture and God and those who have sold you something different. That golden calf may be pretty, but don't blame our God for not being a giant floating gold bull in the sky. God is not what you've been taught, never was that thing, and never will be.
-
9
Christianity (Including JWs) Debunked
by HowTheBibleWasCreated in1 cor.
15: 21,22 rnwt: for since death came through a man,+ resurrection of the dead also comes through a man.+ 22 for just as in adam all are dying,+ so also in the christ all will be made alive.. .
so according to the nt jesus makes alive those that die in adam.. given the overwhelming evidence that adam as a man did not exist jws lose the battle on this verse.. however foolish christians like pentecostals and catholics like to call adam figurative.. okay... read it again^^^^^^... .
-
-
David_Jay
I am sure you heart is in the right place. But you arguments need a little sharpening up to work.
Being Jewish I neither believe that Jesus was the Messiah or in the concept of "original sin," and I totally accept evolution. However it sounds like you are confusing JW claims for what other religions actually teach as well as stuck reading the Pauline texts from the limited Watchtower perspective.
First off, both Catholicism and Pentecostals believe in the historicity of Adam. The only difference between the two faiths is that Catholicism sees the Genesis account as allegory while Pentecostals generally embrace a Fundamentalist interpretation, reading the Genesis account as literal. So that needs to be adjusted.
Next, the references in 1 Corinthians 15 to Adam introducing "death" into the world does not mean to other Christians what Jehovah's Witnesses claim it does.
The Jewish Annotated New Testament (which employs the NRSV text) has a very hearty footnote to these verses. Being that Paul was Jewish, the reference points out that unlike how the Watchtower interprets these verses, i.e., that Adam passed death to the rest of humanity via our DNA or something of that sort, Paul was likely employing the art of midrash to make a slightly different point.
Midrash is a Jewish form of hermeneutics that plays off the fact that the Hebrew tongue and its idioms are highly terse. Most other languages are not, but Hebrew very much is (meaning that one word can have a variety of subtle meanings). Here Paul seems to be quoting not Scripture but early rabbinical thought from the Second Temple era. Some Jewish sages and rabbis from this era taught that human "mortality" was introduced via Adam's envy, and that the Genesis account was an allegory claiming that humanity has wanted God out of the picture since the beginning (i.e., 'envying' God). The first personification or embodiment of this envy as the "Devil" in a religious text came shortly afterwards as found in Wisdom 2:24, an apocryphal Jewish writing (written around 100 BCE.)
While it is not clear if the text is calling Adam's envy "the Devil" (as Jews generally don't believe there is such a thing as a spirit enemy of God and humans) or if Wisdom is (for the first time in writing) introducing the Devil as a spirit being similar to Christian belief, Paul nevertheless does expand on this ambiguity via midrash in 1 Corinthians.
While Judaism does not teach that we die because we inherited death from Adam as a punishment, Paul via midrash took these elements to play off this illustriously. However, even Paul was not advancing the idea of Original Sin. That is a doctrine the Catholic Church would not introduce until much later. Paul's statement is related only to the Second Temple era theology (and it was not universal among Jews of the time either). The idea that all in Adam are dying as opposed to all in Christ being made alive is not literal, not in the first part anyway. He is merely using the illustration about Adam in arguing his point that resurrection is corporeal, not something that happens when someone dies and goes to heaven (the idea advanced by some that Paul is arguing against). By contrast Jehovah's Witnesses refer to a "heavenly resurrection" which is etymologically incorrect as the term "resurrection" refers only to the reanimation of physical, dead bodies.
All that aside, and as I do not subscribe to Christianity, I don't accept Paul's teaching even here. But what he is actually saying is far different than what you are describing (which seems to be the fault of the JWs never allowing you to learn outside their influence, not yours). Your conclusion has merit, but others outside the Watchtower will simply slice through the details in your argument for the reasons I pointed out. They need to be sound enough to stand up to mainstream theological academia. JW teaching does not.
A footnote: none of the Biblical genealogies are meant to be complete. All of them are based on outside sources, some oral and some written which no longer exist, from which only select names were taken in order to build a narrative in the context in which they occur. Jehovah's Witnesses claim that the Bible is the main source for these records, but the Bible was never the ultimate source for Jewish records, especially genealogical ones, since marriage and business contracts relied upon them. Copies of the Scriptures were never widely available even among the Jews until after the 17th century CE, so it would have been impractical to keep our records in the Bible. One therefore cannot base arguments for or against evolution on them (and remember, I accept the evolutionary model).
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
Hey folks, I am being sincere that I may have made a mistake and written things in ways I shouldn't have. No one needs to apologize for anything they said either. Before my God I promise I hold nothing against anyone here.
I went from being abused all my life suddenly to the lifestyle of living as a JW at 16, going to meetings, no Christmas, going to assemblies, Saturday service, etc. That was not abuse for me, but one man's paradise can be another man's hell, huh? Sorry how it sounded. I know it must have been horribly abusive for many if not all of you who went through it.
A last thought: when someone said they were afraid for the people I worked with because of what I wrote, that did some damage. I understand, and I forgive you, but I am moving on. The damage from that one comment has to do with something...well, it is far beyond what I can explain now, and for reasons you couldn't have known it is damage that will be permanent if I don't leave now.
Hey, it happens, and it's okay. I've survived worse. It could happen again in the future that someone may say something in a thread that will just stab an old wound they don't know is there. On this forum I would be stupid if I thought it couldn't occur again. It will happen in other parts of my life too.
I can't stop all those situations from popping up. But I decided I won't stay and continue after tonight as exposing myself to that possibility in the future has to be minimized for my own good. I can minimize future pain and have to. You are still wonderful people, and I am sure and know in my heart that no one means to be malicious. Just sometimes two sick people will only make each other sicker unless one goes to their own sickbed. That is what I do now. Regardless all is still forgiven. We can only do what we can to keep exposure to the elements at a minimum and do what's best for each other's healing.
Good nignt. Shalom. My best wishes. And my most sincere thanks for all the help you have given me. You have been to me a most wonderful mitzvah.
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
Thank you, nonJWspouse, but I think we need to move on now from me. What probably caused me to write my post without thinking is that I became a JW as teenager, leaving my parents behind for the life of meetings, field service etc. For me it was a relief. The abuse stopped (at least those things I mentioned as happening in my non-JW home before my Witness aunt took me in), and so I cannot say that living that life was anything but a relief. I came from a rich home, all the toys I could want, a nanny, dogs, we even celebrated all the holidays though we were Jews. I guess I knew no better as I was happy to go to meetings and field service and have no Christmas etc., anything but what I was rescued from. But I sincerely appreciate the adjustment. I need some time to move on for a bit, but I did want to thank you for that comment.
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
No, I feel I shouldn't have said anything as I was merely comparing being raised as a Witness without beatings, etc and saying that alone was not abuse. But if others believe that such is abuse, even without such things then I am not going to deny that of them. Apparently how I wrote things show, as dubstepped wrote, that there is something that even the people I work with should fear of me. I will seriously take that into consideration.
I feel very bad now for participating and the mistake I've made. Please accept my apology. I will move on to other subjects now, but thanks again for the correction.
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
And I would like to apologize to anyone else who found my post as an attempt to say that there are not other forms of abuse. I was only calling for some perspective on matters.
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
@dubstepped
I strongly believe that there are such things as religious abuse and that members of the Jehovah's Witnesses may have experienced different forms of this in different ways.
I never stated that my experience was the "measure of the spectrum of abuse."
I never tried to make it "the bar for abuse."
I only stated that having to live the life of a JW child is not in and of itself child abuse.
...honestly it frightens me for those that you work with that you have such a narrow view of abuse. In fact, trying to tell people that feel abused that they aren't simply because it wasn't as bad as you had it is itself abusive. Invalidation of others fits right in line with emotionally abusive behavior.
Apparently you are the judge of what constitutes a "narrow view of abuse" in a comment on this thread. I didn't think I told people who felt abused that they were NOT abused because it wasn't the same type of abuse I went through, but apparently you have this ability to look deep inside another person and determine that is what they meant. So I am going with you.
Thank you for telling me I was invalidating the feelings of others. Apparently you would never make such a mistake, and never by your words make someone who went through abuse feel worse for sharing their own feelings on the matter...you obviously also took a lot of consideration on how hard it was for me to share that.
Peace to you all.
-
25
And then it hit me: we were abused
by Anders Andersen infrom a psychcentral (run by mental health professionals): a familiar item on a list of 7 types of parental abuse :.
spiritual abuse.
has the child experienced:dichotomous thinking – dividing people into two parts: those who agree with the parent and those who don’t.
-
-
David_Jay
Over 50 now and I still have recurring nightmares in which I find myself playing with toys as a child in the home I grew up in...and then it hits me: "Oh, no! I'm a child again! Help!" Nothing else happens. My parents are not there. I do not get abused. The nightmare is that I am a child again.
Child abuse is a living nightmare, a horror that even the most strictest of family lives cannot match. I lived with an actual dread of each day, searching for a way out. And you desperately want out each and every day but can't leave because you are just a kid. Witnesses may fear reprisals from leaving the cult, but as adults they can leave. They don't spend each moment of each day looking for a way out as I did.
You don't see Witnesses and their children constantly peeing themselves in public places or throwing up in church or school each and everyday because of having been made to follow the rules and miss Christmas. But I would do these things all the time due to the abuse I suffered as a child because I couldn't express emotionally what was happening to me at home when I was in the hands of my father and mother.
Following strict rules in the Witness religion doesn't leave you with bruises, with bloody noses, with concussions or sore genitals and a bleeding bum. Abuse does. Being taught there are evil spirits or Armageddon that can come any day now is not the same as being tied up and gagged and locked in a closet for a day or two, having to live in your own feces and urine.
Being dragged to meetings and field service on regular basis is a breeze compared with having a naked adult's body on top of you as they release sexual fluids on and in you. Complain about being made to sit quiet through a 2 hours meeting or an assembly for several hours at a time? Try getting slapped in the face 15 to 20 times and then being told if you cry or shout in response you will get more of the same.
I'm sorry. But you are not describing abuse if you compare those things with these and many other things I went though. It may not have been easy for some of you, and for others there may have been actual abuse even as adult JWs, but these others things...no, they aren't child abuse.
-
43
2520-607 = 1913
by schnell ini love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
-
-
David_Jay
We did attempt to compensate for the leap year problem and came up with a year as close as 1841 as a result, but then realized that was an artificial stab in the dark. We merely had to guess at the amount of time added because at one point in history the months were added through visible examination, and this was not always correct. It led to problems that had to be corrected later.
So if one merely counts 2,520 straight lunar years of 29.5 days, you still can't figure it out unless we know for sure if the leap months were added when mathematically necessary (enough .5 days to make an extra month), or were added when they were observed by Jerusalem in the historical past (which has some mistakes in the calculations of the past), or if they should be added when the leap months should have occurred (based on the corrected recount of modern times), or do they get ignored completely? There's no way to know.