Posts by David

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

The Torah verses under discussion where composed around the post-exile era, when the Jews lived in Babylon or shortly after the rebuilding of the Second Temple had begun. They weren't really uttered to Moses from God millennia ago during the legendary narrative of Israel's 40-year trek through the wilderness.

They reflect an attempt by the Jews to understand how to be just in the world around them. Jews are not of the opinion that God really stated the actual words in these laws, telling us it's okay to have slaves. Some Christians believe that, and you seem to believe their take on the matter, be we Jews don't.

The Jews have struggled through the ages to understand and apply the principle of Tikkun Olam, which is basically trying to see clearly now to act right in and toward the world and it's inhabitants. Over the ages Torah has reflected the mores of society in which they developed, changing and even being discarded as our religious view evolved.

God has been against subjugation of anyone since the beginning of history, and Jewish Scripture is but an ancient snapshot of how Torah was understood at the time of their composition. Many of these biblical laws were discarded by Judaism centuries before Christ. The Midrash and then the Talmud took up the cloak of presenting Torah after this.

The Scriptures often use particular language to claim that God permitted certain behaviors and practices, attributing things like slavery to God. But Jews know this was not really the case. The Biblical record is neither historical nor are all the commands within really from Heaven.

We don't view the Bible in these terms about slavery in the way you believe. You repeating Christian theology and starting it represents Jewish thought is not a way to prove your point. It only shows you lack of exposure to Hebrew thought.

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

Just because those enslaved by the Jews had some limited rights does not make it right. It does not lessen the injustice and it certainly does not lessen the nonsensical situation where a supposed God of love provides the framework for one group of people to subjugate another.

Who said Jews teach that our God is "a God of love"? Torah never describes God as the "love-all, always perfect and always just" God you're talking about. You got that from Christians, not us!

I'm a Jew, and I tell you we know slavery was evil. We never said:

Just because those enslaved by the Jews had some limited rights...

--that it was right. We teach that slavery in all its forms, even that regulated by Torah, has always been unjust and evil. It was never right, even in Biblical times as it occurred in Israel.

You know nothing about me, my ancestors or my culture. You don't even know if I am white, black, Asian or a bloody martian.

And the fact that you attribute such incorrect interpretations about Jews, the Scriptures we wrote, and our God-concept at the center of it all, shows you don't know anything about me, my ancestors or my culture.

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

For the record, Jews learned from Torah that any type of slave ownership was wrong. Torah did not call for slavery. On the contrary, Torah called for the Jews to end it. Eventually we did, but while our culture grew out of it, Torah demanded we treated all life equally.

This cannot be said for how Gentiles treated their slaves throughout history.

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

konceptual99,

What about your culture's history with slavery? Did your ancestors treat slaves better? Could your ancestor's slaves free themselves?

Could the slaves of the UK or US free themselves this way? Did your people apply the Lex Talinois to free and slave the same, or could the slave owners of your people get away with how they treated them?

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

ttdtt,

Do remember that you are quoting from the New World Translation. The verse doesn't read exactly like that in the Hebrew.

The Hebrew reads like this:

When someone strikes their slave with a rod, whether they be male or female, and it's the type of beating that results in a death, punishment must be extracted. But no punishment will be demanded where this does not happen. If there is a question, wait a day or two. The slave is the other’s property.

Torah isn't saying that Jews may beat those in their service up to the point of death. On the contrary, Torah is explaining why someone can receive capital punishment for killing their own slave. It is teaching that there is a difference between someone whacking another with a rod and one beating them so badly that they die.

The phrase, "the slave is the other's property" follows the statement LO YUQQAM in Hebrew, which literally means "DO NOT EXECUTE (HIM)." This shows that the subject of the passage is when a slave owner is accused of going too far in beating a slave. Torah is asking: Was this just a passing beating? Was it bad enough to kill the slave?

Torah suddenly skips a few verses to say something else, then continues with the slave issue, stating in verse 26:

When someone strikes the eye of their slave, male or female, causing permanent damage, they must let that slave go free on account of losing their eye. If they knock out the slave's tooth, male or female, they must let that slave go free on account of losing their tooth.

You might notice that there are verses stuck in between speaking about what happens to a slave when a slave owner punishes them. What are these verses? Verses 22-25 are the famous Lex Talinois law, the "measure-for-measure" punishment, the "eye for an eye, life for life" law. They are applied to free people in this instance and then Torah goes back to speaking about slaves. Why?

Torah is saying Biblical law is the same for all classes. You beat anyone, free or slave, and cause any damage, the same gets done to you.

Sure, my people the Jews had slaves, but don't forget, so did yours. How did your people treat your slaves when your Gentile ancestors had them? Were their laws worse or better? What does history say about your culture's treatment of slaves?

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

It's a common mistake made by some that the slavery mentioned in the Jewish Scriptures was anything like the slave trade during Roman times or the Atlantic (sometimes called "African") slave trade.

The Torah forbade any type of slavery that resembled what the Jews experienced in Egypt, and it was nothing like the slavery of recent times, like those owned by Americans before the Civil War. For instance:

1. Slaves in Israel became members of the household, and enjoyed the benefits and protections of the Mosaic Law such as rest on the Sabbath, rest and celebration on Jewish holy days, and thus could inherit the household's wealth and name if there was no heir to pass it to (and possibly in despite of that fact according to Proverbs 17:2).--Ge 15:3; Ex 12:44, 45, 20:10, 21:20; 23:12; Deut 5:14-15; 12:18; 16:11-14.

2. Slaves were compensated for their work, especially when they were hurt on the job. Mistreatment by the owner could even be a reason for immediate release. If a slave died from mistreatment at the hands of their owner, the Torah demanded that the slave owner face punishment for killing another human.--Ex 21:20, 26-27; Lev 25:29, 43, 46, 53; Deut 23:17.

3. Slaves could buy and own their own property. They could even buy their freedom from their masters.--Lev 25:29; 2 Sam 9:10; 16:4; 19:18-30 (see also 1 Sa 9:8); see also Jewish works Kid 1:3; Yad, Avadim 5:2.

4. Those who owned slaves were forbidden by Torah to mistreat them, and kidnapping someone for the sole purpose of enslaving them or selling them into slavery was a capital offense.--Ex 21:16; Lev 25:43, 46, 53; Deut 23:17; 24:7.

And there's more. But this should be enough to demonstrate that the service regulated by the Torah in Scripture is not the same as the slavery developed by Gentiles and employed in recently modern times.

Too often upon leaving the Watchtower or never studying anything but a Christian interpretation of Torah, people are left reading Jewish texts through Western filters. The same often applies in other areas of Jewish writings as well.

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

Your OP works, just not against Jewish Scripture, per se.

And Jews never had Proverbs 10:19 in mind when they started composing their Scriptures (which started by oral transmission many millennia ago). Proverbs 10:19 was written around 516 B.C.E., after the Jews built the Second Temple.

For it to have been eternal, Proverbs 10:19 would have to be the guiding principle for all of Judaism, known before the writing of the Torah. But it wasn't.

Coming from the JW religion you might have a hard time understanding this at first, but these texts are not eternal. These principles haven't always existed, nor has Judaism ever held Proverbs 10:19 as anything particularly important.

And, by the way, "eternal" means without beginning or end. "Everlasting" is the word you are looking for. That means to continue forever ONCE it comes into existence. Since Proverbs was not composed until after the Babylonian exile ended, none of its texts can be said to be guiding principles used for any of the narratives that came before it.

22

Bible writers ignored their own principle

by venus in

bible gives a very beneficial principle when it states “too much talk” is problematic whereas “anyone who holds his tongue is prudent.” (proverb 10:19) in harmony with this if bible had given us just enough verses like this: “remember god always and do everything as an offering to him” (ecclesiastes 12:1; colossians 3:17), it could have kept itself invincible.. instead, it started to speak “too much” which often backfired.

1) too much information on a too less important subject (such as woman’s menstruation) and yet too less information on too important subject such as creation which comes in just one sentence: god created “the mankind in his image.” (genesis 1:27).

2) jesus was taken to a mountain top so that he and satan could see “all the kingdoms of the earth” [which is in support of flat-earth belief], and satan tried to tempt jesus by offering them all in exchange of an act of worship to him.

David_Jay

For this to be so, the following would also have to be true:

1. The Jews would have had to (from the very beginning of their existence) intend that their various religious texts, some written generations before Proverbs, be written for the purpose of being a single volume based on a single principle (as you mention) from Proverbs...which by the way was likely not composed until the beginning of the Second Temple era (the post-exile period).

2. Jesus of Nazareth would have to have been accepted as the Messiah by Jews, and Jews would have to change their religion to believe there was such a being as Satan the Devil.

3. Marcion of Sinope, a Christian bishop of the 2nd century, had never become a heretic.

The idea that the Jews set out to write a single volume that never contradicts itself and that was to act as the basis for a religious creed was an idea developed mostly in America during the Second Great Awakening (1790-the 19th century). The idea you are proposing had been suggested in the 2nd century by the famous heretic Marcion, but it would be the New Religious Movements (NRMs) of the Second Great Awakening that would not merely revive it but reshape it to fit their ideals. The NRMs individually proclaimed themselves each to be the restoration of true Christianity, the end of times to be upon mankind, and the Bible as the ultimate form of revelation from God (the Latter Day Saints even went so far as to add a new further written authority).

Even now the Jews don't actually see the Hebrew Scriptures as one book. We see them as three collections of different types of books. And we hadn't settled on making them one volume (which we now call the Tanakh) until the 6th century C.E. when the Masoretes began their work of developing a single and final authoritative text.

Unless any of the writers had an idea that this would ever happen and on top of that knew of the "principle" you mention ahead of time (again you are talking about a proverb which didn't likely see light until after the time of Ezra), then the charge doesn't hold much weight. If they had intended to follow the principle you mention to make a single book, then your claim also falls flat. This would require that the very first Bible writers could foresee events and predict the composition of that post-exile principle. If that had that ability, then you would have a hard time arguing against anything they wrote, but believe me as a Jew when I say that such was never the case.

The idea of a Bible canon was invented by a Gentile Christian bishop of the 2nd century known as Marcion of Sinope. Attracted to Gnostic ideas, Marcion made the first assemblage of holy books for the purpose of acting as proof-texts for his doctrines. His idea was that holy writ was the highest form of divine revelation and that religion can only be based on that (albeit when interpreted through a select group gifted with special insight that others could not possess). Marcion was excommunicated for his teachings that salvation was reliant upon Scripture.

Finally, your argument only works if the original Jewish writers of Scripture intended the Christian scriptures to continue their tradition to create a single volume based on that "foreseen" principle. As you are aware, Jews neither accept Jesus as the Messiah not believe in Satan the Devil's existence. So adding that on to the original point raised doesn't work.

This doesn't mean you don't have a case. What you are arguing very effectively against is the NRM view of Scripture. The Jehovah's Witnesses are one of these NRMs that grew from the Second Great Awakening era. Like the others, they too claim to be the restoration of true religion and that we are living in the last days. They claim they can rightly ignore the great religious authorities who have ties to antiquity by claiming that the Bible is the ultimate form of divine revelation. This is merely a resurrection of Marcionism that taught that ultimate knowledge was granted only to a select group that could decipher salvific instruction from a volume of select holy texts.

It's not the Bible that's the problem. It's this Marcionic concept that the JW religion holds onto. To insist on Marcionism requires that Scripture was written for the purpose of being a single volume, that it cannot contradict itself, and that only those chosen to decipher the salvific message hidden inside can benefit from what is written (along with those who listen to their interpretations).

48

Aren't you a bit amazed that the WTS/JWS is still around ?

by Finkelstein in

i know i am, to me its a bit of a peculiar anomaly that the wts is still around and functioning in reflection of its decades and now complete century that the wts has been bullshitting to people .

organizations like the church of god have shrunk dramatically from its heyday of the 1980's, this too was another organization that spread and grew by publishing its own magazine proclaiming a armageddon soon doctrine and its main publication was called " the truth " .

i'm guessing some of this has to do with the fact that people who get lured into this cult aren't aware of its past, its doctrines, the people who started it and so forth.

David_Jay

Yeah, definitely. But in another way I am also left asking where it went.

I lost touch with all things Watchtower after leaving it behind in the 1980s/early '90s. I started to live my life without thinking about it at all. Years went by even.

Then 2014 came and a JW came to my door (I moved across country after leaving and hadn't seen a Witness in about 20 years). When they offered me literature I realized who they were and asked: "It's 2014. You folks are still around?"

So, yeah, to that degree I am amazed. I told some JWs on the day I left that the end was not coming, that if they didn't wake up soon that it would suddenly be 2014 and still there would be no Armageddon.

"Oh, this world will never last till then," they said. "You can bet on that! It won't even last till 2000, you'll see! By 2014 we'll be way deep into the New World Society and you will be dead!"

When that JW knocked on my door that hot June Saturday morning in 2014, I almost wanted to laugh in their face mockingly. But I reminded myself that this was not the same person from my past who told me such foolishness about the world ending before the year 2000.

I've since tried to look on their new website and just got a headache reading and seeing a few things. So much has changed! This is not the religion I left.

Two overlapping groups making up the "generation" of 1914? Huh? How did they even settle on the number two? Where in the Holy Bible do they get just "two" overlapping groups? Why not more? How does it overlap?

And a video ministry? In my day we called televised preaching a tool of Satan! And the dumbed-down picture books they now use as "spiritual food"?! We used to teach that such basic, dumbed-down publications in Christendom were proof that they were suffering a spiritual famine! And when I left there was like about 8000 of the anointed remnant. But the "remnant" has now since doubled?!?!

This is not the Jehovah's Witnesses anymore. That religion ended when Franz died and the year 2000 came without the end of the world coming.

What you have now is some other new cult that they slyly snuck in under all these poor, unsuspecting saps. The religion I belonged to did end. It ended when the 1914 generation from that 1980s Watchtower magazine cover all died and Franz kicked the bucket. In my day the only way Brooklyn Bethel was going to be emptied is when the last burning ember from heaven fell upon and slaughtered the last worldly person (and then it was probably going to be used as the capital buildings of the New World Society). And now look!

I am astonished at what has taken its place, but also satisfied that the cult I was in did disappear. If instead of leaving when I did, I had but merely fell into a coma, waking up today--I would be disfellowshiped for believing in false doctrine and practicing a false religion....the one I learned from the blue Truth book and the red Live Forever book.

The Jehovah's Witnesses and their New World Society ended. That cult finally collapsed. I don't know what this "JW.org" is, but we would have called them apostates and a group blinded by Satan in my day!

David Jay Cohen--March of 2017.

43

Atheism would not appeared if …

by venus in

· if religions were immune to division.

· if scriptures were immune to scientific errors.

· if religious leaders were immune to hypocrisy.

David_Jay

Is your question for me or Venus?

As for me, what am I after reading your sentence? Well being Jewish, we don't put much value in "beliefs" like non-Jewish peoples often do.

That also means we don't have opinions about not believing in things either. We are concerned with dealing with what is before us, living in the now, and with the advent of the post-denominational/post-rabbinical age of Judaism which began in the late 20th century, I don't subscribe to the concept of debating about concepts which have no practical application.

I was not whatever you said before, and thus am not anything (having to do with that subject) now.

David_Jay

Posts by David_Jay