David_Jay

Joined

• started 23 topics
• posted 874 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by David_Jay

• 
  30

  The Pagan Origins of the Memorial Observed by Jehovah’s Witnesses

  by David_Jay in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  “we don’t celebrate holidays because god doesn’t approve of any celebration that is rooted in pagan customs and manmade traditions.” (see here for a similar jw response.).

  if you were once an ex-jw like me, you have probably said something like this out in field service to someone who asked the question: why don’t you people celebrate holidays?

  as the witnesses' official website states in an faq about not celebrating easter:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  David_Jay

  lusitano o tuga,

  I myself am Jewish. And if you read the information you will see what we Jews teach about our own celebration.
• 
  30

  The Pagan Origins of the Memorial Observed by Jehovah’s Witnesses

  by David_Jay in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  “we don’t celebrate holidays because god doesn’t approve of any celebration that is rooted in pagan customs and manmade traditions.” (see here for a similar jw response.).

  if you were once an ex-jw like me, you have probably said something like this out in field service to someone who asked the question: why don’t you people celebrate holidays?

  as the witnesses' official website states in an faq about not celebrating easter:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  David_Jay

  “We don’t celebrate holidays because God doesn’t approve of any celebration that is rooted in pagan customs and manmade traditions.” (See here for a similar JW response.)
  

  If you were once an ex-JW like me, you have probably said something like this out in field service to someone who asked the question: Why don’t you people celebrate holidays? As the Witnesses' official website states in an FAQ about not celebrating Easter:

  We believe that our decision to abstain from celebrating Easter is based firmly on the Bible, which encourages the use of “practical wisdom and thinking ability” rather than simply following human traditions. (Proverbs 3:21; Matthew 15:3)

  This same page on their website also states:

  Jesus commanded that we commemorate his death, not his resurrection. We observe this Memorial each year on the anniversary of his death according to the Bible’s lunar calendar.—Luke 22:19, 20.

  Did you know that the Memorial is rooted in pagan customs and rites? It also has human traditions incorporated into it. This is because it is based on the Jewish Passover. The customs of Passover, the very timing of the observance, and even the meaning attributed to everything not just at a Passover Seder but at the Memorial observed by Jehovah’s Witnesses all come from the pagan world and invented tradition. Don’t believe me?

  
  What Jews Know and Teach about Passover

  Jews teach that the Passover comes from a custom observed by Abraham that he got from his ancestors before him. It was a spring festival held on the night of the first full moon in Spring (or somewhere to coincide with the arrival of the new season) to celebrate the this time of change and new life. And this observance, by its very nature, was of pagan origin.

  While there are variations in the Haggadah that each Jewish family or gathering will use, the outline of the Haggadah is pretty much generalized. The one I use is The New Union Haggadah (a recent revision of a very classic American Jewish Haggadah first published in 1923.) It has a very interesting explanation of the history of the Passover and its symbols in the back:

  In fashioning their allegorical narrative, the authors of the Book of Exodus mythologized an array of rituals that were likely part of ancient Near Eastern society for centuries. Many scholars have suggested that the slaughtering of an animal for the sake of painting one’s doorposts [with its blood] to ward off evil spirits existed long before the Israelite authors adopted and adapted it for the Exodus story’s final plague….

  Similarly, the consumption of matzah was mythologized to take on new meanings...it was likely tied into the agricultural celebrations associated with the springtime harvest of the winter’s wheat. The integration of matzah and pesach [Passover doorpost painting] into the Exodus story--two ritual objects associated with renewed life and sustaining life--builds upon common themes in brilliantly creative contexts. What an ancient Canaanite family was observing annually anyway is suddenly imbued with an Israelite mythological origin….
  

  Most prominent in the Haggadah are materials that derive from Rabbinic literature rather than the Torah...even the specific ritual items on the seder plate, not to mention the four cups of wine--these and other details are all Rabbinic inventions with no basis in Torah.

  This is not to say that there is no historical basis for what the Jews are observing each and every Passover. The Jewish people are descendents of people who were enslaved several times in history, as they were in Babylon when the particular version of the Exodus that is in the Bible took its final shape. The Hebrews were likely among the Semites who migrated to Egypt when it was under Hyksos rule and then left when foreign settlers were being enslaved under the new dynasty of pharaohs that followed.

  
  Notes The New Union Haggadah:

  What is described in the Passover story should be considered a veiled depiction of Jews displaced to Babylonia and eventually through the Levant after the conquest of Jerusalem in 586 BCE.

  While there is definitely reason to remember our “Egyptian sojourn,” Jews are also aware that those ancient stories were recomposed through the lense of the Diaspora after the Babylonians took us from our land. The promise of being freed from slavery, of entering into a new covenant with God, of receiving laws that would produce a just society (as they understood it back then), and the hope of entering (returning) to the Promised Land were all very real Diaspora concepts the Jews painfully felt while living in Babylonian exile. This gave their oral history about their origin as migrants escaping slavery in Egypt the meaning that filled the Exodus narrative we know today.

  
  The Emblems are Pagan

  This leads us back to the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that they don’t observe customs or celebrations that have pagan origins or have their basis in human tradition. Yet, as you can see, the bread or matzah used in the Memorial has its basis in pagan customs. The use of wine during the Passover Seder comes from a tradition invented by Rabbinical authority, not from God.
  

  It might also help people see that Jews are a bit more egalitarian than some have accused us of being. We don’t see ourselves as better or far more special than others. We understand that we are a product of the world around us and that our origins are far less than the legendary Cecil B. DeMille sequences from the movie The Ten Commandments. At its core the Exodus story is a call for all form of slavery to end, for all people to celebrate their freedom, and for people to learn from the past and celebrate the “now” with their loved ones. Whatever your beliefs, creed, or lack thereof, you too are called out from the bonds of darkness and oppression. Especially if you too left the Watchtower, you are free to celebrate your exodus in anyway and anytime you see fit. You were once slaves, but now you are all free.

  Blessings this Passover to all,

  David Jay

  
  
• 
  43

  Atheism would not appeared if …

  by venus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  · if religions were immune to division.

  · if scriptures were immune to scientific errors.

  · if religious leaders were immune to hypocrisy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  David_Jay

  fulltimestudent:

  Eight days ago I brought up the same Cambridge Study (I believe it was the 9th answer after the OP) and supported it, stating:

  A Cambridge study suggests that atheism was not necessarily caused by religion. In fact, the evidence at hand suggests that atheism appears to have been around as long as religion....

  Theism cannot be argued to be the natural course of all, even in ancient times. Therefore atheism's existence cannot be said to rely on the existence of theism.

  In response I got from Venus (the author of this thread):

  I was clearly disagreeing with “The Cambridge study (and others like it) providence evidence that atheism grew just as naturally and even independently of religion.”

  And it went on.

  I'm glad you brought it up and that no one is challenging you on it. I am not sure why when I bring it up I get told that the study is wrong.

  Sometimes I think that because I am an exJW who is now Jewish, that some people have such a hatred of religion and religious people that they cannot see past their hate to see our support of atheism. As I mentioned:

  I do not advocate beliefs or faith in deities.

  I don't subscribe value to mentally assenting to any concept, as if making a claim to a creed, declaring faith in a doctrine, or exercising credulity have value.

  The love of my life was an atheist. (She is gone now.) Her family is entirely composed of atheists. Like the Cambridge Study, none of them, including my wife, became atheists due to religion. They never belonged to one. Their parents never did either....

  I don't know why you are arguing against my personal conviction on this: Atheism exists because some people choose logic over superstition; atheism is not dependent on the existence of religion and rejecting it. Some people do become atheists by rejecting religion, but not everyone does.

  I don't see the logic in damning one person who speaks in favor of atheism by citing a study but saying nothing to another when they point to the same data in their post.

  But I am glad you got the same (and even more) data up to support that study. If they will not listen to me, I am glad they are listening to you.
• 
  22

  Bible writers ignored their own principle

  by venus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  David_Jay

  konceptual99,

  I am slightly confused however since my original comment which sparked this too-ing and fro-ing was in response to a post you made which appears to be attempting to contextualise the accounts of slavery in the OT/Torah (and I apologise for the simplistic crossover but time is limited) and mitigate them by reference to laws that provide a measure of protection from very harsh treatment.

  If I have understood the overall point of your original post then why attempt to defend or explain OT slavery rather than simply say that Jews don't believe any of it happened in that way and all these accounts are false?

  Part of it is my fault. And part of it has to do with what we have both just come to understood about one another.

  When I said you "understood the overall point," I was referring to the view of slavery we both share in common. We have been on the same page on this issue since the start.

  What I was not referring to is was your assumptions about what Torah is to Jews. I thought you must have known the view of Jews from the start. Why argue about what the Jews' laws are about if you aren't actually studied in Torah and Halacha? Right?

  Again that was my fault. I forget that you are not writing from my point of view, i.e.: "We're talking philosophical ethics that the Jews couldn't apply at the time they wrote these laws about having slaves. They themselves were slaves in Babylon, not owners of them. They were writing about how they hope slaves would be treated in the future if they ever got back to their land."

  But you weren't arguing from that point of view, were you? You just learned at the end that this was my view because I just learned at the end where you were arguing from. We could have saved time and effort if we had realized this, but we can't read each other's minds, and so it took time to get the wires uncrossed.

  In the end, I think we understand one another now. But any other confusion I have caused, forgive me as my time on here for the next few weeks is up. As I wrote, we are a little around 10 days before Passover, and we have a whole list of things we do to prepare that actually begins today for me, in just an hour or so.

  But despite that it was a debate, it was very pleasurable discussing matters with you.
• 
  22

  Bible writers ignored their own principle

  by venus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  David_Jay

  konceptual99:

  If you will be patient with me (and I will try to be as concise as possible), I will explain how we are actually both on the exact same page.

  You keep debating with me and saying the same things over and over, even though I’ve repeatedly said that Jews view slavery, even the slavery spoken of in Scripture, as evil. Though I totally agree with you and have explained that Jews do too, you still keep arguing as if I haven’t said those words or that my claim about how we view slavery isn’t true.

  But then you added this following point, and I suddenly realize what the problem is:

  It was wrong when it happened to the Israelites and it was wrong when it happened to people captured by the Israelites.

  It seems that you believe that the Biblical accounts of the Hebrews conquering nations and taking their people as slaves are historical fact (and that we Jews do too). They are not fact, and we know and teach this.

  The five books of Moses, the Torah, the Pentateuch, whatever you want to call it, is not an historical record. We never conquered the peoples living in the Fertile Crescent, destroying their cities, killing their people, and enslaving those who survived the invasion. We, the Jews, are those very people.

  The New Union Haggadah sums it up best:

  The Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem in 586 BCE. The rule of the world order up until that time--and for most cultures, ever since--was quite simple: if you were conquered and exiled, left without a monarch and bereft of religious shrines, your people would be integrated into the conquering host culture and quickly disappear. The Torah writers...remind us repeatedly of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadomites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites--people who were once nations like all other nations but whose destiny went the way of the conquered and oppressed…The Torah’s allegory, therefore, was devised to reform the Judaism of its day from an altogether land-based culture (prior to 586 BCE) into a religion that could survive without a central shrine, without an oligarchic priesthood, and most impressively, without a king--both on ancestral lands and in the Diaspora.

  Did you notice how the Torah is referred to as “allegory”? What historically happened is not what you are repeatedly accusing me, the Jews, and the Hebrew Scriptures of. “When Torah was written, Egypt was no longer the player it once has been on the historical stage of nations. The shores of the Nile provided a place with few political ramifications during the author’s day...The Torah tells us of servitude and redemption in a valorized time and mythic place, but the servitude is to be abhorred in every era, and redemption is to be sought for captives in each generation.”--The New Union Haggadah, “The Biblical Exodus,” Rabbi David H. Aaron, PhD, Professor of Hebrew Bible and the History of Interpretation, Hebrew Union College--Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincinnati, Ohio.

  As you might know, a Haggadah is the book we Jews read from during the Passover Seder (which will be in about 12 days). What you just read above is from the one I use in my home with my family, and those statements pretty much sum up much about what you can expect from the rest of the Bible and its stories about the Jews.

  This isn’t to say there isn’t any history behind the mythos. There is, but it is just under the veil of an illustrative narrative. The Israelites “12 tribes” are likely a combination of “the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadomites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.” Biblical stories of Israelites conquering and plundering these nations and enslaving survivors is not what really happened.

  The Bible Through the Ages, (1996, Pleasantville, NY) states:

  During the period of [the] Hyksos rule [of Egypt], and for a long while afterwards--or until about 1300 B.C.--there were great migrations of people in and out of Egypt owing to drought and famine and the slave trade.

  It was likely during the Hyksos rule that the primary or central family of Hebrews entered Egypt. The Hyksos dynasty lasted 108 years, but saw its end when the Theban revolt spread northward under Kamose, with his successor, Ahmose, becoming king. The migrant peoples were enslaved under this new dynasty, but eventually it lost power over its slaves. A series of revolts and at least three series of exodus movements followed, with the enslaved people leaving.

  It is theorized that the last exodus movement was the one that contained the people who would become the nation of Israel, but by this time they included more than just the nucleus of Hebrews. The mixed company that came with them crossed over into the Fertile Crescent and apparently merged with the peoples who lived there, with “the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadomites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.”

  Our legends say we conquered them, but in reality they merged with us and we all became the nation of Israel.

  Stories of them being conquered by “God’s army” are mythological ways of saying their cultural ways eventually dissolved to become one with ours. Under the Davidic dynasty, worship of YHWH became the state religion, and the stories that would be carried into Babylon and eventually become the Bible took shape.

  But the conquests, our taking slaves, etc., these things didn’t happen as the legends say. The laws in Torah are meant to sound just like you describe them, as if to say “we treat our slaves better.” But this was only because we were a nation made up of slaves, not warrior conquerors of nations. Such a warrior state would have never fallen to the Babylonians if we were as great as the Torah stories say we were.

  What you are talking about is based on a view we all got when we were Jehovah’s Witnesses, that these stories were factual. They aren’t. Slavery is evil. Always has been, always will be.

  This doesn’t mean that the Jews didn’t own slaves at times. We did, probably from very early in our history. We were like everyone else when we were an ancient nation and thought that slavery was a normal aspect of life. We might have had laws that were made to regulate it that seemed humane, but we were not always faithful to our own laws.

  Jews participated in the Atlantic slave trade. It appears I myself may have had ancestors who, while living in New Spain to avoid the Spanish Inquisition, purchased slaves during the time the Sephardic Jews founded what is now known as Monterrey, Mexico.

  But just like practically all of us have ancestors who engaged in the horrible practice of slavery (I am sure you can find slave owners in your family tree too), we also likewise both have ancestors who were part of the Abolition Movement. (See “Antislavery Movement” from the Jewish Encyclopedia for more information).

  You might get what I’m saying, and I hope you do. Or you might keep repeating the same thing over and over again as if I haven’t said from the beginning that I and the rest of Jewry agree with you. If just keep saying that, you are arguing something that isn't about Israelite or Jewish history. I can’t help or keep arguing with someone who won't learn the fact and be logical based on the real historical data.

  Whatever other feelings or views you may have, however, are not based on a factual view of the Jewish people or their history. They seem to be left over of views left by the cult that left us both with scars. You may also be unaware that the Jews are not a religion, but a people and culture. Judaism is not a religion of belief but a practice. Some members and practitioners of Judaism are theists, others are atheists. It’s an ever-evolving way of preserving a people through time, and we are not innocents or more enlightened than others.

  And it's a tapestry. Pull at one string you don't like, the whole thing and the people and culture within gets the impression you are against it.
• 
  22

  Bible writers ignored their own principle

  by venus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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?