Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
(Post 1210585)
Well, I did not say they are similiar, but the old stories in the bible are soemwhat influenced by the judaic tradition. You mention yourself the fore god in the mountain somwhere below. and that is the same god concept you find in the old testament. In both traditions, there is a reference to abraham being a fundament, cutting it short here.
|
Ya they borrowed heavily from the Torah, then took it all as being absolute truth. Something the Jews never really did (unless you go way back perhaps).
Quote:
Yes, but the 12 israeli tribes, at least I read that ands saw that in TV, have also behaved as conqueror and even rivals at times, and based on the divine promise and command to move to Kanaan. The landtaking in Kanaan took place under expulsion of foreign tribes there around the 14th or 13th century before Christ. This is being called for both in the Judaic Tarnach, at least I read, and is decribed in the Bible as well. The Israelites were not always fighting wars of defence only, nor were they always only the vicitms of foreign agression. Sometimes they also were the attackers and conquerors.
|
Oh most definitely, they were not a culture of peace and love and harmony. In the bad old days they would also try to forcibly convert people, and all kinds of other nasty stuff. But that was the way of the times, for all cultures. They had their good moments, and bad moments.
Quote:
the Israeli present today is a chpater in nitself that we must not touch upon here. Also, it certainly is not as simplistic as you make it appear here. And this I say although for the most I defend Israel's policies.
|
No I agree it isn't quite as simple as I present it.
Quote:
He also terrorised a father by commanding him to kill his son in order to see if he would obey, admitted, he stopped him short before the deed, but the terror for the father was real. What for? He caused a global genocide because his creation - made bis his own hands - was not like he wanted it to be: obedient. Why hasn't he created man accordingly in the first? This whole theory of God setting up challenges to man to test him, simply makes no sense and simply illustrate a truly psychotic, blood-thirsty behavior. A cynic who has intentionally designed man to be able to fail, calling that "free choice" and then punish man for being like he designed him to be - but wanting to be worshipped as a man-loving benefactor. That is not only cynical, that is sadistic. the bible holds quite many stories illustrating this kind of divine cyncism and sadism and thirst for penalty and blood. Man gets punished for God having created him the way he did. Great.
|
Ya, lots of awful stuff in there. We have to keep in mind though that we are dealing with an ancient religion (3000-4000 years old). Modern Judaism is rather different from that practiced during the time of the Romans, or during the time of Israel. It has evolved and changed. A lot of the nasty stuff comes from when Yahweh was the fiery mountain god, who was an angry and vengeful god (modern research suggests this was due to large amounts of volcanic activity in the region way back in time, that put a great deal of strain on the peoples of the region). The Jews also at one point performed animal sacrifice just like most of the polytheistic religions of the time. Jewish scholars have long debated the meanings (if there even is any) behind those old stories. The key thing though is that part of the Torah is based on their oral history, from before Hebrew writing existed. These stories were told around the camp fire for millennia, so naturally are full of blood, guts, and other embellishments to keep the story interesting and entertaining.
Quote:
Yes, but to come to that image of a god while basing on the fire god just memntioned above - that really needs some form of creative thinking. That'S what I mean. that modern Judaism tends towards what you just described, was my novice view, too, although I did base on a limited fundament only, on some literature on Kabbala (ynd you know better than I do, I assume, how compex and difficutl a theme that is), when studying some interlinks between Kabbala and Tarot in certain esoteric systems.
Yes, Skybird knows and does Tarot. Now that will earn me some jokes, will it! :DL
|
A key point is that Judaism is an ever changing and evolving entity. If it had stayed unchanging, it probably would have been destroyed given the history of the Jewish people. Kabbalah is interesting, thought it is just one of many schools of Jewish philosophy/thought. One thing is for sure though, Judaism is a very scholarly religion (there are so many different books, schools of thought, etc). I suspect that is a key reason why it was never very popular, too much work involved. :DL
Quote:
Reminds of some more esoteric christian traditions, and the Christian mystics.
|
Another nice thing is that Jews don't feel any need to convert others around them. It is even difficult to convert (particularly as you have to learn Hebrew), though its not that you are not welcome to try to if you wish. They also don't view other religions as being wrong per say, that unbelievers will suffer damnation. They are the chosen people, not because they are superior, but the opposite. G*d chose that they would have things harder in life, that they would have all the laws/mitzvot to obey, etc, while the gentiles do not.
Quote:
If that is all there is, one would wish that only more religious people would be like that.
|
Ya me too, though of course there are plenty who only pay lip service to their faith, and are greedy, selfish, etc. But that is just the nature of humanity.
A lot of modern morality and law is based on Jewish law, such as the 10 commandments and some of the 613 Mitzvot. Duty to your parents, don't engage in incest/adultery, don't murder, don't steal, don't lie in court, don't judge others or insult, don't oppress the weak, and on and on. There are some weird ones of course too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot
Quote:
I never dealt explicitly with it in books on Abraham, but only indirectly in books about Islam, and Christian history (as matching the timeframe of Islam). But I am aware of these deficits of mine, at least. that'S why you will not read me writing about Judaism and Abraham as explicitly as I do about the relgion-atheism-confrontation, the church, Jesus or Islam.
Maybe I should add one or two books on Judaism and its theology and history, in the future. But currently too many other books are waiting.
|
Ya that is certainly wise. I did not mean to come off as harshly as I think I did on your lack of knowledge in this area. It was just some of what you had written bugged me a bit as I felt it to be highly inaccurate :DL
I would certainly recommend reading more about it; their history is fascinating. In many ways it is amazing that they managed to survive as a people and a religion after the start of the diaspora, facing the hate and oppression they did from Christianity, Islam, and even atheism, surviving all the massacres and pogroms, and with such a hard religion to follow. Perhaps though it was all the trials they faced which kept their religion going, forcing them to bind together tightly.
Anyhow I do understand what you mean about too many books waiting :03:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
(Post 1210696)
Really that is a modern affection that has spread from the more fundamentalist elements of judaism in the west.
Traditionally there are 7 names, and God or G*d ain't one of them.
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism
You have to remember that we are translating from Hebrew to English. In English, God is the name ascribed to the all powerful deity. So it is common to put the asterisk in as that is directly naming it. Yes this is a new practice as most Jews pray, debate about, and read scriptures in Hebrew. Only Reform Judaism offers English/Hebrew services, and will censor G*d when written (which isn't commonly written), and generally not speak that word but use words such as lord, master, etc. But in the Hebrew texts, god is very rarely named by its proper name, only alluded to.
