Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 08:34 PM

stephan perhaps no one cares what my definition is.
But this is my thread, and I was responding to a specific allegation from outhouse in made in post #57 that MY 'definition of Judaism seemed rather narrow.'

I explained, and demonstrated that my definition of Judaism and of Jewishness is on the contrary very broad and very inclusive.

So perhaps we won't need to discuss anymore in this thread whom I consider a 'Jew', and who is 'Jewish' in MY view.
'Born Jewish or Converted to Judaism, they all are equally Jewish to ME.

aa5874 · 02-15-2013, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Let our Greek experts search ALL of Philo's writings, and locate all of his uses of 'theraputae', and show that he reserves this Greek term exclusively for Jews.

I did that in the last thread (which was thankfully killed). Are you schizophrenic or what? I can't follow your line of thought and don't really want to. Shesh as an amateur psychologist, I have to say - there's just too much of you in your interpretation of history. You are too involved in the outcome. It's all about what you like and what you don't like. You have to start with indifference or try at the very least - as best as possible - to remain impartial. I know you know that you know that Philo thought the sect was Jewish. You're hate just gets in the way of you seeing things objectively.

You could not have shown that Philo claimed the Therapeutae were Jews or of Jewish origin.

We have examined every word and every line in "On the Contemplative Life" and there is no mention whatsoever that the Therapeutae were Jews.

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan

What did the ancients think. How did they define the term.

Now that we have settled the challenge to MY definition perhaps we can move on to that subject.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan

I don't care what your faith is, what God you worship. Get these comments the fuck out of this forum.

This is MY thread stephan, and that's not going to happen stephan, unless I am banned from presenting, explaining, and defending my views.

If you don't like participating in this particular thread stephan -which is perhaps only the fifth one that I have personally opened in my ten years of participation on this Forum- or the opinions I express, there are hundreds of other threads, other forums, or start up your own thread and simply stay out of this one, or there are other sites that you can depart to. I believe I can somehow manage to survive the absence of your nastiness.

I do not enter your threads (and how many would that be?) and try dictate what you post. I expect the same courtesy.

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Let our Greek experts search ALL of Philo's writings, and locate all of his uses of 'theraputae', and show that he reserves this Greek term exclusively for Jews.

I did that in the last thread (which was thankfully killed). Are you schizophrenic or what? I can't follow your line of thought and don't really want to. Shesh as an amateur psychologist, I have to say - there's just too much of you in your interpretation of history. You are too involved in the outcome. It's all about what you like and what you don't like. You have to start with indifference or try at the very least - as best as possible - to remain impartial. I know you know that you know that Philo thought the sect was Jewish. You're hate just gets in the way of you seeing things objectively.

You could not have shown that Philo claimed the Therapeutae were Jews or of Jewish origin.

We have examined every word and every line in "On the Contemplative Life" and there is no mention whatsoever that the Therapeutae were Jews.

And many Gentiles studied those same Holy Scriptures and were also Sabbath keepers. So the fact that these theraputae observed the Scriptural Sabbath is in itself not any valid evidence that they were Jewish.

stephan huller · 02-15-2013, 09:04 PM

Quote:

But this is my thread,

But it brings down the quality of the forum when people use threads to talk about themselves. Start a blog.

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 09:12 PM

Take a hike if you don't like it.

We can discuss What is Jewish? just fine without your input.

People have discussed the subject of Jewishness for over 2000 years without any need of stephan huller's input,

Somehow, we will manage to survive your absence.

outhouse · 02-15-2013, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Sure they are.

Were talking about Philo, and for the most part about hellenistic Judaism, which for the most part your trying really hard to ignore.

Love ya bud, but the definition at this time was almost as multicultural as Judaisms origins.

Since post #57 you and I bud, have NOT been discussing Philo, or Hellenistic Judaism.

Our little discursion here began at post #57 and proceeded through 60, 61, 64 . This was the context of our exchange.

There is not a word about, and not a single reference to Philo in any of those posts.

And the only thing at all about Hellenisim to be fond there is that which you attempted to insert, and which I DID NOT reply to, or 'discuss' with you.

The subject we -were- discussing is your statement that;

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

your (my) definition of Judaism which seems rather narrow.

I don't know where you got that mistaken idea. but it is absolutely wrong.

My definition of Judaism is anyone born Jewish is Jewish.
And anyone that 'converts' to Judaism is Jewish.
The end of that.

Which statement can hardly rightly be catagorized as being 'rather narrow'

When I pointed that out. Your complaint then became that MY view was not that of 'The Jewish encylopedia' or of some ancient 'multicultural' milleu.
And my acceptance of Jewish Judaism was therefore too broad.

To which I pointed out that I don't have a strainer, or sorting and grading machine on which to run the Jewishness of Jews through. They all go into the same basket marke 'Jewish' for Adoni Elohim to sort them out.

But point of the entire exchange between us since post # 57 was about [i]MY[/u] 'definition of 'Judaism' and MY level of acceptance of Jewish peoples 'Jewishness'.

OK you state it wasnt narrow that it is inclusive.

Then why cant people who worshipped Judaism for centuries be called Jewish?

Do you think you can define Proselytes as Jews, gentiles or both?

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 09:24 PM

Quote:

What did the ancients think. How did they define the term 'Jewish'?

When dealing with ancient Jewish ideas of whom qualified as being Jewish, it would be a matter of what sect or what individual one was inquiring of. Just as it is now.

But even way back before there were any people defined as 'Jews' or 'Jewish' the ancient Hebrews had their divisions.
Famously the test of the shibboleth where 144000 Ephraimites were slain over their mispronunciation of a single word. (Jud 12)
Apparently the Gileadites did not think that these Ephraimites were 'Hebrew' enough with their speech.

Sheshbazzar · 02-15-2013, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

OK you state it wasnt narrow that it is inclusive.
Then why cant people who worshipped Judaism for centuries be called Jewish?

You use that phrase repeatedly. If they. worshiped 'Judaisim' the religion itself, (which no doubt some indeed did) they were worshipping a religion and not the Deity of that religion.

Perhaps that is why they even 'forgot' what their deity's name was, or even how to pronounce it?

...been so busy worshipping 'Judaisim' itself, that they no longer had any idea Whom the Elohim of Judaism was, not even so much as His Name?

They just 'forgot' and could no longer 'call upon The Name יהוה

Wonder if they're still struggling with 'shibboleth' ?

spin · 02-15-2013, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Let our Greek experts search ALL of Philo's writings, and locate all of his uses of 'theraputae', and show that he reserves this Greek term exclusively for Jews.

I did that in the last thread (which was thankfully killed). Are you schizophrenic or what? I can't follow your line of thought and don't really want to. Shesh as an amateur psychologist, I have to say - there's just too much of you in your interpretation of history. You are too involved in the outcome. It's all about what you like and what you don't like. You have to start with indifference or try at the very least - as best as possible - to remain impartial. I know you know that you know that Philo thought the sect was Jewish. You're hate just gets in the way of you seeing things objectively.

You could not have shown that Philo claimed the Therapeutae were Jews or of Jewish origin.

We have examined every word and every line in "On the Contemplative Life" and there is no mention whatsoever that the Therapeutae were Jews.

And many Gentiles studied those same Holy Scriptures and were also Sabbath keepers. So the fact that these theraputae observed the Scriptural Sabbath is in itself not any valid evidence that they were Jewish.

1. They worshiped the same god as Philo.
2. They celebrated the shabbat.
3. They "sang hymns of thanksgiving to God the Saviour".
4. They are "very acceptable to the Father and Creator of the universe because of their virtue".
5. They acknowledged the exodus.
6. They esteemed Moses and Miriam.
7. They esteemed the prophets.
8. They accepted the same pentacontad based festivals as the Jews who wrote the Temple Scroll.
9. Philo gives no hint that these people who adhere to Jewish religio-cultural tropes were anything other than Jews.

Sheshbazzar, like all the other denialists, has not adduced a single indicator that these therapeutae were not Jewish. Arguments such as the fact that Philo doesn't call them Jews, reduce to nonsense when we take into account that Philo doesn't call Moses Hebrew, Jew or even human.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

But even way back before there were any people defined as 'Jews' or 'Jewish' the ancient Hebrews had their divisions.
Famously the test of the shibboleth where 144000 Ephraimites were slain over their mispronunciation of a single word. (Jud 12)
Apparently the Gileadites did not think that these Ephraimites were 'Hebrew' enough with their speech.

The story has nothing to do with being Hebrew. It was purely a tribal conflict between Gileadites and Ephraimites, apparently over allegiances. I wish you would consider the amount of bullshit you post, shesh, and cut back.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-15-2013, 08:34 PM	#71
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	stephan perhaps no one cares what my definition is. But this is my thread, and I was responding to a specific allegation from outhouse in made in post #57 that MY 'definition of Judaism seemed rather narrow.' I explained, and demonstrated that my definition of Judaism and of Jewishness is on the contrary very broad and very inclusive. So perhaps we won't need to discuss anymore in this thread whom I consider a 'Jew', and who is 'Jewish' in MY view. 'Born Jewish or Converted to Judaism, they all are equally Jewish to ME.

02-15-2013, 09:12 PM	#76
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Take a hike if you don't like it. We can discuss What is Jewish? just fine without your input. People have discussed the subject of Jewishness for over 2000 years without any need of stephan huller's input, Somehow, we will manage to survive your absence.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.