Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Little Dot · 08-13-2011, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Actually spin, some of Levin's study might prove useful here:

Quote:

"However, while adoption is known in some Ancient Near Eastern legal codes, Jewish law, both in antiquity and in the modern era, has no such legal institution. Though there are several biblical stories that would seem to suggest something like adoption (e.g. Abraham complaining that Eliezer 'son of my house' will inherit him [Yaron 1960:17], Ephraim and Manasseh by Jacob, Moses by Pharaoh's daughter, Ruth's child by Naomi, Esther by Mordecai and Raguel by his son in law Tobias) almost all of these are cases of adoption within the existing family, often by women, who had little, if any, legal status to pass on, and in no cases can it be shown that such an 'adoption' had any legal consequences. As summarized by Tigay, "if adoption played any role at all in Israelite family institutions, it was an insignificant one." Also, "for the post-Exilic period ... there is no reliable evidence for adoption at all." (Tigay 1971:300)" [p. 423 - 424]

and again at the end of a long section examining Jewish law:

Quote:

In a nutshell, there is nothing in Jewish law, in either the Hebrew Bible or in later Halakhah, which can be seen as the model by which Jesus, Son of God, could be considered the legal, but not the genetic heir to the Davidic throne. How then could Jesus have been considered both the physical Son of God and the legal Son of David? The answer must be found in the primary legal system that was current in the Mediterranean world during the first century CE ... that of the early Roman Empire [ibid]

The point again is that there is absolutely no basis for Jesus ever claiming to be a 'son of David' based on Jewish Law. You are free, Little Spot, to argue that Jesus wasn't Jewish, that his family lived in a religious vacuum and invented their own legal interpretations or any of the usual lunacy that goes on in this forum. But you'll have to do so by at least acknowledging the conclusions of Levin and developing your own theories from there. The obvious answer is that these ideas regarding him being an 'adopted' heir of David developed when Christianity was no longer attached to the Jewish world and was wholly aimed at pagans (c. mid to late second century CE).

Stephan

I don't put much faith in what the proponents of Rabbinic Judaism have to say. The opinions of anyone that would belong to a religion that holds in high esteem such a vile and filthy work as the Talmud should be ignored. :angry:

avi · 08-13-2011, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

I don't put much faith in what the proponents of Rabbinic Judaism have to say. The opinions of anyone that would belong to a religion that holds in high esteem such a vile and filthy work as the Talmud should be ignored.

1. Good to let your hair down, nice.
2. Not quite so sure about the implications of the "filthy" business...
3. I pay no attention to what anyone SAYS, but the idea here, in my opinion, is to try and elevate our collective appreciation for, or understanding of, the biblical passages pertinent to a particular question.

Having never consulted with the Talmud, can you express, in a sentence or two, what it is that causes the Talmud to be "vile"? How is it different from Bible study tools? Is it written exclusively in Hebrew, or, has it been translated into other languages?

How is the Talmud different from the various commentaries on the Quran or the Bhagavad Gita?

avi

spin · 08-13-2011, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

I don't put much faith in what the proponents of Rabbinic Judaism have to say. The opinions of anyone that would belong to a religion that holds in high esteem such a vile and filthy work as the Talmud should be ignored. :angry:

You haven't read it.

Little Dot · 08-13-2011, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

I don't put much faith in what the proponents of Rabbinic Judaism have to say. The opinions of anyone that would belong to a religion that holds in high esteem such a vile and filthy work as the Talmud should be ignored.

1. Good to let your hair down, nice.
2. Not quite so sure about the implications of the "filthy" business...
3. I pay no attention to what anyone SAYS, but the idea here, in my opinion, is to try and elevate our collective appreciation for, or understanding of, the biblical passages pertinent to a particular question.

Having never consulted with the Talmud, can you express, in a sentence or two, what it is that causes the Talmud to be "vile"? How is it different from Bible study tools? Is it written exclusively in Hebrew, or, has it been translated into other languages?

How is the Talmud different from the various commentaries on the Quran or the Bhagavad Gita?

avi

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False..._child_sex.htm

gupwalla · 08-13-2011, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False..._child_sex.htm

You do realize that you have just linked to an Anti-Semitic website to justify your earlier statement?

The page you linked to claims that Jews are involved in a sex-trafficking conspiracy, and elsewhere the site attempts to prove that Jews are satanic. There is also some crazytown gobbledygook about Jews and Freemasons.

It might be wise of you to use a bit more discretion when sourcing your claims, lest people begin to think that you are a crazytown Anti-Semite as well.

ahdenai · 08-14-2011, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Little Dot: I don't put much faith in what the proponents of Rabbinic Judaism have to say. The opinions of anyone that would belong to a religion that holds in high esteem such a vile and filthy work as the Talmud should be ignored.

Me: By similar logic, the opinions of anybody who holds in high esteem such vile and filthy works as the new testament should be ignored, too. Matthew 10:34-37. Vile & Filthy.

(post#122)

by not responding, you seem to have turned the other cheek.

Little Dot · 08-14-2011, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gupwalla

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False..._child_sex.htm

You do realize that you have just linked to an Anti-Semitic website to justify your earlier statement?

The page you linked to claims that Jews are involved in a sex-trafficking conspiracy, and elsewhere the site attempts to prove that Jews are satanic. There is also some crazytown gobbledygook about Jews and Freemasons.

It might be wise of you to use a bit more discretion when sourcing your claims, lest people begin to think that you are a crazytown Anti-Semite as well.

Auhhhhhhhh, boohoo :vomit:

You need to do a :realitycheck:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get off your soap box and save your supposed consternation for the Talmud supporters. Rabbinic Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament. I defy you to show me where the Old Testament says it's ok to rape children!

Their a bunch of sick bastards, may they rot in hell! You obviously didn't look around the site or you would have found the good guy/bad guy section:

http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_2.html

Toto · 08-14-2011, 03:51 PM

www.jesus-is-savior.com has got to be satire. It attacks Jews, Wiccans, Roman Catholics, Santa Claus, psychiatry, rock music, movies -- and that color scheme!

Toto · 08-14-2011, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

...

Get off your soap box and save your supposed consternation for the Talmud supporters. Rabbinic Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament. I defy you to show me where the Old Testament says it's ok to rape children

...

The Talmud does not say that it's okay to rape children. You can read a rational discussion here.

JoeWallack · 08-14-2011, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Dot

Get off your soap box and save your supposed consternation for the Talmud supporters. Rabbinic Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament. I defy you to show me where the Old Testament says it's ok to rape children!

Their a bunch of sick bastards, may they rot in hell! You obviously didn't look around the site or you would have found the good guy/bad guy section:

http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_2.html

JW:
Jesus, you don't need to make up shit to find which religion has the pedophiles. Just read the Newspapers.

Joseph

ErrancyWiki

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

08-14-2011, 03:51 PM	#8
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	www.jesus-is-savior.com has got to be satire. It attacks Jews, Wiccans, Roman Catholics, Santa Claus, psychiatry, rock music, movies -- and that color scheme!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.