Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Dlx2 · 12-08-2007, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Which texts were canonized also took into account which ones were popular, not just how well they agreed with the orthodox positions. There are in fact some major inconsistencies between the Pauline epistles and the epistle to the Hebrews, for example.

Popular where? I'm under the impression that a lot of the Gnostic texts were really popular in, say, Egypt.

reniaa · 12-09-2007, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestionMark

1> Christianity and Islam are universal religions. Each of them believe that their religion is the only true religion and that the whole world should believe as they do. IOW the non-believers will not go to 'Heaven'.

Judaism is a particular religion for the Jewish people, all others who follow the Noahide Laws (Most US State Constitutions are based on these) will get whatever Jews get, without the burden of following all the Jewish Laws.

2> Christians believe that Jesus was perfect.
Muslems believe that Mohamed was perfect.
Jews have no perfect 'walk the earth' heroes, including Moses.

3> Christians and Muslim spiritual leaders regularly ask their members "Do you believe ...?"

No Jew in any Jewish ritual is ever asked that question. It does not matter what a Jew believes. In fact a Jew may also be an Atheist and be a member of a Synagogue in good standing.

QM?

is this aside from the fact that all 3 use the bible as a source material ^^

Berthold · 12-09-2007, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestionMark

The Jews invented God and the Christians and the Muslims took it too seriously!

QM?

If you take things like the (alleged*) conquest of Palestine, or atrocious punishments ordered for "abominations", the OT is a serious matter indeed!

*Archaeological evidence, at least according to Finkelstein et al., does rarely harmonize with the tale as written.

QuestionMark · 12-09-2007, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tammuz

No, in Judaism, non-believing Jews don't go to Heaven. According to the testimony of a former Orthodox Jew, a non-believing Jew is punished much harder than a non-believing Gentile. In turn, the Paradise the righteous Gentiles can attain is nothing compared to what the righteous Jews can attain.

"According to the testimony of a former Orthodox Jew....."

Just ask any non-former Orthodox Jew and you will hear the opposite.

QM?

QuestionMark · 12-09-2007, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestionMark

1> Christianity and Islam are universal religions. Each of them believe that their religion is the only true religion and that the whole world should believe as they do. IOW the non-believers will not go to 'Heaven'.

Judaism is a particular religion for the Jewish people, all others who follow the Noahide Laws (Most US State Constitutions are based on these) will get whatever Jews get, without the burden of following all the Jewish Laws.

2> Christians believe that Jesus was perfect.
Muslems believe that Mohamed was perfect.
Jews have no perfect 'walk the earth' heroes, including Moses.

3> Christians and Muslim spiritual leaders regularly ask their members "Do you believe ...?"

No Jew in any Jewish ritual is ever asked that question. It does not matter what a Jew believes. In fact a Jew may also be an Atheist and be a member of a Synagogue in good standing.

QM?

is this aside from the fact that all 3 use the bible as a source material ^^

"THE" Bible is not anything.

There are many versions of a book called "Bible".

For example; The commandment about not taking life.

"Though Shall not 'Kill', is in fact a mistranslation.

Every priest and minister will agree that 'kill' is incorrect.

The Hebrew is 'Murder'.

People have died because of the error because they would not defend themselves including CO's.

Why don't they change 'kill' to Murder if Murder is the correct term?

In Judaism, they have changed the Exodus "Red Sea" to "Reed Sea" when they discovered the error caused by the missing 'e'.

The willingness to correct errors may be another difference between the religions.

QM?

Dlx2 · 12-09-2007, 08:34 AM

QM, I feel like you're falling into a trap of black and white thinking. Things are much more subtle than you're making them out to be.

Christianity is full of debate. The various Vatican counsels are full of priests, bishops, and cardinals debating how to best read the texts. During the High Middle Ages, there existed entire schools of theology based on argument between educated scholars...this is the environment that produced Abelard (or some would say, Heloise) and other such thinkers. The difference I suppose I'm making is that Judaism has had a higher rate of literacy than Christianity for most of the last 1300 years, which is why the debate on the texts involved the common man, rather than reaches the common man by way of a priest or friar who claims to have all the answers. I'm under the impression that literacy is VERY important in Islam, and that discussion on the Koran is both permitted and encouraged, but that there is a taboo on questioning the Koran itself.

As for your comment on Islam and violence, I feel that a few things should be pointed out.

First of all, you are currently in the middle of celebrating a holiday in which an outside threat to your ancestors' right to worship their god in the manner of their choice was met with violence and bloodshed. You will celebrate two more such holidays this Spring.

Secondly, Christians have, for about 1700 years, preferred to kill for their faith than die for it. You more than anyone should be aware that the Crusades and the Inquisition were not benign acts of the church.

Everyone pulls the same shit. They just pull it to different degrees.

QuestionMark · 12-09-2007, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dlx2

QM, I feel like you're falling into a trap of black and white thinking. Things are much more subtle than you're making them out to be.

Christianity is full of debate. The various Vatican counsels are full of priests, bishops, and cardinals debating how to best read the texts. During the High Middle Ages, there existed entire schools of theology based on argument between educated scholars...this is the environment that produced Abelard (or some would say, Heloise) and other such thinkers. The difference I suppose I'm making is that Judaism has had a higher rate of literacy than Christianity for most of the last 1300 years, which is why the debate on the texts involved the common man, rather than reaches the common man by way of a priest or friar who claims to have all the answers. I'm under the impression that literacy is VERY important in Islam, and that discussion on the Koran is both permitted and encouraged, but that there is a taboo on questioning the Koran itself.

As for your comment on Islam and violence, I feel that a few things should be pointed out.

First of all, you are currently in the middle of celebrating a holiday in which an outside threat to your ancestors' right to worship their god in the manner of their choice was met with violence and bloodshed. You will celebrate two more such holidays this Spring.

Secondly, Christians have, for about 1700 years, preferred to kill for their faith than die for it. You more than anyone should be aware that the Crusades and the Inquisition were not benign acts of the church.

Everyone pulls the same shit. They just pull it to different degrees.

I agree, EXCEPT that the Jewish shit was before Christianity came along and Christian shit (burning witches) was a fairly long time ago as well.

Muslim shit is happening NOW!

Muslim shit towards women is inescapable, NOW!

QM?

Toto · 12-09-2007, 01:25 PM

If you want this thread to stay in BCH, please confine the discussion to textual matters.

If you want to discuss the sociology of religious violence, this thread might be better in GRD.

squiz · 12-10-2007, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squiz

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestionMark

1> Most US State Constitutions are based on these (Noahide Laws).

Sources for this claim please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestionMark

Have you looked up Noahide?

Educate yourself in 30 seconds on Google or Wiki.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/idea...ID=12848802522

The prohibition against idolatry refers specifically to idolatrous worship, and not to BELIEFS. In later generations, Jews had to determine whether the prevailing religious cultures in which they lived were idolatrous. Since Islam is strictly monotheistic, Muslims have always been considered Noahides. Since the later Middle Ages, Jews have acknowledged that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity was not the same as idolatry, and they were also recognized as Noahides.

Thus Jews accept Muslims and Christians as Noahides!

I assume this was directed at my question, although you didn't explicitly refer to it.

Here is a reference to the Jewish idea of the Noahide Laws:

Seven_Laws_of_Noah. I still can't find any evidence that "Most US State Constitutions are based on these". The only reference I can find is a quote from the US Congress in 1991: Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws, which is modern politically based opinion and not evidence.

I would like to see which US State Consitutions ban idolatory, for example. That must make it difficult for the Hindus in those US states.

Anyway, showing some correlation between these Laws and existing Laws does not show that they were based on them. That is quite an extreme claim, that is probably politically motivated (sort of like this crap that our laws are based on the 10 commandments).

I suppose this belongs more in the CSS than here.

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

12-09-2007, 08:34 AM	#26
Dlx2 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 2,546	QM, I feel like you're falling into a trap of black and white thinking. Things are much more subtle than you're making them out to be. Christianity is full of debate. The various Vatican counsels are full of priests, bishops, and cardinals debating how to best read the texts. During the High Middle Ages, there existed entire schools of theology based on argument between educated scholars...this is the environment that produced Abelard (or some would say, Heloise) and other such thinkers. The difference I suppose I'm making is that Judaism has had a higher rate of literacy than Christianity for most of the last 1300 years, which is why the debate on the texts involved the common man, rather than reaches the common man by way of a priest or friar who claims to have all the answers. I'm under the impression that literacy is VERY important in Islam, and that discussion on the Koran is both permitted and encouraged, but that there is a taboo on questioning the Koran itself. As for your comment on Islam and violence, I feel that a few things should be pointed out. First of all, you are currently in the middle of celebrating a holiday in which an outside threat to your ancestors' right to worship their god in the manner of their choice was met with violence and bloodshed. You will celebrate two more such holidays this Spring. Secondly, Christians have, for about 1700 years, preferred to kill for their faith than die for it. You more than anyone should be aware that the Crusades and the Inquisition were not benign acts of the church. Everyone pulls the same shit. They just pull it to different degrees.

12-09-2007, 01:25 PM	#28
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	If you want this thread to stay in BCH, please confine the discussion to textual matters. If you want to discuss the sociology of religious violence, this thread might be better in GRD.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.