Logicboy03: Kai! See as christians avoid this thread!


Bumped....Goshen, Anony and co....we are waiting

Still jogging and warming up at the sideline.....waiting for my turn to jump into thread. Still jogging and reading from sideline

mazaje: Whose view of the old testament should be considered authoritative, that of the christians or jew? I say this because the two religions have very different views of the old testament.For example, the jews see the garden of eden story as man’s elevation to a moral sense and awareness, while christians  on the other hand see the eden story as the fall of man. Jews do not recognize and believe the original sin hypothesis while christians do and that is a great difference since both of them read from the same book.

I notice that jews do not completely regard the whole old testament as historical, they have no problem stating that some of the stories are allegories and not historical, but christians don't usually share that view. . .

Whose interpretation should be authoritative and hold precedence? That of the jews or Christians?

Authority refers to an official, administrative or definitive exercise of dominant control or a potency of ideals within an association, organization, group or other collective. An authority is always restricted in its scope of office.

Thus, the Jews' interpetation is authoritative and holds precedence for them.
While that of the Christians is authoritative and holds precedence for them.
Same as the account of the Muslims is authoritative and holds precedence for them.

Doesn't get easier

InesQor:

Authority refers to an official, administrative or definitive exercise of dominant control or a potency of ideals within an association, organization, group or other collective. An authority is always restricted in its scope of office.

Thus, the Jews' interpetation is authoritative and holds precedence for them.
While that of the Christians is authoritative and holds precedence for them.
Same as the account of the Muslims is authoritative and holds precedence for them.

Doesn't get easier

The Jews invented all the stories not christians. . .Its the same as muslims laying claim to the Jesus story, making some changes to it and expecting people to believe it when christians came up with the Jesus story. . .

mazaje:
The Jews invented all the stories not christians. . .Its the same as muslims laying claim to the Jesus story, making some changes to it and expecting people to believe it when christians came up with the Jesus story. . .

Yeah, Christians inherited a lot from Jewish material. And I think when knowledge is transferred, especially via oral traditions, a lot of interpretation is subjective to the agents of transfer. They transfer what they remember, and in some cases they may even add their own perspectives.

The first Christians used some Jews as their sources. What if it was those Jews that informed the Christians that were actually correct in what they remembered, and the other ones were wrong? Not sure my point is coming across clearly but I guess it's hard to tell.

That's why maybe each party is best left holding on to their own authority and not trying to impose it on others.

InesQor:

Yeah, Christians inherited a lot from Jewish material. And I think when knowledge is transferred, especially via oral traditions, a lot of interpretation is subjective to the agents of transfer. They transfer what they remember, and in some cases they may even add their own perspectives.

The first Christians used some Jews as their sources. What if it was those Jews that informed the Christians that were actually correct in what they remembered, and the other ones were wrong? Not sure my point is coming across clearly but I guess it's hard to tell.

That's why maybe each party is best left holding on to their own authority and not trying to impose it on others.

You are always simple and straight to the point, thats why I like reading your post even though we disagree. . .Roger. . .

Logicboy03:


you get the point!

Unfortunately, you don't. That's the opposite direction, actually.
You don't agree with Christian authority?

Image123:
Unfortunately, you don't. That's the opposite direction, actually.
You don't agree with Christian authority?

Christians have no authority on the old testament.


The direction doesnt matter..........

mazaje: Whose view of the old testament should be considered authoritative, that of the christians or jew? I say this because the two religions have very different views of the old testament.For example, the jews see the garden of eden story as man’s elevation to a moral sense and awareness, while christians on the other hand see the eden story as the fall of man. Jews do not recognize and believe the original sin hypothesis while christians do and that is a great difference since both of them read from the same book.

I notice that jews do not completely regard the whole old testament as historical, they have no problem stating that some of the stories are allegories and not historical, but christians don't usually share that view. . .

Whose interpretation should be authoritative and hold precedence? That of the jews or Christians?

The nation you see today and call "Jews/Israel" a secular nation is a far fetched from the nation of "kings and priest" you hear mention in the bible.

When the nation of Israel was destroyed in 70ce, they lost all their history that was in the temple that was burned down aside this info that was contain in the OT and what the christian NT contain.

This part was in the hands of other "Jews "scattered abroad"

What you have today is a secular nation that operate as any other nation and does not have Yahweh appointing their "king and priest" as it use to be.

They have a completely different ideology.

Am afraid, you miss fired again sir.

Peace to you any how.

truthislight:

The nation you see today and call "Jews/Israel" a secular nation is a far fetched from the nation of "kings and priest" you hear mention in the bible.

When the nation of Israel was destroyed in 70ce, they lost all their history that was in the temple that was burned down aside this info that was contain in the OT and what the christian NT contain.

This part was in the hands of other "Jews "scattered abroad"

What you have today is a secular nation that operate as any other nation and does not have Yahweh appointing their "king and priest" as it use to be.

They have a completely different ideology.

Am afraid, you miss fired again sir.

Peace to you any how.

So now, the Jews dont know their own religion and you a Nigerian who was given a Jewish religion called christianity through slavery from the British knows the old Jewish Laws better than them?

Disgusting arrogance

Martian: Judaism has no concept analogous to original sin.

"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days. And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:" (Leviticus 12:1-6).

"Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female." (Leviticus 12:7).
.......................................

well, their was a sin offering for new bone.

I dont know why there was a need for atonement for sin.

Martian: Judaism has no concept analogous to original sin.

The jews of today are a secular nation with a completely different Ideology.

The bible speaks for itself.

Martian: This is one is for both sides and their arguements about Abraham's two sons. It seemed the "apostle formerly known as Saul" thought the story was an allegory too.

Galatians 4 21-31
Slave versus free
21 Tell me—those of you who want to be under the Law—don’t you listen to the Law? 22 It’s written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and one by the free woman. 23 The son by the slave woman was conceived the normal way, but the son by the free woman was conceived through a promise. 24 These things are an allegory: the women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, which gives birth to slave children; this is Hagar. 25 Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and she corresponds to the present-day Jerusalem, because the city is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27 It’s written:

"Allegory" must be a Hebrew word that was used in the original manuscript.

Can the use of the word "Allegory" be a choice of word By the translators?

Some other translations puts it this way:

Gal. 4:24.
"This things are a symbolic drama ............."

does that means it did not happened?

We see a "live drama" on the road every now and then.

Did you ask yourself:
How then did Abraham became father of the nation of Israel?

The bible give people and their intentions what they want to see indeed.

Lol

Logicboy03:



So now, the Jews dont know their own religion and you a Nigerian who was given a Jewish religion called christianity through slavery from the British knows the old Jewish Laws better than them?

Disgusting arrogance

Can you point out what is wrong with my post:

truthislight:

The nation you see today and call "Jews/Israel" a secular nation is a far fetched from the nation of "kings and priest" you hear mention in the bible.

When the nation of Israel was destroyed in 70ce, they lost all their history that was in the temple that was burned down aside this info that was contain in the OT and what the christian NT contain.

This part was in the hands of other "Jews "scattered abroad"

What you have today is a secular nation that operate as any other nation and does not have Yahweh appointing their "king and priest" as it use to be.

They have a completely different ideology.

Am afraid, you miss fired again sir.

Peace to you any how.

mazaje:

You are always simple and straight to the point, thats why I like reading your post even though we disagree. . .Roger. . .

Thanks man

truthislight:

The nation you see today and call "Jews/Israel" a secular nation is a far fetched from the nation of "kings and priest" you hear mention in the bible.

When the nation of Israel was destroyed in 70ce, they lost all their history that was in the temple that was burned down aside this info that was contain in the OT and what the christian NT contain.

This part was in the hands of other "Jews "scattered abroad"

What you have today is a secular nation that operate as any other nation and does not have Yahweh appointing their "king and priest" as it use to be.

They have a completely different ideology.

Am afraid, you miss fired again sir.

Peace to you any how.

This is exactly what I was explaining to Mazaje. A lot of the original records seem to be forever lost when Israel was destroyed, so it is hard to know which is actually "right" or "authoritative" between the contemporary Jewish account and the Christian accounts.

Logicboy03:

Christians have no authority on the old testament.


The direction doesnt matter..........

Apostle Paul and Jesus Christ are authority on the two testaments, you'd better listen to them.

truthislight:

The nation you see today and call "Jews/Israel" a secular nation is a far fetched from the nation of "kings and priest" you hear mention in the bible.

When the nation of Israel was destroyed in 70ce, they lost all their history that was in the temple that was burned down aside this info that was contain in the OT and what the christian NT contain.

This part was in the hands of other "Jews "scattered abroad"

What you have today is a secular nation that operate as any other nation and does not have Yahweh appointing their "king and priest" as it use to be.

They have a completely different ideology.

Am afraid, you miss fired again sir.

Peace to you any how.

They preserved their religion and its doctrines just like the way they preserved their language. . .Sure Jerusalem was destroyed but the people remained and still practiced their religion where ever they went to. . .Even before the story of Jesus came in, they had their own interpretations that they preserved till date. Once the people survived they continued their traditions. . .I saw a documentary long ago of a youroba tribe that were taken as slaves about 500 years ago and their descendants still worships ifa in brazil till date. . .The Hebrew bible still is available, the midrash and all other religious text that explains these stories are still available, so your claim that their books are all missing is false. . .A lot of them still maintain the original traditions and interpretation. . .The fact that ir does not agree with what the christian usurpers invented does not mean it does not exist. . .

InesQor:
Thanks man


This is exactly what I was explaining to Mazaje. A lot of the original records seem to be forever lost when Israel was destroyed, so it is hard to know which is actually "right" or "authoritative" between the contemporary Jewish account and the Christian accounts.

I am certain this is meant as a hilarious joke.

InesQor:
Thanks man


This is exactly what I was explaining to Mazaje. A lot of the original records seem to be forever lost when Israel was destroyed, so it is hard to know which is actually "right" or "authoritative" between the contemporary Jewish account and the Christian accounts.

Records?. . .Nah.. .Most of the traditions were transmitted orally and do not require any record. . .Once the people survived the tradition survived as well. . .The hebrew bible still survived, same with the midrash that offers the explanations of the traditions. . .so what records exactly are you talking about?. . .Even the christian tradition and interpretations was not actually recorded any where, it was mainly transmitted from one generation to another orally. . .The lack of record assertion holds no water. . .

@mazaje:

Thanks a lot for that Yoruba example that you gave, it's a good illustration for what's going on between Jewish and Christian religions.

Did you know that those Yoruba people in Brazil practise syncretic versions of the Traditional Yoruba. Such religions are Candomble and Santeria, which are quite similar in fundamentals but very different from the original Yoruba traditional Ifa religion?

It is the exact same problem I already identified: when religious tradition is transferred orally, it undergoes all sorts of changes.

Now, we can't say that Candomble or Santeria are fakes and that Ifa is the original. Each one is an original, and each one has its own authority.

Deep Sight:
I am certain this is meant as a hilarious joke.

I am certain you can give voice to your concern in clearer terms as is your regular wont.

InesQor: @mazaje:

Thanks a lot for that Yoruba example that you gave, it's a good illustration for what's going on between Jewish and Christian religions.

Did you know that those Yoruba people in Brazil practise syncretic versions of the Traditional Yoruba. Such religions are Candomble and Santeria, which are quite similar in fundamentals but very different from the original Yoruba traditional Ifa religion?

It is the exact same problem I already identified: when religious tradition is transferred orally, it undergoes all sorts of changes.

Now, we can't say that Candomble or Santeria are fakes and that Ifa is the original. Each one is an original, and each one has its own authority.

Sure, I agree. . .But in the case of the Jews the Midrash and the Talmuds survived. . .Remember the Midrash was written centuries before the new testament was written down. . .It survived along with the Talmud and the Hebrew bible(OT).

InesQor: @mazaje:

Thanks a lot for that Yoruba example that you gave, it's a good illustration for what's going on between Jewish and Christian religions.

Did you know that those Yoruba people in Brazil practise syncretic versions of the Traditional Yoruba. Such religions are Candomble and Santeria, which are quite similar in fundamentals but very different from the original Yoruba traditional Ifa religion?

It is the exact same problem I already identified: when religious tradition is transferred orally, it undergoes all sorts of changes.

Now, we can't say that Candomble or Santeria are fakes and that Ifa is the original. Each one is an original, and each one has its own authority.

How can the Brazil Yoruba be original when there is the Yoruba in Nigeria that was the source? Am I missing something? One i original, the other is a modified version, a fusion.

Jews had their old testaments and interpretation for thousands of years with scribes and clergy men who studied the old testament. Some hippie jew carpenter comes along to claim that he understands the scriptures better than the scribes. Well, a crucifixion was in order for the arrogant carpenter.

Deep Sight:

I am certain this is meant as a hilarious joke.

Dont mind the jokers. How then do the Jews still have the old testament and their other scriptures today?

The christian bible that has been cut, edited and mistranslated (there is no proper english translation for many grek/hebrew words) is now the authority?

mazaje:

Sure, I agree. . .But in the case of the Jews the Midrash and the Talmuds survived. . .Remember the Midrash was written centuries before the new testament was written down. . .It survived along with the Talmud and the Hebrew bible(OT).

But this is the odd bit: most of the discrepancies between Old Testament and the Jewish scriptures are Midrashic. The Talmud contains the Tanakh and Gemara. Tanakh is same as Old Testament; while Gemara are like Rabbinical commentaries on politics and daily life for Jews, some of them re-visiting things said in the Tanakh.

TL;DR Talmud = Tanakh (Old Testament) + Gemara (Rabbinical commentaries on politics and daily life for Jews)

Meanwhile Midrash is a type of exegesis in which you make a whole teaching out of a character that is not prominent in the Tanakh, or does not even exist there at all. Two types of Midrash are Halakha Midrashim (Jewish law) and Aggadah (non-legal elements of Judaism) Midrashim. Midrashim in Halakha try to explain the source of and reason behind religious laws in order to prove their authenticity. Midrashim dealing with Aggadah cover a wide variety of topics and employ a much more liberal style of exposition than do halakhic midrashim.

TL;DR Mirash are like Gemara; but they are Rabbinical personal teachings trying to explain legal and non-legal elements of the Tanakh (our OT).

In short, the only places where discrepancies show between the Jewish scriptures and Christian Old testament have to do with Rabbinical personal opinions and teachings for daily life. AND yes, these differences matter, but they only matter to those that take the authority of those Rabbi as valid. Christians don't take the Rabbis personal opinions as valid, so I don't see why they should take it as an authority.

For the sake of analogy, this is like comparing Rhapsody of Realities by Chris Oyakhilome with actual contents of the Bible.

Logicboy03:

How can the Brazil Yoruba be original when there is the Yoruba in Nigeria that was the source? Am I missing something? One i original, the other is a modified version, a fusion.

Nobody said the Brazilian Yoruba is original. The Brazilian Yoruba syncretized religions called Santeria and Candomble are original.

Please read up on Syncretism. It always produces an original religion.

Logicboy03:
Jews had their old testaments and interpretation for thousands of years with scribes and clergy men who studied the old testament. Some hippie jew carpenter comes along to claim that he understands the scriptures better than the scribes. Well, a crucifixion was in order for the arrogant carpenter.

You don't need to be rude to pass across your message. Sorry, but I'm not interested in further conversation with you for this reason.

Revisiting my earlier statement:

...it is hard to know which is actually "right" or "authoritative" between the contemporary Jewish account and the Christian accounts.

I don't see why this is a problem or a joke but I am hoping DeepSight will return to enlighten me.

The Contemporary Jewish rabbi and the early Christians both drew heavily from the Tanakh / Old Testament. Whatever their impressions or ideals or teachings or commentaries all came from the same source. So why should one be discarded as fake while the other is original? Both are authoritative to their respective audiences.

InesQor:

But this is the odd bit: most of the discrepancies between Old Testament and the Jewish scriptures are Midrashic. The Talmud contains the Tanakh and Gemara. Tanakh is same as Old Testament; while Gemara are like Rabbinical commentaries on politics and daily life for Jews, some of them re-visiting things said in the Tanakh.

TL;DR Talmud = Tanakh (Old Testament) + Gemara (Rabbinical commentaries on politics and daily life for Jews)

Meanwhile Midrash is a type of exegesis in which you make a whole teaching out of a character that is not prominent in the Tanakh, or does not even exist there at all. Two types of Midrash are Halakha Midrashim (Jewish law) and Aggadah (non-legal elements of Judaism) Midrashim. Midrashim in Halakha try to explain the source of and reason behind religious laws in order to prove their authenticity. Midrashim dealing with Aggadah cover a wide variety of topics and employ a much more liberal style of exposition than do halakhic midrashim.

TL;DR Mirash are like Gemara; but they are Rabbinical personal teachings trying to explain legal and non-legal elements of the Tanakh (our OT).

In short, the only places where discrepancies show between the Jewish scriptures and Christian Old testament have to do with Rabbinical personal opinions and teachings for daily life. AND yes, these differences matter, but they only matter to those that take the authority of those Rabbi as valid. Christians don't take the Rabbis personal opinions as valid, so I don't see why they should take it as an authority.

For the sake of analogy, this is like comparing Rhapsody of Realities by Chris Oyakhilome with actual contents of the Bible.

Simply put the Midrash is a way of interpreting biblical stories that goes beyond simple distillation of religious, legal, or moral teachings. It fills in many gaps left in the biblical narrative regarding events and personalities that are only hinted at. It is from it the understanding of various stories came from.The original purpose of midrash was to resolve problems in the interpretation of difficult passages of the text of the Hebrew Bible, using Rabbinic principles of hermeneutics and philology to align them with the religious and ethical values of religious teachers. This method of interpretation was eventually expanded "to provide scriptural pretexts to justify oral tradition"- Wikipedia . . .The christian tradition and exegesis came thousands of years later. . .Why should it hold precedence?. . .You analogy with the Rhapsody of realities isn't good enough because there is a tradition and council behind the midrash. . .The rhapsodies o realities is just the opinion of a single man. . .

Just can't stop talking, thinking and reading about the Christian faith, yet you ask if it's any different from any other. Insincerity.

Image123: Just can't stop talking, thinking and reading about the Christian faith, yet you ask if it's any different from any other. Insincerity.

mazaje:
Simply put the Midrash is a way of interpreting biblical stories that goes beyond simple distillation of religious, legal, or moral teachings. It fills in many gaps left in the biblical narrative regarding events and personalities that are only hinted at. It is from it the understanding of various stories came from.The original purpose of midrash was to resolve problems in the interpretation of difficult passages of the text of the Hebrew Bible, using Rabbinic principles of hermeneutics and philology to align them with the religious and ethical values of religious teachers. This method of interpretation was eventually expanded "to provide scriptural pretexts to justify oral tradition"- Wikipedia

Exactly. The Midrash is simply a Scriptural commentary, so to speak, to justify oral traditions.

mazaje: . . .The christian tradition and exegesis came thousands of years later. . .Why should it hold precedence?. . .You analogy with the Rhapsody of realities isn't good enough because there is a tradition and council behind the midrash. . .The rhapsodies o realities is just the opinion of a single man. . .

But this is not what I'm saying. Christian tradition does NOT hold precedence over the Jewish. Each one holds precedence to their own people. They both draw from the same source.

If in 1990 you wrote a thesis based on a paper published 200 years ago, and this year I write a thesis based on the same paper; does this mean that yours holds precedence over mine? Not at all so!

As for Rhapsody, I used it as an example. There are many devotionals that have a council behind them. Like Our Daily Bread etc.

InesQor:
Nobody said the Brazilian Yoruba is original. The Brazilian Yoruba syncretized religions called Santeria and Candomble are original.

Please read up on Syncretism. It always produces an original religion.

Syncretism is a fusion of other cultures/religion into one. As such, it is not an original religion- only a fusion or mix.

Yoruba is the original, the pre-existing Brazilian cultures/religions are the other originals and then, the Yoruba-Brazil syncretic religion is not an original but a fusion.

#destroyed

InesQor:
You don't need to be rude to pass across your message. Sorry, but I'm not interested in further conversation with you for this reason.

Dont play this nonsense with me. How was I rude? Rude to whom? If you can not debate the facts dont play the victim card- better go home.



Here is my comment again;

Logicboy03:

Jews had their old testaments and interpretation for thousands of years with scribes and clergy men who studied the old testament. Some hippie jew carpenter comes along to claim that he understands the scriptures better than the scribes. Well, a crucifixion was in order for the arrogant carpenter.

InesQor:
Exactly. The Mirash is simply a Scriptural commentary, so to speak, to justify oral traditions.


But this is not what I'm saying. Christian tradition does NOT hold precedence over the Jewish. Each one holds precedence to their own people. They both draw from the same source.

If in 1990 you wrote a thesis based on a paper published 200 years ago, and this year I write a thesis based on the same paper; does this mean that yours holds precedence over mine? Not at all so!

As for Rhapsody, I used it as an example. There are many devotionals that have a council behind them. Like Our Daily Bread etc.

You are right to bring in Rhapsody of realities but you used it for the wrong religion.


Rhapsody is one man's version of a religion. Christianity. Pastor Chris has his own remix of christianity

Christianity is one man's version of a religion. Judaism. Jesus remixed the Jewish traditions



Jewish scriptures have been interpreted and written thousands of years ago before christianity. How the hell can christianity law any claim to the Jewish old testament?


This is why Jews score higher than christians in religious tests. They know the limits of their religion.

To quote Bane from the Dark Knight rises

"You merely adopted the Jewish traditions, I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt know Jesus till I was already an Adult and by that time, I was already reciting the Torah"

InesQor:
Exactly. The Midrash is simply a Scriptural commentary, so to speak, to justify oral traditions.


But this is not what I'm saying. Christian tradition does NOT hold precedence over the Jewish. Each one holds precedence to their own people. They both draw from the same source.

If in 1990 you wrote a thesis based on a paper published 200 years ago, and this year I write a thesis based on the same paper; does this mean that yours holds precedence over mine? Not at all so!

As for Rhapsody, I used it as an example. There are many devotionals that have a council behind them. Like Our Daily Bread etc.

The OT is a Jewish book and therefore the Jewish understanding of it should and must remain the only authoritative understanding of it. Again your analogy about the thesis falls here. . .The OT is originally a Jewish book not a christian book. . .The NT is originally a christian book yet we have muslims telling us things about the NT like Jesus not being crucified and the story of Mary for example and expecting us to believe it when their own tradition came many hundreds of years later. . .