Pharaoh tries to kill all male babies - later Moses orders the very same thing!

by George One Time 50 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney
    What I am saying is that people are coming to conclusions about the Exodus account based on what non-Jewish people have taught them

    I'll bite.

    Why do we have to judge the written words through the prism of how Jewish people interpret them (setting aside the fact that there is no consensus from "the Jewish people)? Shouldn't the words stand on their own?

    Does this mean I can't have an opinion on the Quaran unless it's supported by the Muslim people? Do I even get to have a view on the Bible given that the only religion I've ever belonged to was the Jehovah's Witnesses? Can academics have a view on the scripture if they're not part of the faith?

    It seems like you're arbitrarily setting up a barrier on purpose to insulate scripture from criticism.


  • David_Jay
    David_Jay

    Good grief!

    I made reference to employing a critical based text to learn more about Exodus in my first post. "The Jewish Study Bible" employs scholarship that includes academic voices that are Christian, even referencing Islamic theolgy. The scholarship is provided by some who are secular or Jews that you would call atheist by definition.

    I would also recommend employing the use of the Catholic "New Jerusalem Bible" with the full footnote apparatus and their NABRE translation released in 2011 by the USCCB and CBA. The annotations in the NRSV study editions are great too. All of these use critical exegetical approaches that are academically sound and interconfessional.

    I am all for critical approaches to Scripture. But what is being discussed here is anything but.

    Just added my original post for thought. Forget anything I've posted here at all. Shalom.

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney

    Rejecting literal interpretations of the Exodus and various other accounts in the Torah is a very sound, modern way to practice religion. I applaud you for that.

    However, not all Jews share your views and I'd argue that modern interpretations are irrelevant. What matters most for purposes of this discussion is how the words were understood at the time they were written.

  • David_Jay
    David_Jay

    Neverendingjourney wrote:

    What matters most for purposes of this discussion is how the words were understood at the time they were written.

    But first stated:

    Why do we have to judge the written words through the prism of how Jewish people interpret them

    How can you understand "how the words were understood at the time they were written" if you don't want to "have to judge the written words through the prism of how Jewish people interpret them"? Don't you have to go back to how the original audience interpreted them? Weren't they Jews?

    And isn't the reason for modern critical analysis of Jewish texts among the Jews to get to the original understanding of what it meant to the first audience in the first place? That is what I am talking about, not some new interpretation.

    Apparently I either write in gibberish or there are a few people who cannot understand what I write or some people are just so ready for a fight against anything that sounds like a support for religion that they can't see straight enough to see what I've written.

    Who told you that the very first Jews understood this text as literal? Christians? A crazy cult in NY?

    This is my very last reply, forever. I am so done. I don't care what you believe or anyone believes, to be honest. Judaism is not a religion of beliefs anyway. So I don't give a hoot. I never have.

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney
    This is my very last reply, forever. I am so done.

    That's cool. Come back when you're in a position to have a reasoned discussion without getting your blood pressure up.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    You don`t dictate the narrative of a thread.

    Outlaw, I did not dictate to you what you are allowed to post. I was only trying to be helpful to you by showing you what you should say when debating a subject; this applies to any forum.

    Fisherman


  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    Outlaw, I did not dictate to you what you are allowed to post. I was only trying to be helpful to you by showing you what you should say.....Fisherman

    Image result for Somewhere there's a village is missing their idiot

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman
    level headed atheists and don't worship the murderous maniac

    Anyway, the Bible record is clear what anyone touching lovers of God should expect.

  • Perry
    Perry

    Here's a well reasoned treatment of the subject.

    This action/atrocity by the Midianites is an intensely sordid and depressing tale, of greater scale than even that of Sodom and Gomorrah, and of greater anti-Hebrew malice and calculating treachery than even that of the Amalekites…The removal of this exact sub-culture (without impacting the Moabites or the rest of the Midianites—for good or ill), while mercifully sparing a very large number of innocent young girls, yet without sparing the guilty Israelites, seems neither cruel nor unfair nor unwarranted, given the horrendously dehumanizing character of this crime, and given the unavoidable consequences of conflict upon children in the ancient world…

    Article

  • Cold Steel
    Cold Steel
    George One Time » That is what Moses did to the Midianites. Even all the baby boys were to be killed, not the female babies.

    The difference is that both the Mideanites and the Canaanites were monsters. They weren't just peaceful farmers who suddenly found themselves facing Israelite swords and spears. The cultures were driven by base sexual rites that included the ritual murder of infants. The Canaanites were a profligate, bloodthirsty lot. They were beyond redemption. And though it's popular for critics to judge things with incomplete knowledge, I find it...unwise...to judge God based on incomplete knowledge.

    When Korah appeared before Moses with his family and supporters because they couldn't hold the priesthood, and when Moses and Korah lit them to see to see whom God would support, there came a great earthquake and the ground opened and swallowed Korah, his family and his supporters. But even though Moses never touched Korah, it's interesting that the people blamed, not God, but Moses for their deaths. There's no human I know of who can create an eathquake, but the people apparently felt Moses had deceived God into backing him, and they were too frightened to blame God. Still, Moses defended the people.

    To judge God or the Bible, one should know every aspect of the arguments one is purporting. God proposed wiping out all the people to settle Moses' problem, but He knew Moses would object, sparing them. So unless you know the nature of God and what the people were up to, you're in danger of judging wrongly. And many of the people died because they so presumed.

    http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/246641/jewish/Korahs-Rebellion.htm

Share with others