Members banned from this thread: zaangalewa


Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20282930
Results 291 to 300 of 300
Thanks Tree58Thanks

Thread: Is the Bible the inerrent word of God?

  1. #291
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks
    313

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by splansing View Post
    Hate speech is not any speech you might find offensive. But it's interesting to note that you are in fact a fundamentalist, apparently.

    All I know is this:

    Teaching children in science class that Creationism is equally as scientifically legitimate as evolution is the sort of thing only a crazy person could think.
    See the definition of hate speech.

    How about mein kampf? Do you think it is a legitimate topic in political science?

  2. #292
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,622
    Thanks
    3024

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

    Hate speech is speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.[1][2] In the law of some countries, hate speech is described as speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it incites violence or prejudicial action against a protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership of the group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership of the group. The law may identify a protected group by certain characteristics.[3][4][5] In some countries, hate speech is not a legal term[6] and in some it is constitutionally protected.[7]

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pejorative

    a word or phrase that has negative connotations (see connotation 1) or that is intended to disparage or belittle : a pejorative word or phrase

    How is it different?
    They're called fundies or fundamentalists. I'm sorry your wikipedia page says fundie is disparaging. What it is is factual. They ARE fundamentalists, so calling them fundamentalists isn't hate speech. It's just a fact. And choosing not to type "fundamentalist" every time doesn't make it hate speech either.

    If you and the other fundamentalists want to come up with some other name for yourself that the rest of us can use, let's hear it. But if it's really unwieldy, don't cry about it when people shorten it a bit in common usage. And don't get confused. It's not the speech that's disparaging. It's just my view of fundies; it's not a very intelligent way to live. Sorry, but that's called an opinion, and it's mine.

    You aren't trying to crush my freedom of speech are you? I'll bet you'd like to have me stoned or something, just for speaking my mind, wouldn't you. You probably think the Bible carries more civil authority than The Constitution, don't you.

    And now you're trying to put that oppression on me.

  3. #293
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks
    313

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by splansing View Post
    They're called fundies or fundamentalists. I'm sorry your wikipedia page says fundie is disparaging. What it is is factual. They ARE fundamentalists, so calling them fundamentalists isn't hate speech. It's just a fact. And choosing not to type "fundamentalist" every time doesn't make it hate speech either.

    If you and the other fundamentalists want to come up with some other name for yourself that the rest of us can use, let's hear it.

    But if it's really unwieldy, don't cry about it when people shorten it a bit in common usage. And don't get confused. It's not the speech that's disparaging. It's just my view of fundies; it's not a very intelligent way to live. Sorry, but that's called an opinion, and it's mine.

    You aren't trying to crush my freedom of speech are you? I'll bet you'd like to have me stoned or something, just for speaking my mind, wouldn't you. You probably think the Bible carries more civil authority than The Constitution, don't you.

    And now you're trying to put that oppression on me.
    https://www.thefreedictionary.com/fundie

    fundie (ˈfʌndɪ)(Ecclesiastical Terms) derogatory slang Austral a fundamentalist Christian

    fundie meaning and definition

    fundie meaning and definition/ˈfʌn.di/ (UK) 24h meaning and definition guarantee
    Noun
    Frequency: word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency
    ‎(plural fundies
    pejorative, slang (Should we delete([//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion&a ction=edit§ion=new&preloadtitle=%5B%5Bfundie%23rfd-sense-notice--%7cfundie%5D%5D +]) this sense?) A fundamentalist Christian.
    Some fundies are picketing at the capitol.
    pejorative, slang a religious fundamentalist of any faith.

    "fundie" Definition | Free English Dictionary | international-dictionary.com

    fundie (plural fundies) (pejorative, slang) A fundamentalist Christian. Some fundies are picketing at the capitol. (pejorative, slang) a religious fundamentalist of any faith. He's a Jewish fundie, keeps everything really kosher.
    Last edited by kingrat; 18th December 2017 at 12:57 PM.

  4. #294
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    35,477
    Thanks
    17710

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    https://www.thefreedictionary.com/fundie

    fundie (ˈfʌndɪ)(Ecclesiastical Terms) derogatory slang Austral a fundamentalist Christian

    fundie meaning and definition

    fundie meaning and definition/ˈfʌn.di/ (UK) 24h meaning and definition guarantee
    Noun
    Frequency: word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency word meaning frequency
    ‎(plural fundies
    pejorative, slang (Should we delete([//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion&a ction=edit§ion=new&preloadtitle=%5B%5Bfundie%23rfd-sense-notice--%7cfundie%5D%5D +]) this sense?) A fundamentalist Christian.
    Some fundies are picketing at the capitol.
    pejorative, slang a religious fundamentalist of any faith.

    "fundie" Definition | Free English Dictionary | international-dictionary.com

    fundie (plural fundies) (pejorative, slang) A fundamentalist Christian. Some fundies are picketing at the capitol. (pejorative, slang) a religious fundamentalist of any faith. He's a Jewish fundie, keeps everything really kosher.
    I have made the choice not to address you, but this post seems to be a direct violation of the forum rules. The alleged quoted post that you claim came from splansing reads nothing like his actual post, and there is no evidence that he edited it. I am reporting this post as a violation of forum rules, just so you know.
    Last edited by Czernobog; 18th December 2017 at 12:59 PM.

  5. #295
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks
    313

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    I have made the choice not to address you, but this post seems to be a direct violation of the forum rules. The alle3ged quoted [post that you claim came from splansing reads nothing like his actual post, and there is no evidence that he edited it. I am reporting this post as a violation of forum rules, just so you know.
    LOL.

    I was responding point by point and decided it wasn't worth the trouble. I clicked post reply before I realized the mistake.

    But be my guest. Report it.

  6. #296
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,470
    Thanks
    32661

    From
    Vulcan
    I left this thread behind a while ago, having gotten too far behind over shabbos or a holiday, but I wanted to interject a couple things here.

    Quote Originally Posted by splansing View Post
    Ummm...no. Jews are not the ones who think the Bible is literally factually true.
    There are Jews who believe the Tanakh (the "Old Testament"*) is literally, factually true. Some of the particulars are debated even in the Orthodox world, but they do exist.

    * In the original Hebrew, of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by splansing View Post
    Considering that the entire New Testament is about Jesus, I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that exactly zero Jews believe the Bible is factually true.
    You are, of course, correct as far as the New Testament is concerned, as it has zero status in Judaism. But if Jews use the term "Bible" at all, the context is usually in reference to the Tanakh, which does not include the New Testament.

  7. #297
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks
    313

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    I left this thread behind a while ago, having gotten too far behind over shabbos or a holiday, but I wanted to interject a couple things here.


    There are Jews who believe the Tanakh (the "Old Testament"*) is literally, factually true. Some of the particulars are debated even in the Orthodox world, but they do exist.

    * In the original Hebrew, of course.


    You are, of course, correct as far as the New Testament is concerned, as it has zero status in Judaism. But if Jews use the term "Bible" at all, the context is usually in reference to the Tanakh, which does not include the New Testament.
    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/art...new-testament/

    In fact, the more a modern Jewish reader is acquainted with rabbinic literature, the more he or she is likely to find texts of interest in the NT, and to notice just how similar many NT teachings are to those of the rabbis. For example, Jesus is quoted in Mark as coming to the defense of some of his disciples who had been criticized by the Pharisees for breaking the laws of the Sabbath. Jesus said that they had done no wrong since “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27).

    Some readers over the years have concluded that Jesus was making an antinomian statement, devaluing the Sabbath. But students of rabbinic literature will recognize that Jesus’ words sound very similar to those of Rabbi Yonatan b. Yosef in the Talmud, explaining why the Sabbath may be desecrated to save a human life (Yoma 85b): “‘It [= the Sabbath] is holy for you’ means that the Sabbath was handed over to you and you were not handed over to it.” This is not to say that Jesus and Rabbi Yonatan would necessarily agree about the criteria that justify breaking the Sabbath. But Jesus’ remarks appear much more orthodox when read beside those of Rabbi Yonatan.

    Much of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) reads, on a rhetorical level, like an anti-rabbinic text. In it Jesus argues that the righteousness of “the Scribes and the Pharisees” (= the rabbis) is insufficient and he challenges his followers to strive for what he considered a higher level of morality. The “Lord’s prayer” (Matthew 6:9-13) is introduced by Jesus with a charge to his followers not to pray the way the hypocrites pray in synagogue.

    But, in fact, every phrase in the prayer can be found in rabbinic literature. For example the opening phrase, “Our father who art in heaven” is simply the Hebrew phrase avinu she-ba-shamayim, found in the beginning of many rabbinic prayers. And the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount are, on most points, very similar to those of the rabbis. Books like The Jewish Sources of the Sermon on the Mount, by Gerald Friedlander, show just how many teachings of the NT, particularly those found in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), are parallel and sometimes even identical to the teachings of the rabbis.

    For example, Jesus claims in Matthew (19:9) that divorce is permitted only in a case of adultery and his position is presented there as being in stark opposition to that of the Pharisees. Students of Mishnah know that a great rabbi in the generation before Jesus said the same thing (the opinion of the house of Shamai in Gitin 9:10).

    Both Jews and Christians ought to understand that most of Jesus’ reported teachings are, from a rabbinic perspective, not particularly revolutionary or even new, and that the rift between Judaism and Christianity is a function of what was said about Jesus after his death.

  8. #298
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,470
    Thanks
    32661

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    In fact, the more a modern Jewish reader is acquainted with rabbinic literature, the more he or she is likely to find texts of interest in the NT, and to notice just how similar many NT teachings are to those of the rabbis.
    "Of interest" is certainly a loaded term. It is certainly true that some things in the NT are not new. But that being the case, one need not read the NT to find and learn them.

    I do object, on a general basis, to random quotes from the Talmud, because one must take these things in context. There are many minority opinions in the Talmud, as well as discussions of individual cases, and one must carefully scrutinize in order to know what the actual halachah is.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    [S]tudents of rabbinic literature will recognize that Jesus’ words sound very similar to those of Rabbi Yonatan b. Yosef in the Talmud, explaining why the Sabbath may be desecrated to save a human life (Yoma 85b): “‘It [= the Sabbath] is holy for you’ means that the Sabbath was handed over to you and you were not handed over to it.” This is not to say that Jesus and Rabbi Yonatan would necessarily agree about the criteria that justify breaking the Sabbath. But Jesus’ remarks appear much more orthodox when read beside those of Rabbi Yonatan.
    Or one could simply read Vayikra 18:5, which explicitly says, "You shall observe My statutes and My ordinances, which a man shall do and live by them. I am the L-rd." (Boldface supplied.) That is what was being interpreted.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    For example, Jesus claims in Matthew (19:9) that divorce is permitted only in a case of adultery and his position is presented there as being in stark opposition to that of the Pharisees. Students of Mishnah know that a great rabbi in the generation before Jesus said the same thing (the opinion of the house of Shamai in Gitin 9:10).
    Beis Shammai is almost always not stating the halachah, in contrast to Beis Hillel. In fact, divorce is permitted for many reasons and under many conditions.

  9. #299
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks
    313

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    "Of interest" is certainly a loaded term. It is certainly true that some things in the NT are not new. But that being the case, one need not read the NT to find and learn them.

    I do object, on a general basis, to random quotes from the Talmud, because one must take these things in context. There are many minority opinions in the Talmud, as well as discussions of individual cases, and one must carefully scrutinize in order to know what the actual halachah is.


    Or one could simply read Vayikra 18:5, which explicitly says, "You shall observe My statutes and My ordinances, which a man shall do and live by them. I am the L-rd." (Boldface supplied.) That is what was being interpreted.


    Beis Shammai is almost always not stating the halachah, in contrast to Beis Hillel. In fact, divorce is permitted for many reasons and under many conditions.
    I'm sure that there are objections on legal, textual and theological points and the author the of article I posted never denied that there aren't. The point of the article, imo, is that there are numerous ethical teachings in the nt that are 'parallel and sometimes identical' to the teachings of the rabbis.

    For instance, you once gave jesus' statement regarding the sabbath as an example of how his teaching is tantamount to rejecting the law. But here is an article that points to rabbinic literature that is textually similar. While the grounds for easing the restrictions during the sabbath may be different, the ethical teachings behind them are very similar.

    I guess what I am asking is what makes one have zero standing in judaism and the other, a 'minority opinion'?

  10. #300
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,470
    Thanks
    32661

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    I'm sure that there are objections on legal, textual and theological points and the author the of article I posted never denied that there aren't. The point of the article, imo, is that there are numerous ethical teachings in the nt that are 'parallel and sometimes identical' to the teachings of the rabbis.
    Sometimes. When it comes to Judaism, though, the NT has nothing new to teach.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    For instance, you once gave jesus' statement regarding the sabbath as an example of how his teaching is tantamount to rejecting the law. But here is an article that points to rabbinic literature that is textually similar.
    Note, however, that you cannot simply take a statement from the Talmud and represent that as being the law. It may be, but it may not be. As I indicated, without the context and a thorough understand of what is going on when a statement is made - assuming that it is even the whole statement of the person to begin with - it is literally impossible to know that that is the halacha that is in the midst of discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    I guess what I am asking is what makes one have zero standing in judaism and the other, a 'minority opinion'?
    The NT has zero standing not because of ethical teachings that may accord with Judaism, but because it does not represent halacha, and has as its purpose the promotion as moshiach an individual who demonstrably is not.

Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20282930

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 78
    Last Post: 6th July 2017, 06:02 AM
  2. The Satanic Bible vs. the holy bible
    By knight in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 26th March 2016, 07:07 AM
  3. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 26th October 2014, 04:54 PM
  4. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 3rd January 2014, 03:19 PM
  5. If the Bible is the word of God...
    By Zarathustra in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 229
    Last Post: 11th December 2007, 01:57 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed