Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This just shows what you don't understand about Judaism. The Pharisaic system is centered around a building, a core set of beliefs and a central authority.
What does any of this have to do with anything? Many Jews are also left handed. This shines no light on your claim about the origin of a Hebrew word.
Interesting to note, when the Chilonim choose to pray in a synagogue, do you know what kind of synagogue they go to?
That's because Judaism still sees them as Jews and they know Jewish (Pharisaic) law about it.
Well, I gave you the citation from tractate Yadayim, right? (I think it was chapter 4, mishna 6, but it is in others in that chapter, 5 times in total). It is also in Avot D'Rabbi Natan 3 times and in tractate Kedushin of the Babylonian Talmud. It is also in the Jerusalem Talmud approximately 8 times. You can find it in the Mechilta, the Sifra, Sifrei, Vayikra Rabah and other texts. Just do a search in the Bar Ilan Responsa if you want all the citations quickly. Also, check out the Mishna of Niddah 4:2 which discusses the decision of certain women to separate (pershu) from the Saduccee ways (פֵּרְשׁוּ לָלֶכֶת בְּדַרְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, הֲרֵי הֵן כְּיִשְׂרְאֵלִית).
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosends
Well, I gave you the citation from tractate Yadayim, right? (I think it was chapter 4, mishna 6, but it is in others in that chapter, 5 times in total). It is also in Avot D'Rabbi Natan 3 times and in tractate Kedushin of the Babylonian Talmud. It is also in the Jerusalem Talmud approximately 8 times. You can find it in the Mechilta, the Sifra, Sifrei, Vayikra Rabah and other texts. Just do a search in the Bar Ilan Responsa if you want all the citations quickly. Also, check out the Mishna of Niddah 4:2 which discusses the decision of certain women to separate (pershu) from the Saduccee ways (פֵּרְשׁוּ לָלֶכֶת בְּדַרְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, הֲרֵי הֵן כְּיִשְׂרְאֵלִית).
I found the reference to the Sadducees, but no reference to the Pharisees. I can say that I now know more about Jewish rules covering menstruating women than I ever expected to need to know. Attempting to research the Mishna's is a real test to my skills as a researcher.
As a rabbi, are you aware, or more precisely do you acknowledge, the infusion of Persian religious beliefs into Judaism that occurred? Monotheism itself, for example. There is only one God of all creation, whom Zoroaster called Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord. Zoroaster was proclaiming this, his main message of monotheism in the second millennium BC, at a time when Jews were still henothestic in their beliefs. Because it has been my experience that many Jews, and by extension many Christians, fiercely deny that monotheism was anything other than a revelation of Judaism.
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense; 10-25-2018 at 11:13 AM..
I found the reference to the Sadducees, but no reference to the Pharisees. I can say that I now know more about Jewish rules covering menstruating women than I ever expected to need to know. Attempting to research the Mishna's is a real test to my skills as a researcher.
As a rabbi, are you aware, or more precisely do you acknowledge, the infusion of Persian religious beliefs into Judaism that occurred? Monotheism itself, for example. There is only one God of all creation, whom Zoroaster called Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord. Zoroaster was proclaiming this, his main message of monotheism in the second millennium BC, at a time when Jews were still henothestic in their beliefs. Because it has been my experience that many Jews, and by extension many Christians, fiercely deny that monotheism was anything other than a revelation of Judaism.
If you want to believe the publications that tie Judaism to henothesim and then claim that monotheism only developed after exposure to other religions, feel free. You ask me to acknowledge that those claims are true, but I don't happen to subscribe to that theory.
If you want to believe the publications that tie Judaism to henothesim and then claim that monotheism only developed after exposure to other religions, feel free. You ask me to acknowledge that those claims are true, but I don't happen to subscribe to that theory.
Not being Jewish myself I am forced to rely on Jewish experts for my understanding of Jewish history.
History of the Jews
"Between the two extremes of animistic polytheism and absolute monotheism there is an intermediate stage of `henotheism'--that is, the recognition by each tribe of a peculiar divinity, its patron and the guardian of its destiny, whose worship was often dovetailed with the cult of the local deities personifying the forces of nature. The Israelites shared with other Semitic tribes the idea of a supreme being who held sway over nature and man. This supreme being was known as El or Elohim (corresponding to the Babylonian Illu or Ila), a name in which the concept of force was implicit, and which was perpetuated in the names of both Israel itself and such individuals as Eleazar and Elijah. From its association with Babylonian culture the Hebrew Israelite tribe derived the concept of primordial chaos, the creation of the world and man, and the flood, which were prevalent in the Near East and which eventually emerged in modified form as the cosmology of the book of Genesis. But these nomads and semi-nomads could not absorb the Babylonian religion whose complex polytheism was closely associated with conditions of urban life and of organized rule. In Babylonia every city had a deity and a temple of its own; and the prince or regent of that city was looked on simply as the representative (priest) of its particular deity. The ungoverned Canaanite life of the Israelites gave birth to simpler religious ideas, which contained elements of a natural monotheism not connected to any specific place or people. It was only on the eve of the conquest of Canaan, when the several Israelite tribes combined to form a single nation, that the concept of a particular tribal deity, originally identified with Mt. Sinai, became dominant. This deity, under the name of Yahweh, became the God of the Israelites--their patron, their sovereign ruler, and the symbol of their unity " (History of the Jews, pp.99-100, by Simon Dubnov).
Wikipedia
Simon Dubnow
Simon Dubnow (alternatively spelled Dubnov, Russian: Семён Ма́ркович Ду́бнов, tr. Semyon Markovich Dubnov, IPA: [sʲɪˈmʲɵn ˈmarkəvʲɪtɕ ˈdubnəf]; Yiddish: שמעון דובנאָװ, Shimen Dubnov; 10 September 1860 – 8 December 1941) was a Jewish-born Russian historian, writer and activist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Dubnow
Simon Dubnov was a highly respected Jewish historian who indicated that in ancient times the Jews were henothestic, accepting the existence of many gods, but worshiped their tribal God, Elohim , later refered to as Yahweh.
Answers in Genesis
Today the usual dating of Abraham in Mesopotamia is in either the Ur III or Isin-Larsa periods (see table 1). This depends upon the different interpretations concerning biblical chronology.3 Kenneth Kitchen, for instance, dates the oppression of the Israelites in Egypt from c. 1320–1260/1250 and the Exodus around 1260/1250 and uses a 645 year period between Abraham and the Exodus. This gives a date for the period between Abraham and Joseph from around 1900–1600 (Kitchen 2003, pp. 358–359).4 This would place Abraham during the Isin-Larsa period. (approximately 2000 -1750 BC). https://answersingenesis.org/bible-t...t-mesopotamia/
The dating of Zoroaster is also problematic. Modern historical archaeology places Zoroaster circa 1200 to 1500 bce.
The precise date of the founding of Zoroastrianism is uncertain. An approximate date of 1200-1500 BCE has been established through archaeological evidence and linguistic comparisons with the Hindu text, the Rig Veda. BBC - Religions - Zoroastrian: Zoroaster
At a time when the Jewish nation was enslaved by Egypt, according to Exodus, Zoroaster was already teaching Monotheism in Persia. The Jewish nation was not undeniably monotheistic until after the Babylonian captivity, and their extensive exposure to Persian beliefs.
Not being Jewish myself I am forced to rely on Jewish experts for my understanding of Jewish history.
Being Jewish, myself, I can rely on a wide variety of Jewish experts for my understanding of Jewish history, not just Dubnov. I can also rely on people besides him for my opinions about other things related to Jews. https://judaism.stackexchange.com/qu...rael-practiced
Being Jewish, myself, I can rely on a wide variety of Jewish experts for my understanding of Jewish history, not just Dubnov. I can also rely on people besides him for my opinions about other things related to Jews. https://judaism.stackexchange.com/qu...rael-practiced
Wikipedia
Monolatry
In ancient Israel
Some historians have argued that ancient Israel originally practiced a form of monolatry or henotheism.Both Frank Eakin, Jr. and John Scullion believe Moses was a monolatrist rather than a monotheist,and John Day suggests that angels are what became of the other gods once monotheism took over Israel. John McKenzie has stated: "In the ancient Near East the existence of divine beings was universally accepted without questions. ... The question was not whether there is only one elohim, but whether there is any elohim like Yahweh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolatry
This is not a new argument, obviously. Nor is observing that the Jews of antiquity practiced monolatry, or henotheism, without solid foundation. Because it's right there in your religious books.
Joshua 24:
[14] Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.
[15] And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.(KJV)
Wikipedia
Zoroastrianism
Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion, although Zoroastrianism is often regarded as dualistic, duotheistic or bitheistic, for its belief in the hypostatis of the ultimately good Ahura Mazda (creative spirit) and the ultimately evil Angra Mainyu (destructive spirit). Zorastrianism was once one of the largest religions on Earth, as the official religion of the Persian Empire. By some scholars,[who?] the Zoroastrians ("Parsis" or "Zartoshtis") are credited with being some of the first monotheists and having had influence on other world religions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism
According to Zoroastrian belief, in order to give humankind genuine free will, Ahura Mazda tore his divine nature into two halves, creating Angra Mainyu (the destructive spirit, or evil lie) along side of His own creative spirit. Ultimately however, there is only one God, Ahura Mazda.
The point I am attempting to make is, it becomes rather obvious that both fundamentalist Jews and fundamentalist Christians might have a real vested interest in attempting to downplay or disguise the notion that the very concept of strict monotheism, something that the Jews rather jealously tend to regard as belonging to them, was in fact infused into Judaism by the phrsa·e.
The point I am attempting to make is, it becomes rather obvious that both fundamentalist Jews and fundamentalist Christians might have a real vested interest in attempting to downplay or disguise the notion that the very concept of strict monotheism, something that the Jews rather jealously tend to regard as belonging to them, was in fact infused into Judaism by the phrsa·e.
The point you are trying to make is one mired in a lack of understanding of Hebrew and Jewish history and texts. You would have people believe that in America, there are multiple gods because Paul Simon's lyrics read "the neon god they made." There is a device in English in which one references something while not acknowledging that it is valid. We write about leprechauns because some people believe in them so if I write, "don't believe in leprechauns" that doesn't mean I accept that they exist. That statement doesn't make them true. When biblical texts forbid people's worshiping "other gods" that doesn't make the other gods true, just the creation of the people, a creation which is incorrect. If an atheist writes, "You shouldn't believe in god" that doesn't mean that his statement means he accepts that god exists. Your logic is flawed and you couple it with an incorrect statement about Hebrew.
You have a real vested interest in choosing an interpretation of text and pairing it with a misunderstanding of language which furthers your particular agenda.
The point you are trying to make is one mired in a lack of understanding of Hebrew and Jewish history and texts. You would have people believe that in America, there are multiple gods because Paul Simon's lyrics read "the neon god they made." There is a device in English in which one references something while not acknowledging that it is valid. We write about leprechauns because some people believe in them so if I write, "don't believe in leprechauns" that doesn't mean I accept that they exist. That statement doesn't make them true. When biblical texts forbid people's worshiping "other gods" that doesn't make the other gods true, just the creation of the people, a creation which is incorrect. If an atheist writes, "You shouldn't believe in god" that doesn't mean that his statement means he accepts that god exists. Your logic is flawed and you couple it with an incorrect statement about Hebrew.
You have a real vested interest in choosing an interpretation of text and pairing it with a misunderstanding of language which furthers your particular agenda.
Well, Paul Simon IS Jewish, so maybe you are on to something there.
But "The Sound of Silence," as great as it is, hardly rises to the level of holy scripture. So your comparison is little more than an attempted bit of misdirection. Or dare I say an example of an attempt to downplay or disguise. I am not referring to the lyrics of a mere pop song. I am referring to very specific references to the existence of numerous "other gods" which is to be found in Jewish scripture.
Joshua 24:
[14] Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.
[15] And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.(KJV)
Deuteronomy, for example, dates from the 8th century BC. At a time when Jews were still proposing the existence of "tens-of-thousands-of holy ones", Zoroaster was already long dead, and the monotheistic religion that Zoroaster proclaimed was, arguably I suppose, the dominant religion in the middle east by the 8th century BC.
But "The Sound of Silence," as great as it is, hardly rises to the level of holy scripture. So your comparison is little more than an attempted bit of misdirection. Or dare I say an example of an attempt to downplay or disguise. I am not referring to the lyrics of a mere pop song. I am referring to very specific references to the existence of numerous "other gods" which is to be found in Jewish scripture.
No, you are actually only referring to the idea of other gods, not their existence. The song comments on human behavior; it doesn't validate the object of the behavior. The biblical text does the same thing. Addressing that something is viewed as a god and saying that something is a god are very different. Your claim that the two are the same is disingenuous at best.
Saying that one should worship no other gods when people had invented other gods does not mean that those other inventions are real, just that they are really being worshiped. The Jewish midrash speaks of Abraham's father as a seller of idols and the text also speaks of Rachel stealing Laban's idols. This doesn't mean that those idols were gods, but people worshiped them.
I found the reference to the Sadducees, but no reference to the Pharisees. I can say that I now know more about Jewish rules covering menstruating women than I ever expected to need to know. Attempting to research the Mishna's is a real test to my skills as a researcher.
As a rabbi, are you aware, or more precisely do you acknowledge, the infusion of Persian religious beliefs into Judaism that occurred? Monotheism itself, for example. There is only one God of all creation, whom Zoroaster called Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord. Zoroaster was proclaiming this, his main message of monotheism in the second millennium BC, at a time when Jews were still henothestic in their beliefs. Because it has been my experience that many Jews, and by extension many Christians, fiercely deny that monotheism was anything other than a revelation of Judaism.
Zoraster was the grandson of Noah. Adam spoke with God and he taught his family, do you think Noah was taught about God and the promises his fathers recieved from God?
Of course he did, and the truth was always known, but that truth is always perverted just like it is perverted in Ishmael, in Esau, in Ephraim, in the Samaritans, in christianity where the wrong brother thinks he is the seed just like Cain.
Zoraster is simply the grandson of Noah who built the great cities, and who began the greatest story of the first Messiah resurrected from the dead and no matter what Pagan God we speak of, they all go right back to Babylon, to Noah's grandson and the proof of this is you.
You bring up paganism because you know the links are there, and this proves that one of them borrowed from the other, and your claim is that zoraster is older, and thus the God of the bible must be wrong.
That would almost work if you had a bible of Zoraster to compare, or maybe you can show how the whole world has been changed by Zoraster over God.
To claim Zoraster to be older is not and cannot be a serious claim, not to people who believe in God, because there is nothing to even compare the bible with, certainly not Zoraster, Zoraster only proves God. If proves the truth has always been known, and it traces all people back to the same region.
Of course I mean that God chose a people out of all the people in the world and they have born out all the punishment against mankind as a witness that they are God's people. God wrote down everything that would happen to these people and it has come true to the point that one must confess that God either knew the future and wrote it down, or that the world read the bible and went out to self fulfill the prophesies of God's chosen people and this simply would not work.
God wrote down their entire future from the beginning and they have done everything God said they would do, and the nations of the world have done everything God said they would do against his people.
ONE people in all of history who lost everything, they lost their land and they lost their nation but just as God has foretold NO MATTER HOW IMPOSSIBLE IT WAS, They got their land back, they returned and became a nation and this fact is taken for granted by everyone.
THERE is literally no other people, no other nation, no other bible to compare with God's word and his chosen people that a God has chosen and foretold their entire existance.
I follow what God has said about Israel and in 1948, it has become a new era unlike any other era.
Unlike any people or any nation, the impossible happened, and that alone should prove God. 30 years later, the big bang was proven and that alone should have proven that there was a God.
If I need further proof, all I would have to say is,'' The Dead Sea.''
There has never been a body of water so proven and symbolised for what God appointed it for.
We have the stories of Sodom and Gamorrah ending up with that Dead sea. The snows fall on the 3 peaks of Hermon as the word of God, and these snows melt and drain into the river Jordan where they feed the sea of Galilee where Jesus walked upon the waters, and these waters continue down into the dead sea.
For thousands of years nobody knew the lowest point on Earth, and how is it that the one true God has built is story just by accident where everything that is written ends up about that dead sea?
Coincidence?
The whole bible was written around the dead sea being the lowest spot on Earth?
What are the chances when nobody knew it was the lowest point, and when nobody knew the spiritual teachings woild bring you to the lowest point of human kind?
There is nothing to compare the bible or the people of the bible with. There is no comparison that any other people, religion or nation to compare with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
