• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

spin offs

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?

I have no horse in this race, but you're begging the question.

Would you rather fly on the first plane invented, or a modern one?

Meh...ultimately that's as pertinent to this as a Van Gogh reference.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
All rivers lead to the sea. You're happy with your choice and, of course, think it's the best possible choice. And it is the best possible choice: for you.

Others make a different choice which they believe is the best choice and it is: for them.

Some of us don't feel the need for an exoteric religion.

And so it goes.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?
The little I know...I believe "the original" called for more.
 

Super Universe

Defender of God
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?

Because the first wine wasn't wine, it was vinegar.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I have no horse in this race, but you're begging the question.

Would you rather fly on the first plane invented, or a modern one?

Meh...ultimately that's as pertinent to this as a Van Gogh reference.
But these spin offs substantially change the message, which is to say they either imply or state outright that the original was wrong. That is not improving upon Judaism. That is saying that Judaism was false. You can't have it both ways.
 

Super Universe

Defender of God
OMGosh. Read psalm 19. The law of the LORD is perfect.

Psalm 19 talks about the heavens, the skies, the sun, warmth, then it says the law of the LORD is perfect. The physical laws are perfect, not 3,000 year old ideas written by humans who were afraid of comets.

Thanks for giving humanity the idea of one God but you can keep all the ridiculous rituals and the stoning people to death stuff.

Wait, you don't do that anymore, do you? I thought ancient Judaism was perfect?
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Psalm 19 talks about the heavens, the skies, the sun, warmth, then it says the law of the LORD is perfect. The physical laws are perfect, not 3,000 year old ideas written by humans who were afraid of comets.

Thanks for giving humanity the idea of one God but you can keep all the ridiculous rituals and the stoning people to death stuff.

Wait, you don't do that anymore, do you? I thought ancient Judaism was perfect?

ח תּוֹרַת יְהוָה תְּמִימָה, מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ; עֵדוּת יְהוָה נֶאֱמָנָה, מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי. 8 The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
ט פִּקּוּדֵי יְהוָה יְשָׁרִים, מְשַׂמְּחֵי-לֵב; מִצְוַת יְהוָה בָּרָה, מְאִירַת עֵינָיִם. 9 The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
י יִרְאַת יְהוָה, טְהוֹרָה--עוֹמֶדֶת לָעַד: מִשְׁפְּטֵי-יְהוָה אֱמֶת; צָדְקוּ יַחְדָּו. 10 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever; the ordinances of the LORD are true, they are righteous altogether;
יא הַנֶּחֱמָדִים--מִזָּהָב, וּמִפַּז רָב; וּמְתוּקִים מִדְּבַשׁ, וְנֹפֶת צוּפִים. 11 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

You can believe this, or you can believe the New Testament. But obviously you can't believe both.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
But these spin offs substantially change the message, which is to say they either imply or state outright that the original was wrong. That is not improving upon Judaism. That is saying that Judaism was false. You can't have it both ways.
Not really.
Recognizing that Newtonian physics aren't as accurate and complete as Relativity doesn't mean that they are wrong exactly. Just not the whole story.
Tom
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
ח תּוֹרַת יְהוָה תְּמִימָה, מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ; עֵדוּת יְהוָה נֶאֱמָנָה, מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי. 8 The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
ט פִּקּוּדֵי יְהוָה יְשָׁרִים, מְשַׂמְּחֵי-לֵב; מִצְוַת יְהוָה בָּרָה, מְאִירַת עֵינָיִם. 9 The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
י יִרְאַת יְהוָה, טְהוֹרָה--עוֹמֶדֶת לָעַד: מִשְׁפְּטֵי-יְהוָה אֱמֶת; צָדְקוּ יַחְדָּו. 10 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever; the ordinances of the LORD are true, they are righteous altogether;
יא הַנֶּחֱמָדִים--מִזָּהָב, וּמִפַּז רָב; וּמְתוּקִים מִדְּבַשׁ, וְנֹפֶת צוּפִים. 11 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

You can believe this, or you can believe the New Testament. But obviously you can't believe both.
The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever. Why not the law, say the same?
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
But these spin offs substantially change the message, which is to say they either imply or state outright that the original was wrong. That is not improving upon Judaism. That is saying that Judaism was false. You can't have it both ways.

Then they're not really 'spin offs', and your analogy of Van Gogh and cheap copies doesn't fit.
As to why you should take them seriously, you don't need to from a theological perspective, if you don't want to. But in terms of being religions, best to take them seriously. They wield a lot of power and influence on the world, secular as that concept might be.
 

Super Universe

Defender of God
ח תּוֹרַת יְהוָה תְּמִימָה, מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ; עֵדוּת יְהוָה נֶאֱמָנָה, מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי. 8 The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
ט פִּקּוּדֵי יְהוָה יְשָׁרִים, מְשַׂמְּחֵי-לֵב; מִצְוַת יְהוָה בָּרָה, מְאִירַת עֵינָיִם. 9 The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
י יִרְאַת יְהוָה, טְהוֹרָה--עוֹמֶדֶת לָעַד: מִשְׁפְּטֵי-יְהוָה אֱמֶת; צָדְקוּ יַחְדָּו. 10 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever; the ordinances of the LORD are true, they are righteous altogether;
יא הַנֶּחֱמָדִים--מִזָּהָב, וּמִפַּז רָב; וּמְתוּקִים מִדְּבַשׁ, וְנֹפֶת צוּפִים. 11 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

You can believe this, or you can believe the New Testament. But obviously you can't believe both.

So all the stoning to death stuff, I'm sure it's just coincidence that you stopped doing that stuff right around the time of Jesus? So you did learn something after all.

I can believe both the OT and the NT and I can also believe in Mormon beliefs, and Baha'i beliefs, the UB, and others you've never heard of.

Human understanding of God is evolving. God is not simple. God is not a golden calf or a burning bush. God is the most complex thing in the universe. Humanity won't have a clear understanding of God for another 1,000 years so we're going to need much more revelation.

I'll give you a secret, the latest human revelation that I am aware of is going to a little girl.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).
Well that's a pretty skewed view of it ...
Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?
From a non-Jewish perspective the Talmud is like a new religion compared to the Torah alone. It was written by Rabbis in the dark ages. Whereas on the other hand the Torah and the books of the prophets were written by prophets that spoke by the Spirit of the Lord many centuries before. So it's a big change.

But to seriously answer you; Jesus is Jewish. The Jewish Messiah. I don't think you have to trade in your painting.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?
But why settle for the spinoff, Judaism, when you could have the Canaanite polytheism it was derived from?

I mean, when one member of an ensemble cast gets spun off into their own show, it's never good. Judaism is to its predecessor religion as Joey is to Friends.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

I guess I'd like to know more about where you think the really unique aspects are when it comes to the law code for example, if you would argue there are.. Other cultures around the world actually developed similar spiritual taboos.. Not naming gods, not eating certain animals, not eating blood, how to handle the sick or dead, how to approach holy places, how to go to battle, what materials to use when building etc. etc. It seems like the erasure of multiple spiritual or religious law systems / or the adopting of the more abrahamic specific ones, all via Christianity and Islam etc., often puts the 'uniqueness' of the Torah revelation in greater relief, though many of the mitzvot probably have parallels in the untouched corners of the world, or in historical anthropological description. Pick one, and I bet we can find other cultures who had very similar practices with no apparent influence from the Torah
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
There are so many spinoffs of Judaism.

Christianity was the first, changing the teaching of obedience to the law to one of belief, and making a man into God (at least the orthodox version).

Then Islam came, a spin off of a spin off.

Most recently we have Baha'i, a spin off of a spin off of a spin off.

All of them change the original message.


Why should I take all these spin offs seriously when I have the original? Which would you rather have: a copy of a Van Gogh, or the original?

The Tanakh is full of spin-offs.
 
Top