May I Ask, What Religion Are You?

[YoursTrue]

Same thing it means when you say any Jew aspires to keep the commandments.

I realize it's next to impossible to know what Jesus actually did and said, as the gospel accounts mix so much legend in with history, and these non-Jewish authors had an interest in making him seem more in line with their movement. But I have been heavily influenced by Rabbi Harvey Falk's "Jesus, the Pharisee" to conclude that Jesus was most likely a typically observant Jew of his day, but more in tune with bet Hillel than bet Shammai.

In actuality, all the authors of the so-called "New Testament" were born and raised Jews.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

You are misunderstanding me. The Talmud never mentions Jesus (there are many Yeshuas, but none are the Yeshua that Christians believe in.) What I said was that Jesus follow the Torah as interpreted by Oral Torah.

No, I do not believe the gospels are reliable sources of information about Jesus. They were written decades after Jesus, and essentially try to collect all the stories about him, whether legend, myth, or history. So I believe in a historical Jesus, but not the Jesus of the gospels.

In my opinion, if a religious man named Yehoshua (Yeshua, Jesus) even existed in biblical times, then it's most likely that his followers embellished the stories about him, and more embellishment and folklore were later added to these stories to make him appear to be more than he actually was. It's possible, in my opinion, that he was simply a well-liked religious teacher whose followers spread false stories about him to make him appear godlike. I also think that it's likely that a few stories about him were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other pagan religions as well, which predate both Christianity and the Bible. The "savior story" of Jesus isn't the first of its kind, and it shouldn't be viewed as remarkable or unique in any manner. I think it was greatly impacted by paganism, and as I explained in other threads (such as this one), paganism significantly influenced Christianity. In my opinion, Jesus' story isn't any more credible than the other savior stories that predate his, such as "10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus," and "Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ." Jesus' story is one of many, and I don't think it's any more believable than the others.

 

[YoursTrue]

In my opinion, if a religious man named Yehoshua (Yeshua, Jesus) even existed in biblical times, then it's most likely that his followers embellished the stories about him, and more embellishment and folklore were later added to these stories to make him appear to be more than he actually was. It's possible, in my opinion, that he was simply a well-liked religious teacher whose followers spread false stories about him to make him appear godlike. I also think that it's likely that a few stories about him were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other pagan religions as well, which predate both Christianity and the Bible. The "savior story" of Jesus isn't the first of its kind, and it shouldn't be viewed as remarkable or unique in any manner. I think it was greatly impacted by paganism, and as I explained in other threads (such as this one), paganism significantly influenced Christianity. In my opinion, Jesus' story isn't any more credible than the other savior stories that predate his, such as "10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus," and "Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ." Jesus' story is one of many, and I don't think it's any more believable than the others.

What then do you think about Moses? The "Oral Law" is based upon Moses teachings, I think. So either he existed or he did not exist. As written and passed down throughout the ages by the Jews and later, followers of Christ. Also for @IndigoChild5559

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In actuality, all the authors of the so-called "New Testament" were born and raised Jews.

First of all, traditional Christians believe that Luke was not a Jew.

But in my humble opinion, I think that most of the New Testament was written by non-Jews, certainly the gospels. The reason why I say this is because I cannot imagine a Jew disrespecting Judaism and the Jewish people the way the authors of the gospels do.

 

[YoursTrue]

First of all, traditional Christians believe that Luke was not a Jew.

But in my humble opinion, I think that most of the New Testament was written by non-Jews, certainly the gospels. The reason why I say this is because I cannot imagine a Jew disrespecting Judaism and the Jewish people the way the authors of the gospels do.

OK, that's your opinion and likely other people's opinion also, but it's not my opinion as to who wrote the Christian scriptures. On the other hand, the temple was run over and desecrated by the Romans, wasn't it?

 

[YoursTrue]

First of all, traditional Christians believe that Luke was not a Jew.

But in my humble opinion, I think that most of the New Testament was written by non-Jews, certainly the gospels. The reason why I say this is because I cannot imagine a Jew disrespecting Judaism and the Jewish people the way the authors of the gospels do.

Speaking of which, do you believe what Moses wrote as traditionally accepted by the Jews? As I understand it, the Torah is placed up front in a special place in the synagogue, has your rabbi ever spoken about who wrote those books originally?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

OK, that's your opinion and likely other people's opinion also, but it's not my opinion as to who wrote the Christian scriptures. On the other hand, the temple was run over and desecrated by the Romans, wasn't it?

Yes, Rome destroyed the temple. Can you tell me what this has to do with the conversation?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Speaking of which, do you believe what Moses wrote as traditionally accepted by the Jews? As I understand it, the Torah is placed up front in a special place in the synagogue, has your rabbi ever spoken about who wrote those books originally?

I put great stock in what scholars say, and accept the Documentary hypothesis that the Torah was written by more than one person. I'm sure that if you could follow the manuscripts trail backwards in time, you would find a base document that Moses wrote that would be edited into the final Torah. But he certainly did not write the entire Torah as it exists now.

 

[YoursTrue]

I put great stock in what scholars say, and accept the Documentary hypothesis that the Torah was written by more than one person. I'm sure that if you could follow the manuscripts trail backwards in time, you would find a base document that Moses wrote that would be edited into the final Torah. But he certainly did not write the entire Torah as it exists now.

Have your rabbis told you which parts in the scrolls in the ark up front of your synagogue were not written as copies now have it?

 

[YoursTrue]

I put great stock in what scholars say, and accept the Documentary hypothesis that the Torah was written by more than one person. I'mH sure that if you could follow the manuscripts trail backwards in time, you would find a base document that Moses wrote that would be edited into the final Torah. But he certainly did not write the entire Torah as it exists now.

Here's what I do know: Moses did not write about himself after he died, that's for pretty sure. He also did not write the names of the so-called books. That was inserted later. He also did not write in English.
Why has the last part of Deuteronomy been ascertained by most sincere Bible believers to have been written likely by Joshua? Because the dead do not write or talk.
Further, if someone claims to be hearing voices or having conversations with dead souls, they are (1) disobeying God's commandments, and/ir (2) lying, and/or (3) deceived. There's more, but I'll leave it at that for now.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Have your rabbis told you which parts in the scrolls in the ark up front of your synagogue were not written as copies now have it?

The rabbi at my synagogue is very good about including modern scholarship in our Torah study lessons. There are many ways to parse a text. Looking at it from textual criticism pov is one way to study the Torah.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Here's what I do know: Moses did not write about himself after he died, that's for pretty sure. He also did not write the names of the so-called books. That was inserted later. He also did not write in English.
Why has the last part of Deuteronomy been ascertained by most sincere Bible believers to have been written likely by Joshua? Because the dead do not write or talk.
Further, if someone claims to be hearing voices or having conversations with dead souls, they are (1) disobeying God's commandments, and/ir (2) lying, and/or (3) deceived. There's more, but I'll leave it at that for now.

So does it take away from the importance of the Torah that Joshua may have written part of it? Of course not. The Torah does not depend on a Mosaic authorship to be The Main Jewish Religious Text.

 

[YoursTrue]

So does it take away from the importance of the Torah that Joshua may have written part of it? Of course not. The Torah does not depend on a Mosaic authorship to be The Main Jewish Religious Text.

He obviously didn't write a lot of the first 5 books. A few sentences presumably written by Joshua about the death of Moses. What books (scrolls) are up front in the ark in synagogues?

 

[YoursTrue]

First of all, traditional Christians believe that Luke was not a Jew.

But in my humble opinion, I think that most of the New Testament was written by non-Jews, certainly the gospels. The reason why I say this is because I cannot imagine a Jew disrespecting Judaism and the Jewish people the way the authors of the gospels do.

Not all

Yes, Rome destroyed the temple. Can you tell me what this has to do with the conversation?

Because many can't figure what and why. I believe Lag B'Omer (not sure of spelling) is still in effect. And the various sects of the various denominations and religions do not agree on the authenticity of the texts as transmitted. If the transmission of the scrolls cannot be relied upon by people and arguments about the authenticity and truthfulness continue, why believe anything in them? That's the way I see it. Yes, some things are figurative, not literal. That's obvious. To me. If I believed scholars about everything, I guess I'd go with evolution, even though it no longer makes sense to me, and creation by God as written in Genesis does. God is good, the Bible makes sense, and He will restore what He wants to when He wants to.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I believe in angels, the spoken word of God, spirituality, dharma, fraternity, reverence, fidelity, and pacifism.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

He obviously didn't write a lot of the first 5 books. A few sentences presumably written by Joshua about the death of Moses. What books (scrolls) are up front in the ark in synagogues?

Standard Torah -- first five books of the bible. And a haftarah--the readings from the Prophets.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Not all
Because many can't figure what and why. I believe Lag B'Omer (not sure of spelling) is still in effect. And the various sects of the various denominations and religions do not agree on the authenticity of the texts as transmitted. If the transmission of the scrolls cannot be relied upon by people and arguments about the authenticity and truthfulness continue, why believe anything in them? That's the way I see it. Yes, some things are figurative, not literal. That's obvious. To me. If I believed scholars about everything, I guess I'd go with evolution, even though it no longer makes sense to me, and creation by God as written in Genesis does. God is good, the Bible makes sense, and He will restore what He wants to when He wants to.

I tend to see it in my mind as the evolution and editing of the sacred texts is all part of their emergence to their present form. It just is not an issue for me.

Yes, the consensus of experts is that life evolved. the TOE is about what drives evolution, and we know of course that our information and understanding of this will grow as new discoveries are made.

 

[YoursTrue]

First of all, traditional Christians believe that Luke was not a Jew.

But in my humble opinion, I think that most of the New Testament was written by non-Jews, certainly the gospels. The reason why I say this is because I cannot imagine a Jew disrespecting Judaism and the Jewish people the way the authors of the gospels do.

OK, you and others can believe that if you want to or think it's the right way to look at it. Not all do. And of course that puts in question the transmission of the scrolls throughout Jewish history, as if they were not properly or accurately transmitted.

 

[YoursTrue]

Standard Torah -- first five books of the bible. And a haftarah--the readings from the Prophets.

So are you saying that these precious scrolls are filled with myths, as if what Moses wrote in many instances is not true? Do you remember how sacred those scrolls were throughout the centuries to God, such as when David wanted to bring the Ark to Jerusalem? You can read it at 1 Chronicles 13. It's very interesting and I'm glad you reminded me of this incident.

 

[YoursTrue]

I tend to see it in my mind as the evolution and editing of the sacred texts is all part of their emergence to their present form. It just is not an issue for me.

Yes, the consensus of experts is that life evolved. the TOE is about what drives evolution, and we know of course that our information and understanding of this will grow as new discoveries are made.

To me, it's like God made the mechanisms and allows circumstances right now. I believe God created the heavens and the earth in the beginning as it says in Genesis.
He made the various kinds, as described in the Bible. To say that is not true is virtually negating the Scriptures as many people do by saying the Jews or Hebrews or Moses in the Bible is manufactured by whomever throughout the centuries. Live and learn.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1)