Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Spirituality & Polyamory

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-12-2010, 12:35 PM
Athena Athena is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: East Coast
Posts: 167
Default

Hi Edward,

The Jewish Rabbi was not saying you don't know the words because you are not a Jew. There are tons of words in the Bible the best, wisest Jewish scholar in the whole world (dare I even say universe?) doesn't know, and that is what that Rabbi was telling you.
However the Jewish sages wrote (in the Oral Torah, without which no one can understand what is in the Torah, Prophets and Writings at all, not to mention all the later inspired commentaries such as Rashi) "The work is great (meaning very large), and one is unable to complete it, but neither is one allowed to turn away from it and not attempt it."
It is true that we only incompletely can follow God's law as laid out in the Bible and the numerous books of Oral Law and later case law, because even if we completely understood every word, we still, being finite human beings would but incompletely understand and perform God's will. Jews meditate and repent every year at Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, because we know that even the most pious and perfected Rabbi (pick any martyred Rabbi that you care to recall), can't fulfill all of God's will and the Law perfectly, and even such a saintly individual must repent of all the errors he or she made both to God and to other human beings.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-12-2010, 02:55 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,669
Default

There is a saying in Jewish circles that if ONE person could carry out the mitzvot perfectly for ONE day, the Temple would be rebuilt and God's Kingdom would come to earth.

This stresses the impossibility of perfectly following the mitzvot.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-13-2010, 01:02 PM
catbird's Avatar
catbird catbird is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: columbia, mo
Posts: 104
Default

I wonder what God would have us do about portions of the Bible that don't apply to society or culture now, e.g. "You shall not suffer a witch to live" or "You shall not wear a garment made of blended fibers."

It seems like the obvious answer is "Well, those strictures are outmoded" and so they might be. But does one set culture above God? My experience has been that God is freaking dangerous and you don't mess with God, or show disrespect. Granted, you should always test God. I think the Creator wants that.

It would be great if there were an answer for the parts of the Law that go against modern civil law or custom. Anybody know of any?

Please don't think I'm trying to play Gotcha or anything, I'm just dreadfully ignorant.
__________________
I cannot brain today. I have the dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-13-2010, 01:22 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,669
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward View Post
I highly recommend "The Year of Living Biblically" (can't remember the author at the moment). The author tried to live according to the Bible for an entire year (9 months for the Old Testament, 3 for the New, as that's the rough division of text). He meets with various religious speakers and believers, some of whom come across much better than others.
OK OK, i just ordered a used copy off of Amazon! Its by AJ Jacobs, an admitted OCD person whose last book was about reading the entire Encyclopedia Britannica. A literary geek! Sounds fun, the reviews say it's hilarious.


Quote:
Originally Posted by catbird View Post
I wonder what God would have us do about portions of the Bible that don't apply to society or culture now, e.g. "You shall not suffer a witch to live" or "You shall not wear a garment made of blended fibers."
Well, witch is a mistranslation. The Hebrew word means evil sorceress and refer to poisonous potions apparently. Interestingly some say that phrase was from about 1400 BCE. Long-ass time ago! I doubt modern Jews fear evil sorceresses/poisoners today are that much of a threat. LOL

In my opinion, blended fibers is a metaphor for Yahweh (the Levites speaking for him) not wanting the Hebrews to enter into mixed marriages with other religious groups.

Quote:
It seems like the obvious answer is "Well, those strictures are outmoded" and so they might be. But does one set culture above God? My experience has been that God is freaking dangerous and you don't mess with God, or show disrespect. Granted, you should always test God. I think the Creator wants that.
Or maybe the rules in the Bible were written by men, based on the Hammurabi code of Babylon, and not actually handed down by an invisible fire god on top of a volcano.

Genesis is all myth IMNSHO.
Quote:
It would be great if there were an answer for the parts of the Law that go against modern civil law or custom. Anybody know of any?
Yes, it's called the Talmud, which we are discussing in the Judaism thread here.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37

Last edited by Magdlyn; 08-13-2010 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-13-2010, 04:04 PM
Athena Athena is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: East Coast
Posts: 167
Default

Actually, the Talmud is not at all against modern law and custom. The Talmud actually requires one to obey the law of the country one lives in. Next, pray tell what is modern custom? I believe that modern custom is to live by the ethics one believes in so long as they do not contradict the law of the land one lives in, so if one believes one's ethics are based on the Talmud, then by definition one is following both modern law and custom. Many Jewish groups that are highly religious are able to reconcile having men and women live modestly, both be highly literate, educated, both to work outside of the home and to respect each other (see Bnei Akiva (for a group of mitnagdim) and Lubavitch (for a group of Hasidim)) just for two examples. Many highly religious Jewish women work as educators, doctors, lawyers, scientists and are knowledgeable both of secular and religious education and have fairly egalitarian homes, aside from a few nods to custom. In fact, in my uncle's family precedence went by age, not sex (except where a custom was binding upon men only and not upon women). My aunt was principal of a school and an educator of educators, as well as mother of three very principled, educated and religious children. Her eldest child is a nurse (and is a woman). Her middle child is an Electrical Engineer and is male. Her youngest child is a biologist (and male). The husband of her daughter is a lawyer. This couple has almost finished raising their two children. The second child is married to a Communications specialist who works in PR and they have at this point 5 kids (maybe 4, I lose track). The youngest child's wife also has something like 5 at this point and is a teacher, an educator of educators and works with her sister in law doing PR work. They all keep every law that is understood of Judaism to the best of human ability, and they have never forced their views on me during periods when I was more secular, and less oriented towards keeping all the religious laws.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-22-2010, 05:53 AM
Derrythe Derrythe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 16
Default

For me, the first and biggest issue with people who have differing views about the Bible is that it is a heavily retranslated text between languages that are so different that large gaps of meaning exist in the wording. Most current translations of the Bible (in English) are built from earlier English texts, which were translated from even older Latin, which came from Greek and Aramaic (new testament), and Hebrew (old testament). Even the first verse, taken from the literal Hebrew reads more like "In creating, God created the Heavens and the Earth."

Hebrew is especially problematic to translate when dealing with emotions and the many abstract concepts that exist in the Bible. The idea of a literal translation after all these years even in the original language is hard to imagine, let alone translated numerous times through various languages.

By the way, maybe this was already said, (I skipped a page) but the website www.libchrist.com has some good information, for example the original Hebrew word for what we translate as adultery was more of a property crime than a sexual one, it means to have sex with another man's wife without his permission.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-22-2010, 11:54 AM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,669
Default

That is why I love the New Oxford Annotated Bible (which I spent 7 years reading and rereading). It's crammed full of footnotes, many of which refer to alternate translations of contested words or phrases. It's also translated into modern English directly from the ancient Hebrew and Greek, by modern scholars of both languages, from sources as close to the originals as possible (the Nag Hammadi texts, for example).
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-22-2010, 05:25 PM
Derrythe Derrythe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 16
Default

Interesting, that is one that I have not seen. I will have to give it a look.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-22-2010, 08:26 PM
Quath Quath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrythe View Post
Even the first verse, taken from the literal Hebrew reads more like "In creating, God created the Heavens and the Earth."
Someone told me that the first verse was suppose to be "gods" not "God" because the Hebrews were polytheistic for a bit and Yahweh(God) was just one of the several gods they worshiped.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-22-2010, 11:37 PM
PixieStyx's Avatar
PixieStyx PixieStyx is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quath View Post
Someone told me that the first verse was suppose to be "gods" not "God" because the Hebrews were polytheistic for a bit and Yahweh(God) was just one of the several gods they worshiped.
That is correct. The word Elohim is PLURAL form of God meaning GODS and appears everywhere in the Bible. Also when you read about the Tower of Bable, the Bible speaks of God in the plural when it says 'Let US confound their language' (paraphrasing here as I don't have my scriptures handy at the moment. LOL)

Last edited by PixieStyx; 08-22-2010 at 11:40 PM. Reason: spelling/ adding more
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
christianity, religion

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 AM.