Obviously these pesky atheists totally misinterpret the verses who say you can have slaves, beat them, they are your property and you can do anything with them. Obviously they are more like servants... obviously....
@salahhe Obviously you either didn't watch my video or didn't understand it... obviously. You also make many false assumptions, such as that only atheists misinterpret verses. Whether or not one believes in God has no bearing on the extent to which one researches a topic. As for your claim that the Torah says slaves are "your property and you can do anything with them", I would like to see your source. I suspect these are just prejudiced thoughts that come from your head with no basis in fact.
@voncello 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall surely be
punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
Exodus 21
I would say that being able to kill your slave means you can pretty much do anything with him. Need more? Because I have a lot more about how you can mutilate him, decide who he marries, have sex with her, treat children sold into slavery like animals...
@salahhe Have you studied the rabbinical tradition on these passages, or are you reading the English translation with no concept of how Jews understand these words? Let's go one verse at a time. Ex. 20 - refers to a non-Jewish slave which means this was one who was a slave from a foreign culture or a prisoner of war. Yes, there were no prisons so POWs were kept by families and clearly they had to be able to defend themselves from these men. However this verse actually protects the slave, More...
@voncello I don't care that there are some people out there who choose to look at the color red and call it green. It's still red. It still says it's ok to beat him to death if he survives for 2 days. That you have some system of dancing around the words and "interpret" this thing so that it looks pink to you is irrelevant. I am quoting the word of god. Who are you quoting? And don't compare this to US slavery. Compare it with human rights and moral standards of the 3rd millennium.
@salahhe The Declaration of Independence says I have the right to "pursue happiness". So this means I can marry ten women, right? If that's my "happiness" I have the right to purse it, right? I can marry ten men too, right? I can marry a dog too, right? "I don't care that there are some people out there who choose to look at the color red and call it green. It's still red."
How ignorant to take another culture's law and interpret it whatever crazy way you want and insist that YOU are right!
@voncello If your pursuit of happiness does not infringe on other people's right, yes, you can do ANYTHING, including having 10 wives. You can even marry a dog if you can prove the dog agrees. However, under any circumstances, you cannot enslave anyone, you don't have the right to beat, and kill anyone unless it is their choice. Your God, however, says it's ok. And all you do is telling me that some humans decided to take the word of GOD and "interpret" it. Calling me ignorant?
@salahhe In the US there are polygamy laws that prevent you from marrying more than one person! Many states still ban gay marriage. And no state allows a man to marry men and women! There are also laws against sex with animals, let alone marriage! Even when the US allowed enslavement it banned polygamy and sodomy. So you are showing a great lack of understanding of US law. How then can you possibly claim to be an expert on Jewish law? BTW, ALL law is interpreted. That's why we have courts.
@voncello I never mentioned US laws. I never pretended that it reflects human rights or moral standards. According to universal human rights and as much as an objective social morality we can accept on all earth, you should be allowed to pursue your happiness in ANY way (including selling yourself into slavery if that is your fetish) as long as you are not taking the same freedom from other people. That includes enslaving anyone, even if they attacked you in the first place.
@salahhe I agree with you in principal but your words don't stand up to reality. You say no one should ever be "enslaved". So are you against imprisonment? Aren't you taking away someone's freedom and forcing them to do as you say 24/7? Are you against the army? Soldiers are essentially enslaved. They are told what to do even if it puts them in grave danger. Are you against contracts? Work place rules? The fact is all societies have laws and it is ignorant to interpret them without knowledge.
@salahhe You say "I am quoting the word of god" but how do you know? Are you aware that this "word" was actually written thousands of years ago in Hebrew? You are reading an English translation of an earlier English translation of a Greek translation! Even if the Hebrew is from God these translations are the work of man! Are you even aware that the Torah has no vowels? Who put them in? The Rabbis! The same rabbis who passed down the interpretation that you want to ignore. That's inconsistent.
@voncello So what you are saying is that the bible isn't a reliable source for the word of God. That is a book made up by humans essentially and they could have gotten it all wrong. And what you are following is not the word of God but of some guys from a couple of thousands years ago. Tell me, if that book might as well be bullshit, why defend it? If the only way you CAN defend it is calling your own holly text bullshit... why call it holly in the first place?
@salahhe I don't think you understand where I am coming from. I never said any book is holy. I never said any book is from God. See my video "What I Believe" if you want to know where I stand on that. What I'm saying is the Torah (which means "Law" in Hebrew) is a book of law from the ancient Jewish culture. In any study of another culture's law the educated thing to do is study sources from that culture and seek to understand how THEY understood and practiced their law.
@voncello If they heard this, my Jewish friends would politely ask you to suck their circumcised penises. Who the fuck gave these laws? Wasn't it Moses, the Holly prophet, after talking directly to God? Wasn't God the reason they left Egypt in the first place?
And there is still slavery in the bible, no matter how you turn it around.
@salahhe If you continue using foul language I'll end this conversation. Are you Jewish? You show no understanding of Jewish Bible interpretation or the basics of Jewish theology. Your fundamentalist interpretations make me suspect you are a born again Christian or a fundamentalist Muslim. What is your background?
@voncello The second you stated that your interpretation of reality is different then everybody else, this discussion ended. In your fantasy world what you say might be true so no need to argue with that. I have proven my point with my first quote and ever since we are dancing around what I now understand is your point of view.
@salahhe What? You are the one who makes up whatever you want a passage in the Bible to mean and insists that YOUR opinion is a fact. To the contrary, I have argued that in studying ANY law of ANY culture the intelligent way to understand it is to learn from the writings of THAT culture and understand THEIR law the way THEY do. Now you are trying to twist my stance into something irrational but you have only proven your inability to have a rational and informed discussion on this topic.
@salahhe As I said before the Torah was written without vowels. Changing the vowels of Hebrew words turns them into other words. So who determined which vowels would be put into the words in the Torah? The Rabbis! So right from the start the rabbis had total control of how the words would be interpreted. If you read an English interpretation of the rabbis words and call it "the word of God" yet you refuse to study what they said the words mean, that is inconsistent and out of touch with reality.
@salahhe I have a chapter in my book "Beyond Faith" that discusses the issue of vowels. I show how the Hebrew words could mean other things. Ex. "there was evening and morning, the first day" could mean "there was a flock of cattle and wild animals one day" with different vowels! So what you are calling "the word of God" was decided upon by rabbis who put in the vowels! I wish for you the increasing ability to evolve in your thinking when exposed to new ideas and information. Knowledge is good.
@salahhe The law understands that the owner has the right to strike the POW or foreign slave in self defense HOWEVER it must not go beyond that. If the slave is killed the owner is liable to the death penalty! If he recovers and the owner is found to have been excessive he will be punished but not by death. However, if he struck him with a rock or a lethal weapon not normally used for chastisement he may be liable to the death penalty even if the slave lives! Compare this to southern US slavery!
@salahhe Indeed, the laws regarding slaves were so protective that they put the owners' own life in jeopardy. For this reason it was said, "He who buys a slave buys a master". Your other examples are also taken out of context. If you want to understand how Jews ACTUALLY understood and lived these verses you need to study from ancient Jewish sources, such as a Torah with rabbinical commentary. Otherwise your comments are similar to those of a bigot who attacks another culture without knowledge.
What you like to do is to take what you want from the Bible, and sweep under the rug whatever you don't like or don't want to think about! Stop treating your Tanakh like a buffet! Some of it is beautiful in its idealsm, but I think some of it clearly is not.
@psandbergnz I don't hide anything but clearly we interpret things differently. If I were studying Shakepeare and an Oxford scholar told me that a certain passage was alluding to something else I would say, "Wow. Thanks for letting me know." I think Gentiles should respond the same way when a rabbi explains a Talmudic interpretation. You interpreted Isaiah 11:14 as an uncivilized mob hell bent on vengeance. But that's not what it says. Yes, it talks about war but not as you twisted it.
@psandbergnz The Bible prophecies about future wars. You interpret that as uncivil but that's unfair. If the author somehow knew the future should he lie about it? There've always been wars and there probably will be more. Don't you think? But there is a principle in Jewish Bible interpretation that negative prophecies are conditional. They are warnings that can be averted if people allow God's will to prevail. But positive prophecies are guaranteed. The Jews will return and there will be peace!
@psandbergnz You've expressed distress at the idea that the Al Aqsa mosque may go. Must a building from a religion that calls non-believers infidels and says they must convert, be humiliated, or killed, stand forever? Why does it matter to you since you aren't a Jew or a Muslim? The Bible states that the Temple will be rebuilt. The Muslims chose to try to thwart this. We'll see if the Bible comes true, but why take sides? Many rabbis believe the Muslims will repent and help build the Temple!
@psandbergnz Remember: in those days, the lion will lie down with the lamb! Put your Shakespeare hat on and look beyond the literal meaning of the words to what they symbolize. In the messianic era, when the word of the Lord will cover the earth like the sea, there will be no more war. Read Isaiah "And many people will go and
say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths". Muslims too!
Yes, there are two Tanakh prophecies for exile (neither referred to as by a neighbour). Isaiah 11:11 explains this:
"In that day, the Lord will reach out his hand a SECOND time to reclaim the remnant of his people from Assyria, Egypt, Babylonia...from the islands.. He will assemble Judah's scattered people”.
The first time was the exodus from Egypt. The second is the return from Assyria (and later, Babylon).
There's no real indication the prophets had a third time in view.
@psandbergnz The 1st exile was by Bablyon. The Jews were moved en masse and returned. The 2nd was done by Rome. As prophesied the Jews were "scattered to the four quarters of the earth". There are Jews in virtually every country on earth! Isaiah only embellishes Torah prophecy. "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse" is the messiah. "He will...gather the exiles of Israel". (There are still Jews not in Israel). THEN "the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the LORD". That's Judaism!
@voncello, but how will we "be filled with the knowledge of the Lord" through Israel?! Israel is a nation of unbelievers - like the rest! The context of Isaiah 11 suits Israel's return from BABYLON 2500 years ago; it has tribes no longer existent (Ammonites, Edom..). THAT is the "2nd time" (the 1st was either Assyria or Egypt)! The returning Jews "plunder peoples to the East". So, an uncivilised, lawless mob you hope to see return, hellbent on vengeance! Yet these people will bring us wisdom?!
@psandbergnz The Talmud identifies who are the descendants of Ammon, Edom, etc. Of course with inter-marriage the lines are blurred today, but some see these names as indicating certain spiritual mentalities. The reason Isaiah says they will be subdued is on a spiritual level. Christians have a similar belief, that Jesus will come and bring the good people with him to heaven. Isaiah is talking about a type of heaven on earth. The messianic era of peace. Why do you choose to demean this vision?
@psandbergnz In the same prophecy Isaiah says "The wolf will live with the lamb...The infant will play near the cobra’s den, the young child will put its hand into the viper’s nest. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain for the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the LORD". How do get from this to "an uncivilised, lawless mob you hope to see return, hellbent on vengeance!"? This strikes me as anti-Semitism. Either that or an extreme case of poor reading comprehension!
@voncello: "how you get from this to an uncivilised, lawless mob.."? Well, I QUOTED from Isaiah 11:14!Isaiah's context suits the return from Babylon. However, admittedly, there could be layers of meaning. But let's be clear: What you want to see is the destruction and replacement of the Al Aqsa mosque for the Temple described in Ezekiel? You want ANIMAL SACRIFICE restored and Levitical priestly function? You want the restoration of a Jewish theocracy? Then "the wolf will lie with the lamb".
@psandbergnz Isaiah cannot be talking about the return from Babylon because none of what he said happened then. Did the wolf lie with the lamb? Did the knowledge of the Lord cover the earth? It still hasn't! Clearly this is about messianic times, and that is what the Jews believe.
I personally don't "want" anything. We are reading a BOOK, are we not? I seek only to read it clearly and in accordance with the way those who wrote it and passed it down approve. You are the one who "wants" things!
@voncello, the "wolf will lie with the lamb" and the knowledge of God on the earth probably refer to some very futuristic time. IF you want to read the scripture according to those who wrote it, then you would surely want the restoration of the things prophesied: the building of the new Temple (implying the riddance of the Jerusalem Mosque), and the slitting of cattle's throat - their blood smeared on the Temple's altar - to atone for sin such as breaking the Sabbath. Will that make you happy?
@psandbergnz What do you mean "will that make you happy"? Suppose you wanted to study Shakespeare at Oxford. Should I say "IF you want to read Shakespeare according to those who wrote it (the English) then you surely WANT Romeo and Juliet to die!"
It's not a question of wanting! It's a question of understanding a book according to the intentions of the author. I'd assume a UK scholar might have a better take on Shakespeare than one from another culture. Same with rabbis and the Bible.
@psandbergnz Now if we can get beyond accusing each other of "wanting" things, can we get back to trying to figure out together what Isaiah 11 is talking about? Do you agree that the wolf didn't lie with the lamb and the knowledge of the Lord didn't cover the entire earth 2500 years ago when the Jews returned from Babylon? If we can agree Isaiah is talking about the messianic times, then the questions are 1. what does he say will happen, 2. why are you opposed to it? 3. Is the status quo better?
@voncello, the wolf lying with the lamb and the knowledge of God lie eons in the future."The lion will eat straw like the ox" (Isaiah 65) belongs to the same futuristic time. Biochemically, it is impossible for lions to digest straw, so don't expect that any time soon! The propecies have no chronology.
I'm sure it will be wonderful if peace fills the world. I'm far less enamoured with the idea of a Jewish theocracy with animal sacrifice, not to mention 613 Mitzvote, all with no "expiry date"!
@psandbergnz Yes, Jews agree that the wolf/lamb stuff hasn't happened yet. For this reason they reject Jesus as the fulfillment of these prophecies. But some things have happened. Israel against all odds is back in Jewish hands, the desert bloomed, etc. Some call this the Birth Pangs of the messiah. What's it your concern if Jews at some point have a kingdom again? You have a monarchy! You have strange customs, like massive surveillance. You "sacrifice" tons of meat for your meat pies! So what!
@psandbergnz Seriously, I'd like to know why you choose (and it is a choice) to interpret the Bible in way that makes the Jews look horrible. You must know that Jews do not interpret their Bible that way. They see it as a blueprint that will lead to a world or peace for ALL humanity, where "the wolf will live with the lamb", i.e. all will be at peace. Yet you turn this vision into one where the Jews become a "lawless mob hell bent on vengeance". Why do you do this? Is it hatred? If not, what?
@psandbergnz Say what you will but your interpretation is not accepted by the people who wrote the books, preserved the books, and live by the books - the Jews. Leviticus 26 "those who hate you will rule over you". This indicates that it would be a neighbor. Contrast this with Deut. 28 "The LORD will bring a nation against you from far away". Isaiah is talking about Israel today. "He will gather the exiles of Israel...from the four quarters of the earth." The scattering was done by Rome!
The recent return (last century) of Jews to Israel is not prophesied in the Bible. Once they had returned from exile in Babylon, they were supposed to have paid the price for their sin. They were supposed to have peace thereafter. Instead, Israel was overcome again and again by militant powers (the Greeks and then the Romans). Another "diaspora" (after Babylon) was not foreseen by the prophets, and hence neither was another return.
@psandbergnz You are simply wrong. There are 2 prophesies of exile in the Torah. The first would be done by a neighbor. The second from someone "whose language you do not know". The first was done by Babylon. The second Rome with its foreign language. There are other details that indicate Rome. Furthermore Moses after this second prophecy details the return - how the desert would bloom (as it has) how Jews would be returned on "wings" and most did fly to Israel. Study Judaism with Jews!
@psandbergnz That is not true. Babylon was a middle east neighbor, and a very powerful one. No one is saying every Jew knew Aramaic but the language was as familiar to them as French is to the English. But Rome was across the Mediterranean and Latin was not known in the middle east. But there are many more identifiers in the prophecies. I wrote a 30 page chapter on this in my book. There is no doubt that the 2 prophecies were about 2 different events proven by dozens of examples.
I don't want to appear TOO negative about the Tanakh, since there are clearly uplifting passages, such as Pslam 23, the idealism in Isaiah, and others. However, I think that the bulk of the Tanakh is primitive, appalling, and with little truly spiritual or edifying value. That's my experience of reading it with a view to searching for enlightenment or knowledge. What keeps Judaism alive is the solidarity it creates among Jews (many/most of whom unbelievers), which we Gentiles can't appreciate.
@psandbergnz "We Gentiles"? You mean "we Jew-hating Gentiles". The fact is many Gentiles love the Jews and interpret the Bible opposite to the hateful way you do. Look I could quote Jesus when he says "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Matthew 10) and say like you "the (New Testament) is primitive, appalling" etc. Even in Psalm 2: you see it as a call to subjugate and enslave while Jews see it as a call to reach out to others and bring them into morality. You turn love into hate.
1) @voncello, I try to be a realist! The Tanakh version of "Love they neighbour" (Lev.17) has fellow Jews in mind - not Gentiles (read context). We see a stark distinction in the value or worth between Jews and Gentiles througout the Tanakh.The Father of all mankind would surely value ALL people equally, even if He has a plan to set one ethnic group apart to be an example to others. How can you claim David wanted to "reach out" when he committed atrocities against innocents? Jesus didn't murder!
@psandbergnz Jesus didn't murder but his followers sure did! Ever hear of the Crusades? The Spanish Inquisition? The Pogroms? The Holocaust? All perpetrated largely by his followers. And didn't Jesus say "you will know a tree by its fruit"? Look, anyone can turn anything into something ugly. If you studied Judaism with Jews you would learn that it is immensely loving to gentiles. The whole reason the Jews endure Inquisition and Holocaust is their belief that they will one day save the world!
2). Did David really have a broad understanding of the term "neighbours"? I will expose what you doubless pretend does not exist! David raided villages and towns for plunder. His cruelty rivalled Mohammed's.
1 Sam. 27:8-11:“Whenever David attacked an area, he did not leave a man or woman alive, but took sheep and cattle...He did not leave a man or woman alive.." He didn't leave survivors lest his actions be exposed. Evidently "Thou shalt not steal/kill" does not apply to Gentiles!
@psandbergnz You always generalize one incident and apply it to all cases. Let's turn the tables:
"In fact, the most glaring cause of the Irish famine was not a plant disease, but England's long-running political hegemony over Ireland. The Irish suffered from many famines under English rule. Like a boxer with both arms tied behind his back, the Irish could only stand and absorb blow after blow." Shall we say then that "thou shalt not steal/kill" doesn't apply to the English? How absurd is this!
@voncello, don't forget that Winston Churchill was Adolf Hitler's nemesis! It may not be too wise to blame the Irish famine on the English. There were pleny of ennobled Irishmen with large estates in Ireland who did nothing to help their fellow-Irishmen. The British in England also suffered from the "blight". Doubtless, we could have done more. But more relevant: the English didn't write a book that they claimed was inspired by God and was beyond critique.
@psandbergnz The Jews wrote a book 3500 years ago! And yet, thousands of years later, you are insulting the Jews for making money on movies?! Of course you will defend the English against the Irish, but I have Irish friends who tell me that the English are the most cold, calculating, self centered, immoral people on the planet. Some say Churchill opposed Hitler only because he was trying to take power from his English overlords. You don't need a book, in your mind you're already beyond critique.
@psandbergnz What do you think Isaiah 53 is about? "Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God...But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities... and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray...and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." You think this is about Jesus? He was talking about the Jews! We suffered and still do at the hands of folks like you - yet we still we reach out!
@voncello, I'm not suret you are right about the Jews "reaching out" to anyone but themselves. Jews do very well in hollywood, though, I see!
When they destroy the Jerusalem mosque to fulfill the prophets, you will see the Tanakh has unleashed Armageddon upon the world, without hope of peace. The true legacy of Judaism will be destruction, until it peters out - as will Christianity. And yes, your interpretation of Isaiah 53 is correct. I understood this years ago. I have left Christianity.
@psandbergnz Now you are reaching into the anti-Semites bag of BS with Jews in Hollywood?! Who in Hollywood has the money and power of your queen and her henchmen? Who purposely sets up situations such as between the Jews and Arabs in Israel where both sides are kept off balance so England and her under the table partners can cleverly reap the benefits? You did it in India. You did it in Africa. You were slave traders, mass murderers around the world. And Jews should not make money like you do?
@voncello, I don''t think the queen has "henchmen"! Many Jews are proud how Jewry nearly runs Hollywood (I hear it from Jews themsleves), and what a cultural legacy Hollywood really is - lol! Your diatribe against England is a little out of date, isn't it? England abolished slavery a half century before the USA did. We also have many greatmen like Wilberforce. We introduced concepts such as "fair play" to the world, which every civilised language borrows in every day speech.
@psandbergnz There isn't one moral thing you "introduced" that the Jews didn't introduce thousands of years ago! But what is the point of this? Are we to jump into the mud with each other? The fact is, you don't like having your culture insulted and having its virtues twisted into ugliness, and neither do we! So why don't you actually "do unto others and you'd have others do unto you" and stop your bigoted rants against Judaism and Jews. How many more centuries must this nonsense go on?
@psandbergnz No, that was your patriarchs - like your great King Henry the 8th who killed his wives that didn't bear him a son!! And then he broke from the Church and established his own, and THIS is YOUR church! Congratulations on applying "the golden rule"!
Can we stop this absurd ethnic fighting, you and I? Have you gotten enough hate out today?
@psandbergnz It doesn't matter that this is my video. I am happy to have conversations that are controversial and delve into difficult subjects. All I ask is that you extend to me basic human respect, as I extend the same to you. When you pick one sentence out of the Bible, interpret it in a way that no Jew would agree with, and then use your misinterpretation as an excuse to make anti-Semitic comments, that is a waste of my time. But if you have legitimate questions I'm all for a good debate.
@psandbergnz You are proving once again that those who seize on "slavery in the Bible" or circumcision or some other handle they can try to turn into a club to beat the Jews usually have a deeper anti-Jewish agenda. You have now been exposed with your Hollywood comment as well as your turning passage after passage from love to hate. Yes, for centuries people around the world were beaten down by the likes of you but we have caught on to your game - polite on the surface and hateful inside.
@voncello, but why do you pretend the atrocities, which are so common in the Tanakh, don't exist? How can you look to God as "Abba" when Moses, David and the prophet Samuel destroyed the lives of thousands of children, at times on your God's very orders? It just doesn't make sense to me! Just because I expose these things does not make me a Jew-hater. Maybe I love truthfulness.
@psandbergnz You don't stop do you? Shall I go back to the English atrocities in India, Arabia, Africa, Asia? You want truthfulness? Look at yourself before you criticize others. All countries fight wars. All kill children on the other side. Here's a secret: even we Americans have done it. And even our leaders have often said that we were doing God's work when we killed others. So stop the diatribe against the Jews, and examine why you have this need to attack them.
@voncello, I can admit the atrocities committed by the British or anyone else. But these atrocities I KNOW did not come from God. Understand finally that the Tanakh is as humanly flawed as other books, your patriarchs as flawed as other humans. You have surpassed them, so why take their teachings as divine? True spiritual knowledge can only come from within. Just as you repudiate the idea of stoning ANYONE to death, you can repudiate the yoke of circumcision.
@psandbergnz There is a major difference between Jewish and English "atrocities", the Jews have only ever fought for a tiny piece of land that they believe is theirs. They have never attacked anyone outside of that boundary. The English would also kill anyone who tried to take parts of England away. Look at what they did in the Falklands which was thousands of miles from England! The English have killed and plundered all over the world. The Jews ONLY fought for their land. Big difference.
@psandbergnz I don't repudiate stoning. Watch my video on the subject. Stoning didn't involve throwing stones. It was the most humane form of capital punishment available. More humane than hanging which is still done today in "civilized" countries. Fact is, you know almost nothing about the Bible from the Jewish perspective. Yet you think you can lecture me on "true spiritual knowledge". Before you can teach you need to learn. Yet you seem to think you have some God given superiority.
@psandbergnz One mistake you make, that is common among Christians or ex-Christians, is you assume God must be Jesus-like. The Muslims rejected that idea and portrayed Allah as a mighty warrior. Judaism rejects both portrayals. God is neither a peace & love hippie nor is He a strongman dictator. He is both and more. Certainly the creator of THIS universe isn't adverse to volcanoes, hurricanes, tidal waves and other things that wreak destruction. Yet He also makes rainbows and moonbeams.
@psandbergnz So the point is that there is nothing inconsistent with the idea of God commanding a group of people to kill as long as it is done in a certain way. First and foremost the Jews were never commanded to kill anyone who was not on God's land. And they had to always offer peace first. If a group decided to oppose God's will then of course there would be war and in war people get killed. Yet God said Jewish control of Israel is necessary for world peace, so Jews were fighting for peace!
@voncello, no! The Israelites were commanded (supposedly by God) to annihilate the Canaanites: "When the Lord your God shall bring you to the land ..you shall defeat and utterly DESTROY them.."(Deut. 7).
Deut. 10:20 exposes your notion of peace: "As you approach to attack, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates, then all the people inside will serve you in FORCED LABOUR.." Otherwise, they were killed. Would you defend yourself given such terms?
@psandbergnz Weren't the Canaanites on God's land? The whole premise of the Bible is that God has a certain plot of land that He considers His. Christians and Muslims agree that the land of Israel is a "holy land". Therefore it is not up to man what happens on that land. Indeed, God told the Jews that just as He will clear the land of the Canaanites due to their immorality on His land, He would do the same to the Jews if they followed suit. And they did, and He did! But He promised a return too.
@voncello, we're all on "God's land" - including you and me! Why would you presume that the command for the Jews to slaughter the Canaanites, to possess the land, was ordained by God rather than man? History repeats itself in every land, e.g. the European incursion into America, with its genocide.
The Hebrews were never held in mass captivity in Egypt anyhow! The exodus account isn't historically valid, as virtually all scholars (including Jews) now believe. There's no record of it in Egypt.
@psandbergnz Just a little googling around shows that the Exodus in very much in debate. But be that as it may, according to the Bible (and we are discussing the Bible) Israel is THE holy land. Christians agree. Muslims agree that it is holy but one man said Mecca is more holy and they accept that. Whether or not Israel actually IS holy is open for debate but you must admit that Israel is the ONLY land God told the Jews to fight for. What's England's excuse for trying to colonize the world?
@psandbergnz The bottom line: an intelligent person studies literature from the perspective of the people who wrote it. A bigot takes the writings of another culture, twists them into something horrible, then pompously accuses that culture of immorality.
I would never take Shakespeare and interpret it as preaching hate, then demean the English as immoral! Yet how dare you do this to the Jews. Where do people like you get this disgusting personality trait from? "Love your neighbor "- Leviticus!
@psandbergnz And if you truly want to find "enlightenment or knowledge" from the Tanach study it with Jews! Learn how Jews interpret their own books. A good place to start is to go to a Jewish book store and get a book of the Bible with rabbinic commentary such as those published by Art Scroll. You can also take Bible classes from Jewish outreach groups like Aish HaTorah or Lubavitch. You can also get my book "Beyond Faith". Do you really want to learn or to insult Judaism? That is the question!
Well, it was interesting discussing this. I doubt we will get further, since I'm pretty sure that neither you nor I can provide further evidence to support our respective positions. Still, I do admit that at least the Torah seems to stipulate that serious injury meted out to slaves shall invalidate their slavery. However, since there was no supervision, it is extremely unlikely that such injury would have resulted in their liberty, unless the owner decided his slave was just "damaged goods".
@psandbergnz Rather than assume the worst wouldn't it make more sense to actually study the Talmud? And I don't mean going to anti-Jewish websites that look for a few quotes to twist and insult. Israel was a small country. There weren't that many Gentile slaves. People usually lived close to others. And many were religious. Isn't it more likely that if a slave was abused people would know? You should examine why you always take the negative against Israel and the Jews. Some say its cultural.
Your rant that slavery permitted in the Torah is mistranslation or misunderstanding is fallacious. What the Torah DOES do is distinguish between enslaving fellow Jews (to be released after 7 years) and enslavement of Gentiles, who could be enslaved permanently and their children. Your claim disfigurement of a prisoner resulted in their release is unfounded.
Note “the slave is his master’s property” (Ex.21:21). Also: “you may buy male and female slaves from the nations around you” (Lev.25:44).
@psandbergnz i didn't "rant" and the fact that you lead with this mischaracterization shows your ideas are weak. You said "Your claim disfigurement of a prisoner resulted in their release is unfounded". Here's the evidence:
"If an eved keeper hits the eye of an eved or handmaid and ruins it, the keeper must let the eved go free because of the eye. If the eved keeper knocks out the tooth of the male or female eved, the eved must be released and go free because of the tooth." Exodus 21
@voncello, yes Exodus 21 states as you quoted. However, the passage isn't clear whether it refers to a Hebrew or a foreign slave. Foreign slaves and their posterity were permanent property of the owner's family, except possibly in the case of certain injuries (as Exodus may imply). But who would enforce the release of a foreign slave? The Torah doesn't require a committee of any sort to provide "eveds" with rights, or to supervise at all. How would "eveds" even know of fhis very limited right?
@psandbergnz The same way a foreign worker knows his rights in the US or the EU. Israel was a country with courts and the law was as known to the public there as it is anywhere today. The passage applied specifically to foreign slaves since they were the only ones a Jew could "own". It was a protection of foreign slaves. Jews could face death for this!
Are you aware of the reason the Torah allows a Jew to buy a foreign slave? And are you aware of the reality of what happened to their children?
@voncello, you say that eveds would know of their rights in "the same way that a foreign worker knows his rights in the US or EU". Hardly! Almost all foreign slaves would have been illiterate, and although Israel had law courts, I doubt you will find evidence of a single incidence when any Jewish law court intervened on behalf of a foreign slave. They wouldn't have been interested, just as the Torah was not interested in ensuring that the practice of slavery was monitored in any way.
@psandbergnz Why do you doubt that? The Torah is unique in its protections of foreigners. The Greeks and Romans called foreigners "barbarians". Yet God tells the Jews over and over again to protect the stranger saying "For you were strangers in the land of Egypt". It's amazing how those with an anti-Jew agenda turn Judaism on its head! There is even whole book that the Jews put into their Bible about God's love of the Gentile. It's called Jonah. I suggest you read it!
@psandbergnz And since you haven't answered my question after several attempts I'll answer it for you. The only reason given for why Jews could buy foreign slaves is that they would eventually be freed. The owner was commanded to teach the slave about Judaism and if he would convert the slave would go free. Most chose this path. But if one didn't still his kids were freed. Now you will say "But that's not what it says" but that's what the Talmud says. There were loopholes that were used!
@voncello, the slave owner was NOT commanded or even encouraged to teach the slave Judaism! Where on earth do you get your opinion from? The slave was just "property"! Nowhere does the Tanakh rate the foreign slave higher than property! Please don't presume I am unfamiliar with the Tanakh (although admittedly, I tend to refer to it as the "Old Testament").
@psandbergnz I have said how many times on this site and the other where we were talking that the Talmud is considered equal in authority to the Torah by Orthodox Jews? The Torah is considered like a bulletin board with broad headings. The Talmud, which is thousands of pages longer, is where the details are discussed. But the Talmud bases its ideas from hints in the actual Torah text. Even wikipedia says, "non-Jewish slaves could be converted to Judaism and then freed".
@psandbergnz "Your rant that slavery permitted in the Torah is mistranslation or misunderstanding is fallacious." Your comment is fallacious. The word in Hebrew is not "slave" but "eved". And if you look at the way this word is used it is nothing like the way the word slave is used. Slaves have no rights. Eveds have many rights. Slaves can be disfigured and even killed with no consequence. Eveds had to be treated as family members. Slaves have no release date. Eveds generally did. On and on...
@voncello, foreign (Gentile) slaves had almost no rights (although not supposed to be beaten to death or sustain serious injufr). If they did die, no one would have cared. It is acceptable in the Torah to beat them to the extent that they could continue (or survive) after "a day or two". In all other respects, they were "property". There is no case for claiming they were to be treated like family! The children of foreign slaves remained permanently under enslavement.
@psandbergnz From where are you getting your interpretations? I've seen the anti-Jewish websites that spread lies about the Torah and the Talmud that say just what you just said. In fact, the Talmud says that a Jew who killed an eved would face the death penalty. The reason the Torah says an eved must be released if a tooth was broken was because anything more serious would subject the keeper to legal action.
Again I ask if you know why the Torah allows a Jew to buy a foreign slave?
@voncello, the Talmud is not considered "divine" scripture by most Jews. Moreover, it was written well after the Tanakh (so by different writers). The Talmud is given a very "rough ride" by critics. By and large, I think it considers Gentiles to have about the same worth as the mud I scrape off my boots! There are CERTAINLY some verses that imply this, although I can't be sure that is the general "spirit" of the Talmud.
@psandbergnz Well again, you are spreading anti-Semitic propaganda, and it is getting quite tiring. It says in the Torah that Moses taught the elders and they taught the people. He also appointed judges. Obviously there was an oral tradition that explained the Torah. This is the Talmud. Furthermore the Torah was a living document that could be interpreted by authorities. Judaism is the most embracing of all religions toward others. In Islam and Christianity non-believers go to hell!
@psandbergnz Many Reform Jews, who are the majority, don't consider any book divine! They have a Humanist type of view from a Jewish perspective. I keep mentioning the Orthodox because they are the ones who accept the Talmud, and BTW, they are the ones who really study it! Many reformist Jews are about as ignorant of it as Gentiles. It is severely misinterpreted, often purposely, by critics. You'll find neo-Nazi and KKK type sites railing against it. But it is profoundly peaceful and beautiful.
@psand What makes the Torah any more "divine" than the Talmud? If the most religious Jews say they're equal who are you to say no? Shall we tell the Pope what is Catholic? There's such hubris in Gentles who think they know better about Judaism than Jews themselves! Remember, the same rabbis who put Jonah into the Bible wrote the Talmud! Does it make any sense that those who would put such a loving book to the Gentile in the Bible would see them as "mud"? It's anti-Semitism. Please rise above it.
@voncello, it's unlikely that the rabbis who wrote "Jonah" also authored the Talmud, whose oral traditions were written ca. 200 CE. Also, although it has God sending Jonah to preach repentance to Gentiles (Ninehvites), and forgiving them, I don't see it as "a loving book to the Gentile" (it's too singular). Rather, it was written to shame Jews, and provoke jealousy. So, the morale would be: "Look, EVEN Gentiles can repent (and be forgiven); so more shame on JEWS (the elite) for NOT doing so".
@psandbergnz I didn't say the rabbis wrote Jonah! I said "the same rabbis who put Jonah into the Bible wrote the Talmud". Who do you think decided what books got into the cannon? God? No! It was rabbis! And you think they put in a book to shame the Jews? That's absurd. They put the book in to teach that we must forgive and help our enemies. In fact, Ninevah was an evil city that had violently attacked Jewish civilians. But the rabbis teach that all nations are God's children and need our help!
@psandbergnz The fact that you took away an anti-Jew moral from the book of Jonah - a book that JEWS put into their own Bible - shows you have some serious anti-Jewisn brainwashing in your past. It is not uncommon for gentiles to view the Bible as if it fell from heaven but the reality is that it was written by JEWS, it was compiled by JEWS, it was written about JEWS largely for JEWS! Gentiles like you look to it as an anti-Jewish book but that is twisted and comes from Christian propaganda.
@voncello, I concur that the Tanakh is written both for and by the Jews. Despite this, many passages demonstrate God's rebuke of the Jews for sin, and punishment for failure to amend, e.g. Israel's captivity in Babylon. I see the Book of Jonah as primarily an attempt to teach the Jews that if EVEN Gentiles can turn from sin and be forgiven, so how much more should God's elect be able to do so! Also, that God reigns supreme. I don't see it as teaching that Jews have a missionary duty to Gentiles.
@psandbergnz Jonah was a Jewish prophet. Nineveh was akin to Nazi Germany (as the Talmud details). Jonah didn't want to help thwart their destruction. He refused to preach repentance to them. According to the story God forced him to go. The moral is clear- you must council even those who hate you. Jews are not to convert Gentiles but clearly they must help them on the path to repentance. It also teaches that we are all God's children! And who wrote this story? JEWS! Give credit where it is due!
@psandbergnz Jonah is but one example of the Bible as "a loving book to the Gentile". Have you read Isaiah? "For out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And He shall Judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nations shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” Isaiah was a JEW spreading the JEWISH message of world peace!
@voncello, yes good point made from Isaiah! But note the awful contrast with Psalm 2:8-9:
"Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will rule them with an iron sceptre, and dash them to pieces like pottery".
We see no evidence of God's love for the Gentiles there. And of course it remains unfulfilled.
@psandbergnz Did you purposely misinterpret that? In context, God said those words to King David. The Psalm begins "The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed". Talmud explains David was praying about the Philistines attempt to destroy him and his people. God comforts him with the line you quoted. But then David councils the kings to "be wise" and "serve the Lord". Like Jonah, David reaches out and councils gentile leaders to repent!
@psandbergnz Actually the Psalm shows the greatness of David. How many leaders even today would reach out to their enemies if God said "Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance...You will rule them with an iron sceptre, and dash them to pieces like pottery"? Most would see this as a green light to ruthlessly kill their opposition and take over the world! But David instead uses this power to urge repentance and reach out to those who hate him and the Jewish message of world peace.
@voncello, I think you are deluded in believing David had any desire to "reach out" to enemies or Gentiles. Psalm 2 is about subjugation of the Israelites' neighbouring tribes. Verse 3 alludes to this subjugation or enslavement, as the Canaanites admonish: "Let us break their chains..throw off their fetters". Although, you will retort that this subjugation by Jews was in self-defence, you only hear one side of the story! Israelite brutality even against Canaanite children is chilling to read.
@psandbergnz Wow, I am truly shocked at the anti-Jewish spin you put on the Bible. The chains and fetters that the enemies of the Jews wanted to throw off were the rules of morality such as not sacrificing virgins to idols, not burning babies to Moloch, not raping strangers (as the crowd wanted to do in the story of Lot), of not having sex with your children (Lot), etc. Yet you turn it into Jews wanting to subjugate others. Your interpretations are similar to what I find on neo-Nazi sites.
@psandbergnz And the proof that David didn't want "subjugation and enslavement" is what he says to the gentile leaders "Therefore, you kings, be wise...serve the LORD with fear and celebrate his rule with trembling." Notice he uses the word Lord, not God. Lord in Hebrew indicates God as the All Merciful. To serve the Lord is to be like Him, to forgive, to be merciful. David is telling them to stop their abusive practices, to become moral and righteous. He is trying to free them from ignorance.
@voncello, Yahweh's hatred of the Canaanites surely reveals He is NOT the creator of the human race! As we see in Deut. 7: "When the Lord your God shall bring you to the land (to possess), ..you shall defeat and utterly destroy them.." There is no directive ever to show the Canaanites (or other tribes) good-will! If God had imparted His eternal Truth to the patriarchs - or had empowered them - they would have had a moral teaching to impart to all. Moses' and David's inhumanity cannot be hid.
@psandbergnz To the contrary, are you aware of the service the Jews did on Sukkot? They sacrificed 70 bulls in order to ask for forgiveness for the 70 original nations. Even today Jews repeat the words of this service every year and pray for the rest of humanity. Moses instituted this service, David carried it on. The whole idea of the messiah who will come to bring peace to ALL mankind is Jewish. And unlike Jesus, the Jews taught that the righteous (not believers) of ALL nations will be saved!
@Newevotime1988 Pretty easy explanation. My "spin" comes from the Talmud, which was written 2000 years ago by the leading rabbis of Israel. To Jews it is as authoritative as the Torah itself. After all, the same people passed down both. If that is not taking it from horses mouth (so to speak) then I don't know what is.
@voncello Lol has viewing and expeirencing politics taught you nothing ... like ..... Don't believe everything you hear or read because it is most probably a lie ...... just think about that for a bit uh......
@Newevotime1988 Laughing out loud (LOL) at people is cruel, but it is also what someone writes when they know their position isn't very strong. It's as if pretending to be laughing at someone somehow bolsters your argument, but it doesn't. If you were to study Shakespeare with the leading expert in Shakespeare at Oxford would you not believe what he says because "it is most probably a lie"? If so, your skepticism is so extreme as to be irrational and bound to keep you uneducated.
My point is that the rabbis who wrote the Talmud were considered the highest authorities on biblical interpretation. I don't see why you would not consider their opinions valid. Certainly they are move valid than yours. After all, you haven't spent years studying Jewish interpretive history, nor do you have any credentials in the field. Of course I don't "believe" that they got everything right. A smart person takes all things with a grain of salt, but you seem to have swallowed the bottle!
@voncello good... i like being uneducated.... i'm still alive even though im dumb ,,,,, i guess it's because you are older and the only thing you have left is to fill ya head with nonsense...... you gotta admit that filling your head with pointless facts is sort of a waste of time and your life.....
@Newevotime1988 One man's "pointless facts" is another man's enduring wisdom. You are arguing the benefits of being uneducated. They say ignorance is bliss. If so, you will have a very happy life ahead of you! All the best! :-)
@Newevotime1988 One man's waste is another man's treasure. It says in the Bible that you should "walk humbly with your God". But elsewhere it instructs us to be "ambitious". The rabbis noticed this seeming contradiction and they wisely pointed out that you should be ambitious in good deeds. Try to be the kindest, most loving, most helpful person you can be. In that case you are ambitious for the truly good things and are thereby walking humbly with your God. If that is a "waste" so be it.
@voncello Why do i know to be and am the kindest, most loving, most helpful person i can be without the bible? did you need the bible to make you be all those things? cos i didn't..... so i guess i have a headstart on you ......
@Newevotime1988 If you are trying daily to be the best person you can be then more power to you. And if others are using the Bible to help them get there, more power to them. I don't generally hear in the secular world much talk about how to be the most moral person you can be. I hear talk about how to be the richest, the slickest, the most powerful, the sexiest, the hippest, the strongest... but rarely do I hear discussions on how to be the kindest & most loving. All things have their values.
@Newevotime1988 BTW, that's not to say that all religions dwell on morality either. In the case of standard Christianity and Islam it is belief, not deeds that gets you into heaven. In Judaism it is the opposite. Entry into a good afterlife is based solely on your actions. No matter what your beliefs, nationality, culture, etc. heaven is the abode of the righteous. And even if there is no heaven, the rabbis teach that doing acts of kindness benefits you more than the other person anyway.
@rearendlover As you did elsewhere you lead with an insult which immediately let's us know what an uncouth individual you are. Then you say it is ridiculous to bring up the fact that many of the people who insult the Bible have either never read it, or certainly never read the Jewish interpretive literature that was passed down with it that explains it. It's weird that you find it lame that I expect people to actually read books they want to criticize. Who is the real wacko?
@snaebjorn53 I am not using an "alternative interpretation" of slavery. The word "slavery" was used by someone who falsely translated the Hebrew word "evid". If you watch the video you will learn that there were laws concerning evids that are totally different than how we define slaves. So the problem is not with me but with whoever made the translation. The fact is, there is no word for evid in the English language.
@snaebjorn53 The way you know slavery and imprisonment was fairer than Gitmo is because there was no imprisonment and no slavery (as we define that word today). If you even broke a tooth of an evid you had to set him free. In most cases evids were your fellow Israelites who needed temporary employment. They had to be treated as family. Certainly you could not torture them. Nowhere does the Bible allow torture.
@sheppaul Your comment makes no sense. I have read the Bible many times and in great depth. Murder is a legal term for when an individual kills another individual in an illegal way. The Bible not only condemns murder, "Thou shalt not murder", but it was probably the first book in history to do so.
I bascially agree with snaebjorn53 ,what makes you think they were better people,they murdered,raped ,and performed human sacrifice.how do you think they treated people they owned, in reality
@sheppaul Show me the chapter and verse where the Jewish people "performed human sacrifice". You can't and that proves you are full of it. Your other charges are also false. Do your homework next time.
@voncello for one thing it is all myth these stories are as real as greek myth.Which charges are false that jewsaccording to the bible raped anmurdered at the orders of Moses and Joshua,killing babies in the womb and then there is Judges 11 with Jephthah so I can human sacrifice! haha
@sheppaul The Jews were NEVER ordered to rape. Rape is against the commandments. So is murder. You are misinterpreting something. Give me the chapter and verse. As for Judges 11, where does it say there was a human sacrifice?
If the Bible says "If", then it means their law says it is ok to sell daughters, beat slaves to near death, and use these people as they wish because they have become commodities. Your comment "so what" suggests you dismiss the atrocity of slavery?
How can one man own another when he cannot even own himself?
As for interpretation, the Hebrew scriptures have been interpreted, interpolated and edited many times since being written. Which truth is the real truth?
@snaebjorn53 Be fair: nowhere does it say you can "use these people as you wish". There were strict laws protecting "eveds". When you refer to my comment "so what" I have no idea where I said that. You have to either reply to a comment itself or quote what you are referring to. The real truth of the Hebrew scriptures has been passed down in Hebrew by the Hebrew people! The Talmud is the main body of books, along with other commentaries by Maimonides, Rashi, etc. Also the Kabbalah, Zohar, etc.
@snaebjorn53 I just did a search of this whole page and there is no comment where I said "so what". Please do your research before "quoting" me and don't make up quotes that I didn't say. I'm quite careful with my words. Thanks.
@voncello Ok, your video title says "what's up with that", same meaning.
Yes, slavery was common in Biblical times, and if you own a commodity, then surely you can do what you wish, I didn't necessarily mean inflict physical suffering by that, just that the slave owner has complete control of another human's life which is abhorrently cruel in any language or any era.
Your comment I refer to implies you disregard the concept of slavery, which most people consider repugnant.
@snaebjorn What's up with that has an entirely different meaning than so what. So what implies no big deal. What's up with that is a question meaning "Can that be true?" And I spend my video showing how the ways the Hebrew word "eved" are used are much different than the English word slave. Ex. you can kill, torture, sexually abuse, a slave but not so for an eved. An eved in most cases would go free at a specified time, you could agree to become an eved, etc. no so with slaves.
There are many passages in the Jewish scriptures which state that slaves are property. Owners can beat them to near death. If a slave is given a wife and they have kids, the wife and children are still property of the slave owner. Slaves should be set free after six years, but only if they are Jewish.
Slavery was common in Biblical times, property with no rights as free people.
I'm curious as to how you interpret the murders and rape in the OT, do you excuse these atrocities too?
@snaebjorn53 Look closer. There is no place where it says, "An owner can beat his slave to death". People read English translations with an agenda to find something evil and then they interpret things in negative ways that were not intended to be negative. The passage says, "IF a man beats his slave". "If" is interpreted to mean "In the event". So if you read this more like a lawyer (and this is a book of Jewish LAW) then it's actually offering the "eved" protections in the event he's hit.
Leviticus 25:44-46 "Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever"
@snaebjorn Here you cite the one case that is closet to actual slavery. The other cases concern POW's, criminals, and domestic work situations. Yes, in those days slavery was common. The Torah was written to apply to that time period but it was to be a living document. The US allowed slavery too but the law evolved. Jewish law did the same. But even in biblical times the object was to convert the slave to Judaism at which point by law he would go free which isn't true of modern slavery.
"I frankly don't care what the original Hebrew word is for this concept, because we have an English word which describes it perfectly in any context. That word is SLAVERY. Ergo, The bible advocates slavery. QED"
- Me.
Use any word you want. Call it "Taco Supreme" if you like. Hell, invent an entirely new word. Let's call owning and beating people "flarge". The bible does in fact advocate flarge, Taco Supreme, and slavery. Your semantic dance does NOTHING to alter that fact.
@Skullpudding What is the point of our conversation? Did you watch my video or not? I explained various ways that the Hebrew word "eved" is used. Sometimes it is used for prisoners of war, sometimes for convicted criminals, sometimes for a domestic work situation, and sometimes for something more similar to our current concept of slavery, but even then a relative could simply buy you back, a gentile could convert and then be freed, etc. indicating something other than the modern word "slave".
"(gay = homosexual, tell = count) ... I hope you will concede my point"
- Yes, I concede without argument that words follow trends, and that their usage evolves. I do not concede your unsupported claim that the bible doesn't advocate slavery. Again, you're arguing semantics. And though this is the only premise you've offered to support your claim, it simply has nothing to do with the thesis of your video.
I'll restate my position, since it seems to go unchallenged:
@Skullpudding You can call it "trends" but there are words today that have the exact opposite meaning of what they once meant. I cited bravery as an example. It once meant the same as bravado - a pretense of bravery, and now it means the opposite, actual bravery. My argument is not unsupported. I am expressing the STANDARD Jewish interpretation of the Jewish Bible as passed down by the Jews in the Talmud. In fact, it is you who are promoting an unsupported interpretation, unsupported in Judaism.
"You also accused me of dishonesty without even asking me to explain my position!"
- No, I accused you of dishonesty IN RESPONSE to a position you've made numerous dishonest arguments for. You argued semantics and invoked colloquialism to argue that biblical slavery somehow doesn't qualify as slavery. I maintain that your methods have thus far been entirely dishonest.
"How rude and crude!"
- I didn't call you names. I made a founded assertion. Grow up.
@Skullpudding It is crude and rude to accuse someone of dishonesty when you don't even know what they think. That indicates a hostility. I find it disturbing to try to speak rationally with people who are irrationally hostile. If you watched and understood my video you'd already know that there are many meanings of the Hebrew word translated as "slave". Ex. you can offer yourself to a family to work for them for a specified period of time. Is that your definition of slavery?
"Jews are (able) to see things from many angles. You (have) a very narrow way of thinking..."
- To recap: Jews are superior thinkers and I'm close-minded, incapable of free thought. What a well-written ad hominem attack. But you completely failed to address my assertions.
No sir, I'm a critical thinker, thank you. I do contend, however, that you're quite unable to consider any alternate viewpoint, as you've demonstrated in every conversation on this video's page.
@Skullpudding I'm surprised you took what I said that way. You misinterpreted my positive comment and turned it negative. You do the same with the Bible. In this case I meant that Jews are taught as part of their religion to see things from many angles. Ex. in most religions you are taught that there is one way to God and one way to understand scripture. In Judaism you are taught that there are many ways to God and the Torah was intentionally written on many levels. There's no superiority here!
Obviously these pesky atheists totally misinterpret the verses who say you can have slaves, beat them, they are your property and you can do anything with them. Obviously they are more like servants... obviously....
salahhe 2 months ago
@salahhe Obviously you either didn't watch my video or didn't understand it... obviously. You also make many false assumptions, such as that only atheists misinterpret verses. Whether or not one believes in God has no bearing on the extent to which one researches a topic. As for your claim that the Torah says slaves are "your property and you can do anything with them", I would like to see your source. I suspect these are just prejudiced thoughts that come from your head with no basis in fact.
voncello 2 months ago
@voncello 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall surely be
punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
Exodus 21
I would say that being able to kill your slave means you can pretty much do anything with him. Need more? Because I have a lot more about how you can mutilate him, decide who he marries, have sex with her, treat children sold into slavery like animals...
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe Have you studied the rabbinical tradition on these passages, or are you reading the English translation with no concept of how Jews understand these words? Let's go one verse at a time. Ex. 20 - refers to a non-Jewish slave which means this was one who was a slave from a foreign culture or a prisoner of war. Yes, there were no prisons so POWs were kept by families and clearly they had to be able to defend themselves from these men. However this verse actually protects the slave, More...
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello I don't care that there are some people out there who choose to look at the color red and call it green. It's still red. It still says it's ok to beat him to death if he survives for 2 days. That you have some system of dancing around the words and "interpret" this thing so that it looks pink to you is irrelevant. I am quoting the word of god. Who are you quoting? And don't compare this to US slavery. Compare it with human rights and moral standards of the 3rd millennium.
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe The Declaration of Independence says I have the right to "pursue happiness". So this means I can marry ten women, right? If that's my "happiness" I have the right to purse it, right? I can marry ten men too, right? I can marry a dog too, right? "I don't care that there are some people out there who choose to look at the color red and call it green. It's still red."
How ignorant to take another culture's law and interpret it whatever crazy way you want and insist that YOU are right!
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello If your pursuit of happiness does not infringe on other people's right, yes, you can do ANYTHING, including having 10 wives. You can even marry a dog if you can prove the dog agrees. However, under any circumstances, you cannot enslave anyone, you don't have the right to beat, and kill anyone unless it is their choice. Your God, however, says it's ok. And all you do is telling me that some humans decided to take the word of GOD and "interpret" it. Calling me ignorant?
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe In the US there are polygamy laws that prevent you from marrying more than one person! Many states still ban gay marriage. And no state allows a man to marry men and women! There are also laws against sex with animals, let alone marriage! Even when the US allowed enslavement it banned polygamy and sodomy. So you are showing a great lack of understanding of US law. How then can you possibly claim to be an expert on Jewish law? BTW, ALL law is interpreted. That's why we have courts.
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello I never mentioned US laws. I never pretended that it reflects human rights or moral standards. According to universal human rights and as much as an objective social morality we can accept on all earth, you should be allowed to pursue your happiness in ANY way (including selling yourself into slavery if that is your fetish) as long as you are not taking the same freedom from other people. That includes enslaving anyone, even if they attacked you in the first place.
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe I agree with you in principal but your words don't stand up to reality. You say no one should ever be "enslaved". So are you against imprisonment? Aren't you taking away someone's freedom and forcing them to do as you say 24/7? Are you against the army? Soldiers are essentially enslaved. They are told what to do even if it puts them in grave danger. Are you against contracts? Work place rules? The fact is all societies have laws and it is ignorant to interpret them without knowledge.
voncello 1 month ago
@salahhe You say "I am quoting the word of god" but how do you know? Are you aware that this "word" was actually written thousands of years ago in Hebrew? You are reading an English translation of an earlier English translation of a Greek translation! Even if the Hebrew is from God these translations are the work of man! Are you even aware that the Torah has no vowels? Who put them in? The Rabbis! The same rabbis who passed down the interpretation that you want to ignore. That's inconsistent.
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello So what you are saying is that the bible isn't a reliable source for the word of God. That is a book made up by humans essentially and they could have gotten it all wrong. And what you are following is not the word of God but of some guys from a couple of thousands years ago. Tell me, if that book might as well be bullshit, why defend it? If the only way you CAN defend it is calling your own holly text bullshit... why call it holly in the first place?
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe I don't think you understand where I am coming from. I never said any book is holy. I never said any book is from God. See my video "What I Believe" if you want to know where I stand on that. What I'm saying is the Torah (which means "Law" in Hebrew) is a book of law from the ancient Jewish culture. In any study of another culture's law the educated thing to do is study sources from that culture and seek to understand how THEY understood and practiced their law.
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello If they heard this, my Jewish friends would politely ask you to suck their circumcised penises. Who the fuck gave these laws? Wasn't it Moses, the Holly prophet, after talking directly to God? Wasn't God the reason they left Egypt in the first place?
And there is still slavery in the bible, no matter how you turn it around.
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe If you continue using foul language I'll end this conversation. Are you Jewish? You show no understanding of Jewish Bible interpretation or the basics of Jewish theology. Your fundamentalist interpretations make me suspect you are a born again Christian or a fundamentalist Muslim. What is your background?
voncello 1 month ago
@voncello The second you stated that your interpretation of reality is different then everybody else, this discussion ended. In your fantasy world what you say might be true so no need to argue with that. I have proven my point with my first quote and ever since we are dancing around what I now understand is your point of view.
salahhe 1 month ago
@salahhe What? You are the one who makes up whatever you want a passage in the Bible to mean and insists that YOUR opinion is a fact. To the contrary, I have argued that in studying ANY law of ANY culture the intelligent way to understand it is to learn from the writings of THAT culture and understand THEIR law the way THEY do. Now you are trying to twist my stance into something irrational but you have only proven your inability to have a rational and informed discussion on this topic.
voncello 1 month ago
@salahhe As I said before the Torah was written without vowels. Changing the vowels of Hebrew words turns them into other words. So who determined which vowels would be put into the words in the Torah? The Rabbis! So right from the start the rabbis had total control of how the words would be interpreted. If you read an English interpretation of the rabbis words and call it "the word of God" yet you refuse to study what they said the words mean, that is inconsistent and out of touch with reality.
voncello 1 month ago
@salahhe I have a chapter in my book "Beyond Faith" that discusses the issue of vowels. I show how the Hebrew words could mean other things. Ex. "there was evening and morning, the first day" could mean "there was a flock of cattle and wild animals one day" with different vowels! So what you are calling "the word of God" was decided upon by rabbis who put in the vowels! I wish for you the increasing ability to evolve in your thinking when exposed to new ideas and information. Knowledge is good.
voncello 1 month ago
@salahhe The law understands that the owner has the right to strike the POW or foreign slave in self defense HOWEVER it must not go beyond that. If the slave is killed the owner is liable to the death penalty! If he recovers and the owner is found to have been excessive he will be punished but not by death. However, if he struck him with a rock or a lethal weapon not normally used for chastisement he may be liable to the death penalty even if the slave lives! Compare this to southern US slavery!
voncello 1 month ago
@salahhe Indeed, the laws regarding slaves were so protective that they put the owners' own life in jeopardy. For this reason it was said, "He who buys a slave buys a master". Your other examples are also taken out of context. If you want to understand how Jews ACTUALLY understood and lived these verses you need to study from ancient Jewish sources, such as a Torah with rabbinical commentary. Otherwise your comments are similar to those of a bigot who attacks another culture without knowledge.
voncello 1 month ago
What you like to do is to take what you want from the Bible, and sweep under the rug whatever you don't like or don't want to think about! Stop treating your Tanakh like a buffet! Some of it is beautiful in its idealsm, but I think some of it clearly is not.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz I don't hide anything but clearly we interpret things differently. If I were studying Shakepeare and an Oxford scholar told me that a certain passage was alluding to something else I would say, "Wow. Thanks for letting me know." I think Gentiles should respond the same way when a rabbi explains a Talmudic interpretation. You interpreted Isaiah 11:14 as an uncivilized mob hell bent on vengeance. But that's not what it says. Yes, it talks about war but not as you twisted it.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The Bible prophecies about future wars. You interpret that as uncivil but that's unfair. If the author somehow knew the future should he lie about it? There've always been wars and there probably will be more. Don't you think? But there is a principle in Jewish Bible interpretation that negative prophecies are conditional. They are warnings that can be averted if people allow God's will to prevail. But positive prophecies are guaranteed. The Jews will return and there will be peace!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You've expressed distress at the idea that the Al Aqsa mosque may go. Must a building from a religion that calls non-believers infidels and says they must convert, be humiliated, or killed, stand forever? Why does it matter to you since you aren't a Jew or a Muslim? The Bible states that the Temple will be rebuilt. The Muslims chose to try to thwart this. We'll see if the Bible comes true, but why take sides? Many rabbis believe the Muslims will repent and help build the Temple!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Remember: in those days, the lion will lie down with the lamb! Put your Shakespeare hat on and look beyond the literal meaning of the words to what they symbolize. In the messianic era, when the word of the Lord will cover the earth like the sea, there will be no more war. Read Isaiah "And many people will go and
say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths". Muslims too!
voncello 1 year ago
Yes, there are two Tanakh prophecies for exile (neither referred to as by a neighbour). Isaiah 11:11 explains this:
"In that day, the Lord will reach out his hand a SECOND time to reclaim the remnant of his people from Assyria, Egypt, Babylonia...from the islands.. He will assemble Judah's scattered people”.
The first time was the exodus from Egypt. The second is the return from Assyria (and later, Babylon).
There's no real indication the prophets had a third time in view.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
When I said "two Tanakh prophecies for exile", I meant prophetic references to two separate exiles and returns.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The 1st exile was by Bablyon. The Jews were moved en masse and returned. The 2nd was done by Rome. As prophesied the Jews were "scattered to the four quarters of the earth". There are Jews in virtually every country on earth! Isaiah only embellishes Torah prophecy. "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse" is the messiah. "He will...gather the exiles of Israel". (There are still Jews not in Israel). THEN "the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the LORD". That's Judaism!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, but how will we "be filled with the knowledge of the Lord" through Israel?! Israel is a nation of unbelievers - like the rest! The context of Isaiah 11 suits Israel's return from BABYLON 2500 years ago; it has tribes no longer existent (Ammonites, Edom..). THAT is the "2nd time" (the 1st was either Assyria or Egypt)! The returning Jews "plunder peoples to the East". So, an uncivilised, lawless mob you hope to see return, hellbent on vengeance! Yet these people will bring us wisdom?!
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The Talmud identifies who are the descendants of Ammon, Edom, etc. Of course with inter-marriage the lines are blurred today, but some see these names as indicating certain spiritual mentalities. The reason Isaiah says they will be subdued is on a spiritual level. Christians have a similar belief, that Jesus will come and bring the good people with him to heaven. Isaiah is talking about a type of heaven on earth. The messianic era of peace. Why do you choose to demean this vision?
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz In the same prophecy Isaiah says "The wolf will live with the lamb...The infant will play near the cobra’s den, the young child will put its hand into the viper’s nest. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain for the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the LORD". How do get from this to "an uncivilised, lawless mob you hope to see return, hellbent on vengeance!"? This strikes me as anti-Semitism. Either that or an extreme case of poor reading comprehension!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello: "how you get from this to an uncivilised, lawless mob.."? Well, I QUOTED from Isaiah 11:14!Isaiah's context suits the return from Babylon. However, admittedly, there could be layers of meaning. But let's be clear: What you want to see is the destruction and replacement of the Al Aqsa mosque for the Temple described in Ezekiel? You want ANIMAL SACRIFICE restored and Levitical priestly function? You want the restoration of a Jewish theocracy? Then "the wolf will lie with the lamb".
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Isaiah cannot be talking about the return from Babylon because none of what he said happened then. Did the wolf lie with the lamb? Did the knowledge of the Lord cover the earth? It still hasn't! Clearly this is about messianic times, and that is what the Jews believe.
I personally don't "want" anything. We are reading a BOOK, are we not? I seek only to read it clearly and in accordance with the way those who wrote it and passed it down approve. You are the one who "wants" things!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, the "wolf will lie with the lamb" and the knowledge of God on the earth probably refer to some very futuristic time. IF you want to read the scripture according to those who wrote it, then you would surely want the restoration of the things prophesied: the building of the new Temple (implying the riddance of the Jerusalem Mosque), and the slitting of cattle's throat - their blood smeared on the Temple's altar - to atone for sin such as breaking the Sabbath. Will that make you happy?
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz What do you mean "will that make you happy"? Suppose you wanted to study Shakespeare at Oxford. Should I say "IF you want to read Shakespeare according to those who wrote it (the English) then you surely WANT Romeo and Juliet to die!"
It's not a question of wanting! It's a question of understanding a book according to the intentions of the author. I'd assume a UK scholar might have a better take on Shakespeare than one from another culture. Same with rabbis and the Bible.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Now if we can get beyond accusing each other of "wanting" things, can we get back to trying to figure out together what Isaiah 11 is talking about? Do you agree that the wolf didn't lie with the lamb and the knowledge of the Lord didn't cover the entire earth 2500 years ago when the Jews returned from Babylon? If we can agree Isaiah is talking about the messianic times, then the questions are 1. what does he say will happen, 2. why are you opposed to it? 3. Is the status quo better?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, the wolf lying with the lamb and the knowledge of God lie eons in the future."The lion will eat straw like the ox" (Isaiah 65) belongs to the same futuristic time. Biochemically, it is impossible for lions to digest straw, so don't expect that any time soon! The propecies have no chronology.
I'm sure it will be wonderful if peace fills the world. I'm far less enamoured with the idea of a Jewish theocracy with animal sacrifice, not to mention 613 Mitzvote, all with no "expiry date"!
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Yes, Jews agree that the wolf/lamb stuff hasn't happened yet. For this reason they reject Jesus as the fulfillment of these prophecies. But some things have happened. Israel against all odds is back in Jewish hands, the desert bloomed, etc. Some call this the Birth Pangs of the messiah. What's it your concern if Jews at some point have a kingdom again? You have a monarchy! You have strange customs, like massive surveillance. You "sacrifice" tons of meat for your meat pies! So what!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Seriously, I'd like to know why you choose (and it is a choice) to interpret the Bible in way that makes the Jews look horrible. You must know that Jews do not interpret their Bible that way. They see it as a blueprint that will lead to a world or peace for ALL humanity, where "the wolf will live with the lamb", i.e. all will be at peace. Yet you turn this vision into one where the Jews become a "lawless mob hell bent on vengeance". Why do you do this? Is it hatred? If not, what?
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Say what you will but your interpretation is not accepted by the people who wrote the books, preserved the books, and live by the books - the Jews. Leviticus 26 "those who hate you will rule over you". This indicates that it would be a neighbor. Contrast this with Deut. 28 "The LORD will bring a nation against you from far away". Isaiah is talking about Israel today. "He will gather the exiles of Israel...from the four quarters of the earth." The scattering was done by Rome!
voncello 1 year ago
The recent return (last century) of Jews to Israel is not prophesied in the Bible. Once they had returned from exile in Babylon, they were supposed to have paid the price for their sin. They were supposed to have peace thereafter. Instead, Israel was overcome again and again by militant powers (the Greeks and then the Romans). Another "diaspora" (after Babylon) was not foreseen by the prophets, and hence neither was another return.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You are simply wrong. There are 2 prophesies of exile in the Torah. The first would be done by a neighbor. The second from someone "whose language you do not know". The first was done by Babylon. The second Rome with its foreign language. There are other details that indicate Rome. Furthermore Moses after this second prophecy details the return - how the desert would bloom (as it has) how Jews would be returned on "wings" and most did fly to Israel. Study Judaism with Jews!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, Aramaic was a language the Jews did not know until their deportation to Babylon.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz That is not true. Babylon was a middle east neighbor, and a very powerful one. No one is saying every Jew knew Aramaic but the language was as familiar to them as French is to the English. But Rome was across the Mediterranean and Latin was not known in the middle east. But there are many more identifiers in the prophecies. I wrote a 30 page chapter on this in my book. There is no doubt that the 2 prophecies were about 2 different events proven by dozens of examples.
voncello 1 year ago
I don't want to appear TOO negative about the Tanakh, since there are clearly uplifting passages, such as Pslam 23, the idealism in Isaiah, and others. However, I think that the bulk of the Tanakh is primitive, appalling, and with little truly spiritual or edifying value. That's my experience of reading it with a view to searching for enlightenment or knowledge. What keeps Judaism alive is the solidarity it creates among Jews (many/most of whom unbelievers), which we Gentiles can't appreciate.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz "We Gentiles"? You mean "we Jew-hating Gentiles". The fact is many Gentiles love the Jews and interpret the Bible opposite to the hateful way you do. Look I could quote Jesus when he says "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Matthew 10) and say like you "the (New Testament) is primitive, appalling" etc. Even in Psalm 2: you see it as a call to subjugate and enslave while Jews see it as a call to reach out to others and bring them into morality. You turn love into hate.
voncello 1 year ago
1) @voncello, I try to be a realist! The Tanakh version of "Love they neighbour" (Lev.17) has fellow Jews in mind - not Gentiles (read context). We see a stark distinction in the value or worth between Jews and Gentiles througout the Tanakh.The Father of all mankind would surely value ALL people equally, even if He has a plan to set one ethnic group apart to be an example to others. How can you claim David wanted to "reach out" when he committed atrocities against innocents? Jesus didn't murder!
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Jesus didn't murder but his followers sure did! Ever hear of the Crusades? The Spanish Inquisition? The Pogroms? The Holocaust? All perpetrated largely by his followers. And didn't Jesus say "you will know a tree by its fruit"? Look, anyone can turn anything into something ugly. If you studied Judaism with Jews you would learn that it is immensely loving to gentiles. The whole reason the Jews endure Inquisition and Holocaust is their belief that they will one day save the world!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, yes you are correct about Christian barbarities, and no one tries to deny it.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
2). Did David really have a broad understanding of the term "neighbours"? I will expose what you doubless pretend does not exist! David raided villages and towns for plunder. His cruelty rivalled Mohammed's.
1 Sam. 27:8-11:“Whenever David attacked an area, he did not leave a man or woman alive, but took sheep and cattle...He did not leave a man or woman alive.." He didn't leave survivors lest his actions be exposed. Evidently "Thou shalt not steal/kill" does not apply to Gentiles!
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You always generalize one incident and apply it to all cases. Let's turn the tables:
"In fact, the most glaring cause of the Irish famine was not a plant disease, but England's long-running political hegemony over Ireland. The Irish suffered from many famines under English rule. Like a boxer with both arms tied behind his back, the Irish could only stand and absorb blow after blow." Shall we say then that "thou shalt not steal/kill" doesn't apply to the English? How absurd is this!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, don't forget that Winston Churchill was Adolf Hitler's nemesis! It may not be too wise to blame the Irish famine on the English. There were pleny of ennobled Irishmen with large estates in Ireland who did nothing to help their fellow-Irishmen. The British in England also suffered from the "blight". Doubtless, we could have done more. But more relevant: the English didn't write a book that they claimed was inspired by God and was beyond critique.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The Jews wrote a book 3500 years ago! And yet, thousands of years later, you are insulting the Jews for making money on movies?! Of course you will defend the English against the Irish, but I have Irish friends who tell me that the English are the most cold, calculating, self centered, immoral people on the planet. Some say Churchill opposed Hitler only because he was trying to take power from his English overlords. You don't need a book, in your mind you're already beyond critique.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz What do you think Isaiah 53 is about? "Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God...But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities... and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray...and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." You think this is about Jesus? He was talking about the Jews! We suffered and still do at the hands of folks like you - yet we still we reach out!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, I'm not suret you are right about the Jews "reaching out" to anyone but themselves. Jews do very well in hollywood, though, I see!
When they destroy the Jerusalem mosque to fulfill the prophets, you will see the Tanakh has unleashed Armageddon upon the world, without hope of peace. The true legacy of Judaism will be destruction, until it peters out - as will Christianity. And yes, your interpretation of Isaiah 53 is correct. I understood this years ago. I have left Christianity.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Now you are reaching into the anti-Semites bag of BS with Jews in Hollywood?! Who in Hollywood has the money and power of your queen and her henchmen? Who purposely sets up situations such as between the Jews and Arabs in Israel where both sides are kept off balance so England and her under the table partners can cleverly reap the benefits? You did it in India. You did it in Africa. You were slave traders, mass murderers around the world. And Jews should not make money like you do?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, I don''t think the queen has "henchmen"! Many Jews are proud how Jewry nearly runs Hollywood (I hear it from Jews themsleves), and what a cultural legacy Hollywood really is - lol! Your diatribe against England is a little out of date, isn't it? England abolished slavery a half century before the USA did. We also have many greatmen like Wilberforce. We introduced concepts such as "fair play" to the world, which every civilised language borrows in every day speech.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz There isn't one moral thing you "introduced" that the Jews didn't introduce thousands of years ago! But what is the point of this? Are we to jump into the mud with each other? The fact is, you don't like having your culture insulted and having its virtues twisted into ugliness, and neither do we! So why don't you actually "do unto others and you'd have others do unto you" and stop your bigoted rants against Judaism and Jews. How many more centuries must this nonsense go on?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, your patriarchs only applied the "golden rule" to their own kind, and when it suited them.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz No, that was your patriarchs - like your great King Henry the 8th who killed his wives that didn't bear him a son!! And then he broke from the Church and established his own, and THIS is YOUR church! Congratulations on applying "the golden rule"!
Can we stop this absurd ethnic fighting, you and I? Have you gotten enough hate out today?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, O.K. let's stop, and go in peace. After all, this is your video.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz It doesn't matter that this is my video. I am happy to have conversations that are controversial and delve into difficult subjects. All I ask is that you extend to me basic human respect, as I extend the same to you. When you pick one sentence out of the Bible, interpret it in a way that no Jew would agree with, and then use your misinterpretation as an excuse to make anti-Semitic comments, that is a waste of my time. But if you have legitimate questions I'm all for a good debate.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You are proving once again that those who seize on "slavery in the Bible" or circumcision or some other handle they can try to turn into a club to beat the Jews usually have a deeper anti-Jewish agenda. You have now been exposed with your Hollywood comment as well as your turning passage after passage from love to hate. Yes, for centuries people around the world were beaten down by the likes of you but we have caught on to your game - polite on the surface and hateful inside.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, but why do you pretend the atrocities, which are so common in the Tanakh, don't exist? How can you look to God as "Abba" when Moses, David and the prophet Samuel destroyed the lives of thousands of children, at times on your God's very orders? It just doesn't make sense to me! Just because I expose these things does not make me a Jew-hater. Maybe I love truthfulness.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You don't stop do you? Shall I go back to the English atrocities in India, Arabia, Africa, Asia? You want truthfulness? Look at yourself before you criticize others. All countries fight wars. All kill children on the other side. Here's a secret: even we Americans have done it. And even our leaders have often said that we were doing God's work when we killed others. So stop the diatribe against the Jews, and examine why you have this need to attack them.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, I can admit the atrocities committed by the British or anyone else. But these atrocities I KNOW did not come from God. Understand finally that the Tanakh is as humanly flawed as other books, your patriarchs as flawed as other humans. You have surpassed them, so why take their teachings as divine? True spiritual knowledge can only come from within. Just as you repudiate the idea of stoning ANYONE to death, you can repudiate the yoke of circumcision.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz There is a major difference between Jewish and English "atrocities", the Jews have only ever fought for a tiny piece of land that they believe is theirs. They have never attacked anyone outside of that boundary. The English would also kill anyone who tried to take parts of England away. Look at what they did in the Falklands which was thousands of miles from England! The English have killed and plundered all over the world. The Jews ONLY fought for their land. Big difference.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz I don't repudiate stoning. Watch my video on the subject. Stoning didn't involve throwing stones. It was the most humane form of capital punishment available. More humane than hanging which is still done today in "civilized" countries. Fact is, you know almost nothing about the Bible from the Jewish perspective. Yet you think you can lecture me on "true spiritual knowledge". Before you can teach you need to learn. Yet you seem to think you have some God given superiority.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz One mistake you make, that is common among Christians or ex-Christians, is you assume God must be Jesus-like. The Muslims rejected that idea and portrayed Allah as a mighty warrior. Judaism rejects both portrayals. God is neither a peace & love hippie nor is He a strongman dictator. He is both and more. Certainly the creator of THIS universe isn't adverse to volcanoes, hurricanes, tidal waves and other things that wreak destruction. Yet He also makes rainbows and moonbeams.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz So the point is that there is nothing inconsistent with the idea of God commanding a group of people to kill as long as it is done in a certain way. First and foremost the Jews were never commanded to kill anyone who was not on God's land. And they had to always offer peace first. If a group decided to oppose God's will then of course there would be war and in war people get killed. Yet God said Jewish control of Israel is necessary for world peace, so Jews were fighting for peace!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, no! The Israelites were commanded (supposedly by God) to annihilate the Canaanites: "When the Lord your God shall bring you to the land ..you shall defeat and utterly DESTROY them.."(Deut. 7).
Deut. 10:20 exposes your notion of peace: "As you approach to attack, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates, then all the people inside will serve you in FORCED LABOUR.." Otherwise, they were killed. Would you defend yourself given such terms?
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Weren't the Canaanites on God's land? The whole premise of the Bible is that God has a certain plot of land that He considers His. Christians and Muslims agree that the land of Israel is a "holy land". Therefore it is not up to man what happens on that land. Indeed, God told the Jews that just as He will clear the land of the Canaanites due to their immorality on His land, He would do the same to the Jews if they followed suit. And they did, and He did! But He promised a return too.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, we're all on "God's land" - including you and me! Why would you presume that the command for the Jews to slaughter the Canaanites, to possess the land, was ordained by God rather than man? History repeats itself in every land, e.g. the European incursion into America, with its genocide.
The Hebrews were never held in mass captivity in Egypt anyhow! The exodus account isn't historically valid, as virtually all scholars (including Jews) now believe. There's no record of it in Egypt.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Just a little googling around shows that the Exodus in very much in debate. But be that as it may, according to the Bible (and we are discussing the Bible) Israel is THE holy land. Christians agree. Muslims agree that it is holy but one man said Mecca is more holy and they accept that. Whether or not Israel actually IS holy is open for debate but you must admit that Israel is the ONLY land God told the Jews to fight for. What's England's excuse for trying to colonize the world?
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz You being English must take some pride in Shakespeare. Yet one can also twist his words too:
"Neither a borrower nor a lender be" - don't help others
"This above all: to thine own self be true" - only care about yourself
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" - don't think just do what you want including murdering others
If you find this absurd and twisted, then you now know what you look like to me when you take Bible quotes and twist love into hate.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The bottom line: an intelligent person studies literature from the perspective of the people who wrote it. A bigot takes the writings of another culture, twists them into something horrible, then pompously accuses that culture of immorality.
I would never take Shakespeare and interpret it as preaching hate, then demean the English as immoral! Yet how dare you do this to the Jews. Where do people like you get this disgusting personality trait from? "Love your neighbor "- Leviticus!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz And if you truly want to find "enlightenment or knowledge" from the Tanach study it with Jews! Learn how Jews interpret their own books. A good place to start is to go to a Jewish book store and get a book of the Bible with rabbinic commentary such as those published by Art Scroll. You can also take Bible classes from Jewish outreach groups like Aish HaTorah or Lubavitch. You can also get my book "Beyond Faith". Do you really want to learn or to insult Judaism? That is the question!
voncello 1 year ago
Well, it was interesting discussing this. I doubt we will get further, since I'm pretty sure that neither you nor I can provide further evidence to support our respective positions. Still, I do admit that at least the Torah seems to stipulate that serious injury meted out to slaves shall invalidate their slavery. However, since there was no supervision, it is extremely unlikely that such injury would have resulted in their liberty, unless the owner decided his slave was just "damaged goods".
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Rather than assume the worst wouldn't it make more sense to actually study the Talmud? And I don't mean going to anti-Jewish websites that look for a few quotes to twist and insult. Israel was a small country. There weren't that many Gentile slaves. People usually lived close to others. And many were religious. Isn't it more likely that if a slave was abused people would know? You should examine why you always take the negative against Israel and the Jews. Some say its cultural.
voncello 1 year ago
Your rant that slavery permitted in the Torah is mistranslation or misunderstanding is fallacious. What the Torah DOES do is distinguish between enslaving fellow Jews (to be released after 7 years) and enslavement of Gentiles, who could be enslaved permanently and their children. Your claim disfigurement of a prisoner resulted in their release is unfounded.
Note “the slave is his master’s property” (Ex.21:21). Also: “you may buy male and female slaves from the nations around you” (Lev.25:44).
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz i didn't "rant" and the fact that you lead with this mischaracterization shows your ideas are weak. You said "Your claim disfigurement of a prisoner resulted in their release is unfounded". Here's the evidence:
"If an eved keeper hits the eye of an eved or handmaid and ruins it, the keeper must let the eved go free because of the eye. If the eved keeper knocks out the tooth of the male or female eved, the eved must be released and go free because of the tooth." Exodus 21
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, yes Exodus 21 states as you quoted. However, the passage isn't clear whether it refers to a Hebrew or a foreign slave. Foreign slaves and their posterity were permanent property of the owner's family, except possibly in the case of certain injuries (as Exodus may imply). But who would enforce the release of a foreign slave? The Torah doesn't require a committee of any sort to provide "eveds" with rights, or to supervise at all. How would "eveds" even know of fhis very limited right?
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The same way a foreign worker knows his rights in the US or the EU. Israel was a country with courts and the law was as known to the public there as it is anywhere today. The passage applied specifically to foreign slaves since they were the only ones a Jew could "own". It was a protection of foreign slaves. Jews could face death for this!
Are you aware of the reason the Torah allows a Jew to buy a foreign slave? And are you aware of the reality of what happened to their children?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, you say that eveds would know of their rights in "the same way that a foreign worker knows his rights in the US or EU". Hardly! Almost all foreign slaves would have been illiterate, and although Israel had law courts, I doubt you will find evidence of a single incidence when any Jewish law court intervened on behalf of a foreign slave. They wouldn't have been interested, just as the Torah was not interested in ensuring that the practice of slavery was monitored in any way.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Why do you doubt that? The Torah is unique in its protections of foreigners. The Greeks and Romans called foreigners "barbarians". Yet God tells the Jews over and over again to protect the stranger saying "For you were strangers in the land of Egypt". It's amazing how those with an anti-Jew agenda turn Judaism on its head! There is even whole book that the Jews put into their Bible about God's love of the Gentile. It's called Jonah. I suggest you read it!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz And since you haven't answered my question after several attempts I'll answer it for you. The only reason given for why Jews could buy foreign slaves is that they would eventually be freed. The owner was commanded to teach the slave about Judaism and if he would convert the slave would go free. Most chose this path. But if one didn't still his kids were freed. Now you will say "But that's not what it says" but that's what the Talmud says. There were loopholes that were used!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, the slave owner was NOT commanded or even encouraged to teach the slave Judaism! Where on earth do you get your opinion from? The slave was just "property"! Nowhere does the Tanakh rate the foreign slave higher than property! Please don't presume I am unfamiliar with the Tanakh (although admittedly, I tend to refer to it as the "Old Testament").
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz I have said how many times on this site and the other where we were talking that the Talmud is considered equal in authority to the Torah by Orthodox Jews? The Torah is considered like a bulletin board with broad headings. The Talmud, which is thousands of pages longer, is where the details are discussed. But the Talmud bases its ideas from hints in the actual Torah text. Even wikipedia says, "non-Jewish slaves could be converted to Judaism and then freed".
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz "Your rant that slavery permitted in the Torah is mistranslation or misunderstanding is fallacious." Your comment is fallacious. The word in Hebrew is not "slave" but "eved". And if you look at the way this word is used it is nothing like the way the word slave is used. Slaves have no rights. Eveds have many rights. Slaves can be disfigured and even killed with no consequence. Eveds had to be treated as family members. Slaves have no release date. Eveds generally did. On and on...
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, foreign (Gentile) slaves had almost no rights (although not supposed to be beaten to death or sustain serious injufr). If they did die, no one would have cared. It is acceptable in the Torah to beat them to the extent that they could continue (or survive) after "a day or two". In all other respects, they were "property". There is no case for claiming they were to be treated like family! The children of foreign slaves remained permanently under enslavement.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz From where are you getting your interpretations? I've seen the anti-Jewish websites that spread lies about the Torah and the Talmud that say just what you just said. In fact, the Talmud says that a Jew who killed an eved would face the death penalty. The reason the Torah says an eved must be released if a tooth was broken was because anything more serious would subject the keeper to legal action.
Again I ask if you know why the Torah allows a Jew to buy a foreign slave?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, the Talmud is not considered "divine" scripture by most Jews. Moreover, it was written well after the Tanakh (so by different writers). The Talmud is given a very "rough ride" by critics. By and large, I think it considers Gentiles to have about the same worth as the mud I scrape off my boots! There are CERTAINLY some verses that imply this, although I can't be sure that is the general "spirit" of the Talmud.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Well again, you are spreading anti-Semitic propaganda, and it is getting quite tiring. It says in the Torah that Moses taught the elders and they taught the people. He also appointed judges. Obviously there was an oral tradition that explained the Torah. This is the Talmud. Furthermore the Torah was a living document that could be interpreted by authorities. Judaism is the most embracing of all religions toward others. In Islam and Christianity non-believers go to hell!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Many Reform Jews, who are the majority, don't consider any book divine! They have a Humanist type of view from a Jewish perspective. I keep mentioning the Orthodox because they are the ones who accept the Talmud, and BTW, they are the ones who really study it! Many reformist Jews are about as ignorant of it as Gentiles. It is severely misinterpreted, often purposely, by critics. You'll find neo-Nazi and KKK type sites railing against it. But it is profoundly peaceful and beautiful.
voncello 1 year ago
@psand What makes the Torah any more "divine" than the Talmud? If the most religious Jews say they're equal who are you to say no? Shall we tell the Pope what is Catholic? There's such hubris in Gentles who think they know better about Judaism than Jews themselves! Remember, the same rabbis who put Jonah into the Bible wrote the Talmud! Does it make any sense that those who would put such a loving book to the Gentile in the Bible would see them as "mud"? It's anti-Semitism. Please rise above it.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, it's unlikely that the rabbis who wrote "Jonah" also authored the Talmud, whose oral traditions were written ca. 200 CE. Also, although it has God sending Jonah to preach repentance to Gentiles (Ninehvites), and forgiving them, I don't see it as "a loving book to the Gentile" (it's too singular). Rather, it was written to shame Jews, and provoke jealousy. So, the morale would be: "Look, EVEN Gentiles can repent (and be forgiven); so more shame on JEWS (the elite) for NOT doing so".
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz I didn't say the rabbis wrote Jonah! I said "the same rabbis who put Jonah into the Bible wrote the Talmud". Who do you think decided what books got into the cannon? God? No! It was rabbis! And you think they put in a book to shame the Jews? That's absurd. They put the book in to teach that we must forgive and help our enemies. In fact, Ninevah was an evil city that had violently attacked Jewish civilians. But the rabbis teach that all nations are God's children and need our help!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz The fact that you took away an anti-Jew moral from the book of Jonah - a book that JEWS put into their own Bible - shows you have some serious anti-Jewisn brainwashing in your past. It is not uncommon for gentiles to view the Bible as if it fell from heaven but the reality is that it was written by JEWS, it was compiled by JEWS, it was written about JEWS largely for JEWS! Gentiles like you look to it as an anti-Jewish book but that is twisted and comes from Christian propaganda.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, I concur that the Tanakh is written both for and by the Jews. Despite this, many passages demonstrate God's rebuke of the Jews for sin, and punishment for failure to amend, e.g. Israel's captivity in Babylon. I see the Book of Jonah as primarily an attempt to teach the Jews that if EVEN Gentiles can turn from sin and be forgiven, so how much more should God's elect be able to do so! Also, that God reigns supreme. I don't see it as teaching that Jews have a missionary duty to Gentiles.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Jonah was a Jewish prophet. Nineveh was akin to Nazi Germany (as the Talmud details). Jonah didn't want to help thwart their destruction. He refused to preach repentance to them. According to the story God forced him to go. The moral is clear- you must council even those who hate you. Jews are not to convert Gentiles but clearly they must help them on the path to repentance. It also teaches that we are all God's children! And who wrote this story? JEWS! Give credit where it is due!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Jonah is but one example of the Bible as "a loving book to the Gentile". Have you read Isaiah? "For out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And He shall Judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nations shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” Isaiah was a JEW spreading the JEWISH message of world peace!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, yes good point made from Isaiah! But note the awful contrast with Psalm 2:8-9:
"Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will rule them with an iron sceptre, and dash them to pieces like pottery".
We see no evidence of God's love for the Gentiles there. And of course it remains unfulfilled.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Did you purposely misinterpret that? In context, God said those words to King David. The Psalm begins "The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed". Talmud explains David was praying about the Philistines attempt to destroy him and his people. God comforts him with the line you quoted. But then David councils the kings to "be wise" and "serve the Lord". Like Jonah, David reaches out and councils gentile leaders to repent!
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Actually the Psalm shows the greatness of David. How many leaders even today would reach out to their enemies if God said "Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance...You will rule them with an iron sceptre, and dash them to pieces like pottery"? Most would see this as a green light to ruthlessly kill their opposition and take over the world! But David instead uses this power to urge repentance and reach out to those who hate him and the Jewish message of world peace.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, I think you are deluded in believing David had any desire to "reach out" to enemies or Gentiles. Psalm 2 is about subjugation of the Israelites' neighbouring tribes. Verse 3 alludes to this subjugation or enslavement, as the Canaanites admonish: "Let us break their chains..throw off their fetters". Although, you will retort that this subjugation by Jews was in self-defence, you only hear one side of the story! Israelite brutality even against Canaanite children is chilling to read.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz Wow, I am truly shocked at the anti-Jewish spin you put on the Bible. The chains and fetters that the enemies of the Jews wanted to throw off were the rules of morality such as not sacrificing virgins to idols, not burning babies to Moloch, not raping strangers (as the crowd wanted to do in the story of Lot), of not having sex with your children (Lot), etc. Yet you turn it into Jews wanting to subjugate others. Your interpretations are similar to what I find on neo-Nazi sites.
voncello 1 year ago
@psandbergnz And the proof that David didn't want "subjugation and enslavement" is what he says to the gentile leaders "Therefore, you kings, be wise...serve the LORD with fear and celebrate his rule with trembling." Notice he uses the word Lord, not God. Lord in Hebrew indicates God as the All Merciful. To serve the Lord is to be like Him, to forgive, to be merciful. David is telling them to stop their abusive practices, to become moral and righteous. He is trying to free them from ignorance.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello, Yahweh's hatred of the Canaanites surely reveals He is NOT the creator of the human race! As we see in Deut. 7: "When the Lord your God shall bring you to the land (to possess), ..you shall defeat and utterly destroy them.." There is no directive ever to show the Canaanites (or other tribes) good-will! If God had imparted His eternal Truth to the patriarchs - or had empowered them - they would have had a moral teaching to impart to all. Moses' and David's inhumanity cannot be hid.
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@psandbergnz To the contrary, are you aware of the service the Jews did on Sukkot? They sacrificed 70 bulls in order to ask for forgiveness for the 70 original nations. Even today Jews repeat the words of this service every year and pray for the rest of humanity. Moses instituted this service, David carried it on. The whole idea of the messiah who will come to bring peace to ALL mankind is Jewish. And unlike Jesus, the Jews taught that the righteous (not believers) of ALL nations will be saved!
voncello 1 year ago
SPINNNNNNNNNN alert SPIN alert !!!!!!! ... once again ........
I think he believes he can see into the past :s thats kind of worrying :o
Newevotime1988 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 Pretty easy explanation. My "spin" comes from the Talmud, which was written 2000 years ago by the leading rabbis of Israel. To Jews it is as authoritative as the Torah itself. After all, the same people passed down both. If that is not taking it from horses mouth (so to speak) then I don't know what is.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello Lol has viewing and expeirencing politics taught you nothing ... like ..... Don't believe everything you hear or read because it is most probably a lie ...... just think about that for a bit uh......
Newevotime1988 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 Laughing out loud (LOL) at people is cruel, but it is also what someone writes when they know their position isn't very strong. It's as if pretending to be laughing at someone somehow bolsters your argument, but it doesn't. If you were to study Shakespeare with the leading expert in Shakespeare at Oxford would you not believe what he says because "it is most probably a lie"? If so, your skepticism is so extreme as to be irrational and bound to keep you uneducated.
voncello 1 year ago
My point is that the rabbis who wrote the Talmud were considered the highest authorities on biblical interpretation. I don't see why you would not consider their opinions valid. Certainly they are move valid than yours. After all, you haven't spent years studying Jewish interpretive history, nor do you have any credentials in the field. Of course I don't "believe" that they got everything right. A smart person takes all things with a grain of salt, but you seem to have swallowed the bottle!
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello good... i like being uneducated.... i'm still alive even though im dumb ,,,,, i guess it's because you are older and the only thing you have left is to fill ya head with nonsense...... you gotta admit that filling your head with pointless facts is sort of a waste of time and your life.....
Newevotime1988 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 One man's "pointless facts" is another man's enduring wisdom. You are arguing the benefits of being uneducated. They say ignorance is bliss. If so, you will have a very happy life ahead of you! All the best! :-)
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello Thanks mate and i am sorry that you wasted yours...
Peace.......
Newevotime1988 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 One man's waste is another man's treasure. It says in the Bible that you should "walk humbly with your God". But elsewhere it instructs us to be "ambitious". The rabbis noticed this seeming contradiction and they wisely pointed out that you should be ambitious in good deeds. Try to be the kindest, most loving, most helpful person you can be. In that case you are ambitious for the truly good things and are thereby walking humbly with your God. If that is a "waste" so be it.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello Why do i know to be and am the kindest, most loving, most helpful person i can be without the bible? did you need the bible to make you be all those things? cos i didn't..... so i guess i have a headstart on you ......
Newevotime1988 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 If you are trying daily to be the best person you can be then more power to you. And if others are using the Bible to help them get there, more power to them. I don't generally hear in the secular world much talk about how to be the most moral person you can be. I hear talk about how to be the richest, the slickest, the most powerful, the sexiest, the hippest, the strongest... but rarely do I hear discussions on how to be the kindest & most loving. All things have their values.
voncello 1 year ago
@Newevotime1988 BTW, that's not to say that all religions dwell on morality either. In the case of standard Christianity and Islam it is belief, not deeds that gets you into heaven. In Judaism it is the opposite. Entry into a good afterlife is based solely on your actions. No matter what your beliefs, nationality, culture, etc. heaven is the abode of the righteous. And even if there is no heaven, the rabbis teach that doing acts of kindness benefits you more than the other person anyway.
voncello 1 year ago
Yeah, if anyone disagrees with this whacko Zionist, he'll simply tell them "you haven't read the Bible" or some other lame excuse. Ridiculous.
rearendlover 1 year ago
@rearendlover As you did elsewhere you lead with an insult which immediately let's us know what an uncouth individual you are. Then you say it is ridiculous to bring up the fact that many of the people who insult the Bible have either never read it, or certainly never read the Jewish interpretive literature that was passed down with it that explains it. It's weird that you find it lame that I expect people to actually read books they want to criticize. Who is the real wacko?
voncello 1 year ago
Comment removed
snaebjorn53 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 I am not using an "alternative interpretation" of slavery. The word "slavery" was used by someone who falsely translated the Hebrew word "evid". If you watch the video you will learn that there were laws concerning evids that are totally different than how we define slaves. So the problem is not with me but with whoever made the translation. The fact is, there is no word for evid in the English language.
voncello 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 The way you know slavery and imprisonment was fairer than Gitmo is because there was no imprisonment and no slavery (as we define that word today). If you even broke a tooth of an evid you had to set him free. In most cases evids were your fellow Israelites who needed temporary employment. They had to be treated as family. Certainly you could not torture them. Nowhere does the Bible allow torture.
voncello 1 year ago
you haven't read the bible,so you do agree they where muderers
sheppaul 1 year ago
@sheppaul Your comment makes no sense. I have read the Bible many times and in great depth. Murder is a legal term for when an individual kills another individual in an illegal way. The Bible not only condemns murder, "Thou shalt not murder", but it was probably the first book in history to do so.
voncello 1 year ago
I bascially agree with snaebjorn53 ,what makes you think they were better people,they murdered,raped ,and performed human sacrifice.how do you think they treated people they owned, in reality
sheppaul 1 year ago
@sheppaul Show me the chapter and verse where the Jewish people "performed human sacrifice". You can't and that proves you are full of it. Your other charges are also false. Do your homework next time.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello for one thing it is all myth these stories are as real as greek myth.Which charges are false that jewsaccording to the bible raped anmurdered at the orders of Moses and Joshua,killing babies in the womb and then there is Judges 11 with Jephthah so I can human sacrifice! haha
sheppaul 1 year ago
@sheppaul The Jews were NEVER ordered to rape. Rape is against the commandments. So is murder. You are misinterpreting something. Give me the chapter and verse. As for Judges 11, where does it say there was a human sacrifice?
voncello 1 year ago
bull s**t
sheppaul 1 year ago
@sheppaul Would you care to elaborate? Or is that all you have to say?
voncello 1 year ago
from sheppaul ,why are you screening,truth hurts
sheppaul 1 year ago
@sheppaul No the truth heals. The truth is in the video not in your comments that are based on no knowledge but pure bias.
voncello 1 year ago
If the Bible says "If", then it means their law says it is ok to sell daughters, beat slaves to near death, and use these people as they wish because they have become commodities. Your comment "so what" suggests you dismiss the atrocity of slavery?
How can one man own another when he cannot even own himself?
As for interpretation, the Hebrew scriptures have been interpreted, interpolated and edited many times since being written. Which truth is the real truth?
snaebjorn53 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 Be fair: nowhere does it say you can "use these people as you wish". There were strict laws protecting "eveds". When you refer to my comment "so what" I have no idea where I said that. You have to either reply to a comment itself or quote what you are referring to. The real truth of the Hebrew scriptures has been passed down in Hebrew by the Hebrew people! The Talmud is the main body of books, along with other commentaries by Maimonides, Rashi, etc. Also the Kabbalah, Zohar, etc.
voncello 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 I just did a search of this whole page and there is no comment where I said "so what". Please do your research before "quoting" me and don't make up quotes that I didn't say. I'm quite careful with my words. Thanks.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello Ok, your video title says "what's up with that", same meaning.
Yes, slavery was common in Biblical times, and if you own a commodity, then surely you can do what you wish, I didn't necessarily mean inflict physical suffering by that, just that the slave owner has complete control of another human's life which is abhorrently cruel in any language or any era.
Your comment I refer to implies you disregard the concept of slavery, which most people consider repugnant.
snaebjorn53 1 year ago
@snaebjorn What's up with that has an entirely different meaning than so what. So what implies no big deal. What's up with that is a question meaning "Can that be true?" And I spend my video showing how the ways the Hebrew word "eved" are used are much different than the English word slave. Ex. you can kill, torture, sexually abuse, a slave but not so for an eved. An eved in most cases would go free at a specified time, you could agree to become an eved, etc. no so with slaves.
voncello 1 year ago
There are many passages in the Jewish scriptures which state that slaves are property. Owners can beat them to near death. If a slave is given a wife and they have kids, the wife and children are still property of the slave owner. Slaves should be set free after six years, but only if they are Jewish.
Slavery was common in Biblical times, property with no rights as free people.
I'm curious as to how you interpret the murders and rape in the OT, do you excuse these atrocities too?
snaebjorn53 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 Look closer. There is no place where it says, "An owner can beat his slave to death". People read English translations with an agenda to find something evil and then they interpret things in negative ways that were not intended to be negative. The passage says, "IF a man beats his slave". "If" is interpreted to mean "In the event". So if you read this more like a lawyer (and this is a book of Jewish LAW) then it's actually offering the "eved" protections in the event he's hit.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello
Leviticus 25:44-46 "Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever"
snaebjorn53 1 year ago
@snaebjorn Here you cite the one case that is closet to actual slavery. The other cases concern POW's, criminals, and domestic work situations. Yes, in those days slavery was common. The Torah was written to apply to that time period but it was to be a living document. The US allowed slavery too but the law evolved. Jewish law did the same. But even in biblical times the object was to convert the slave to Judaism at which point by law he would go free which isn't true of modern slavery.
voncello 1 year ago
@snaebjorn53 did you listen to a single thing he said during this video? Don't comment on something you don't comprehend.
okisoba 1 year ago
@voncello 3(4/4)
"I frankly don't care what the original Hebrew word is for this concept, because we have an English word which describes it perfectly in any context. That word is SLAVERY. Ergo, The bible advocates slavery. QED"
- Me.
Use any word you want. Call it "Taco Supreme" if you like. Hell, invent an entirely new word. Let's call owning and beating people "flarge". The bible does in fact advocate flarge, Taco Supreme, and slavery. Your semantic dance does NOTHING to alter that fact.
Skullpudding 1 year ago
@Skullpudding What is the point of our conversation? Did you watch my video or not? I explained various ways that the Hebrew word "eved" is used. Sometimes it is used for prisoners of war, sometimes for convicted criminals, sometimes for a domestic work situation, and sometimes for something more similar to our current concept of slavery, but even then a relative could simply buy you back, a gentile could convert and then be freed, etc. indicating something other than the modern word "slave".
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello 3(3/4)
"(gay = homosexual, tell = count) ... I hope you will concede my point"
- Yes, I concede without argument that words follow trends, and that their usage evolves. I do not concede your unsupported claim that the bible doesn't advocate slavery. Again, you're arguing semantics. And though this is the only premise you've offered to support your claim, it simply has nothing to do with the thesis of your video.
I'll restate my position, since it seems to go unchallenged:
(cont'd)
Skullpudding 1 year ago
@Skullpudding You can call it "trends" but there are words today that have the exact opposite meaning of what they once meant. I cited bravery as an example. It once meant the same as bravado - a pretense of bravery, and now it means the opposite, actual bravery. My argument is not unsupported. I am expressing the STANDARD Jewish interpretation of the Jewish Bible as passed down by the Jews in the Talmud. In fact, it is you who are promoting an unsupported interpretation, unsupported in Judaism.
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello 3(2/4)
"You also accused me of dishonesty without even asking me to explain my position!"
- No, I accused you of dishonesty IN RESPONSE to a position you've made numerous dishonest arguments for. You argued semantics and invoked colloquialism to argue that biblical slavery somehow doesn't qualify as slavery. I maintain that your methods have thus far been entirely dishonest.
"How rude and crude!"
- I didn't call you names. I made a founded assertion. Grow up.
Skullpudding 1 year ago
@Skullpudding It is crude and rude to accuse someone of dishonesty when you don't even know what they think. That indicates a hostility. I find it disturbing to try to speak rationally with people who are irrationally hostile. If you watched and understood my video you'd already know that there are many meanings of the Hebrew word translated as "slave". Ex. you can offer yourself to a family to work for them for a specified period of time. Is that your definition of slavery?
voncello 1 year ago
@voncello 3(1/4)
"Jews are (able) to see things from many angles. You (have) a very narrow way of thinking..."
- To recap: Jews are superior thinkers and I'm close-minded, incapable of free thought. What a well-written ad hominem attack. But you completely failed to address my assertions.
No sir, I'm a critical thinker, thank you. I do contend, however, that you're quite unable to consider any alternate viewpoint, as you've demonstrated in every conversation on this video's page.
Skullpudding 1 year ago
@Skullpudding I'm surprised you took what I said that way. You misinterpreted my positive comment and turned it negative. You do the same with the Bible. In this case I meant that Jews are taught as part of their religion to see things from many angles. Ex. in most religions you are taught that there is one way to God and one way to understand scripture. In Judaism you are taught that there are many ways to God and the Torah was intentionally written on many levels. There's no superiority here!
voncello 1 year ago