In english, the holy books of ALL religions are subject to translation problems.

[AVG-JOE]

In my humble opinion.

Doesn't mean God's not real and it doesn't mean some Monkeys don't experience God through silver crosses and ancient stories.

Anything truly is possible. Anything.

 

[Indeependent]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

 

[BluePhantom]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

 

[Indeependent]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

Would you please provide a concrete example from The Torah or Prophets?

 

[BluePhantom]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

Let me just follow up on this concept a bit and give a historical example. One of the books of the Bible that I have studied the most is the book of Hebrews. Actually The Revelation is really my strength and where I would say I am strongest in REALLY understanding what the author was saying, but Hebrews is a close second.

Hebrews is not a letter like most of the New Testament. It is a sermon. It is totally unique in the Bible because it is probably the oldest sermon we have in the historical record. When you read Hebrews it sounds terribly anti-Semitic and indeed, Hebrews has been used historically to tear the living shit out of the Jews and justify Christian oppression of Jews. But that's not what the author was getting at. That was not his goal.

We know from what is written in Hebrews that it was written before the destruction of the Second Temple and it was after Paul. Thus Hebrews was PROBABLY written during the reign of Nero. Now Nero was brutal to Christians for a lot of reasons that I won't go into...but what the Christian Church was experiencing was a lot of apostasy Christians were getting slaughtered by Nero. There are even accounts of him using Christians as torches to light his courtyards when he had parties at night.

As a result a lot of Gentiles who had converted to Christianity wanted to avoid getting killed by Nero and so there was a flood of conversions from Christianity to Judaism. The idea was that since they both worshiped the same God, and Jews were not being killed, that a Christian could convert to Judaism, worship God and be protected from Nero's oppression.

Hebrews is a sermon that argues that you should not do that. It argues that you should stay within the Christian faith regardless of the threat of martyrdom and it gives arguments as to why converting to Judaism from Christianity will not save you. The arguments made by the author are predictably based in the the concept that Christianity is the next step in God's Covenant with man and thus, converting to Judaism rejects that New Covenant which invalidates the sacrifice of Christ.

Now when you read it in that context it makes perfect sense. But when you ignore the Sitz Im Leben...boy it sounds like the author is saying "fuck the Jews!!!" And as I said...historically Hebrews has been used as a basis for a HUGE amount of Christian anti-Semitism throughout the ages.

So this is a great example....many people read the Bible today and try to place it in the modern age. That is a mistake. You will get the totally wrong idea. You have to understand what was going on at the time and what the author was relating to and THEN you might find some parallels that can be applied to today

 

[AVG-JOE]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

 

[BluePhantom]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

Would you please provide a concrete example from The Torah or Prophets?

well read what I jusat posted about Hebrews...granted...not Torah or the Prophets but its a good example that I think will make my point clear...and frankly I am about to go to bed. 5:00 AM comes early. Read what I posted about Hebrews and we can pick it up tomorrow.

 

[HaShev]

Hebrew has 3 letters that express sounds not made in english. The Ch from Chanukah is a sound I can't make, no matter how hard I try.

A well placed popcorn kernel shell in the back of your throat will help solve that.

 

[Indeependent]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

What you are posting has ZERO basis in Judaism...ZERO...as in NONE.
What you are posting has a very strong basis in The New Testament and The Koran.

 

[BluePhantom]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

What you are posting has ZERO basis in Judaism...ZERO...as in NONE.
What you are posting has a very strong basis in The New Testament and The Koran.

I would agree with Independent's assessment. The things you refer to Joe are central to Christianity and Islam but not Judaism so much. Yes we all worship the same God but we relate to Him differently. Just because it is the same God that doesn't mean that the message, as we receive it, is the same to our human understanding

 

[HaShev]

Yeah in Judaism there is no literal hell, life is either a paradise or a curse through choice. Hell is a described path we choose stepping outside the path and kingdom concept of paradise life progressed and made perfect.
This is why it's described as a place outside the walls
of Shalem the kingdom, the outter wall where trash was dumped ans decaying burning mess heap, as we see in war torn areas and places that do not progess to become complete and whole (Shalem).
So if you make the wrong choices and support the wrong philosophies, and don't listen to guided help from the place that knows our outcome, then you have the answer to why the world is a mess and full of suffering. The act of bringing order out of chaos, doing mitzvahs, guiding the path to Shalem is in your best interest. It is meant to bring you where you could and should be, from out of that trash heap and back into the Kingdom of Shalem.

 

[BluePhantom]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

Ok lets start here...there are many pathways to God and, speaking for myself, I am not convinced that one way is the right way. We all relate to God on many levels; as a community, as individuals, as couples perhaps, but I think that HOW you relate to God is not as important as THAT you relate to God.

I am getting the strong feeling, for example, that Independent is a Jew. I am a Christian. That does not mean he is wrong or the way he relates to God is invalid. It just means we have found different paths to God. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all based off the same concept. Historically Jews and Christians have had some power struggles but I think that day is done...the ruffled feathers have been plucked. I can speak only for myself but I think of Jews as brothers and sisters in God. It's like that sibling you love to argue with but still love...you have the same parents and you can squabble among yourself, but God forbid anyone else fucks with them...you know?

I really wish Islam would mature enough to join the brotherhood that I believe Judaism and Christianity have forged...there are Biblical reasons why it hasn't happened and probably wont, but assuming Independent is a Jew (which I am assuming he is) I would feel safe is asking for his validation....are not Christians and Jews brothers in God despite the different ways we relate to Him? Have Christians and Jews not formed a pact of support and brotherhood? I can see how someone may disagree with that conclusions, but that's how I see it. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Muslims could join the Abrahamic brotherhood and quit being dicks and work with us? Sheesh...Isaac and Ismail and dead man...get over it

But you know...it's not the Jews' fault. They are not the extremists blowing shit up and acting the ass. Christians and Jews, I believe, disagree but are family nonetheless. The Muslim extremists...ugh. You know what a Christian extremist does? He pickets. Know what a Jewish extremist does? He judges. Know what a Muslim extremist does? Blows shit up and kills as many people as he can.

Seriously...how are we supposed to let these jack asses into the family? They are like the drunk uncle that no one wants to acknowledge.

 

[Indeependent]

Yeah in Judaism there is no literal hell, life is either a paradise or a curse through choice.

Well, un, nope!
Your soul is what you make of it and is in constant flux.
There are an almost infinite number of levels your soul can achieve; only God is infinite.
When you pass away, your soul is in direct contact with it's source...God.
How comfortable you will be in that situation is what you make of it in this life.
If God decides you can do better, you will be infused in another material form, inanimate, animate, animal, human or whatever other manner God deems for you to have a better existence away from your physical form.
You may even be combined with another soul to achieve more.
This is a simple explanation, but is far removed from Black & White.

 

[BluePhantom]

Yeah in Judaism there is no literal hell, life is either a paradise or a curse through choice.

Well, un, nope!
Your soul is what you make of it and is in constant flux.
There are an almost infinite number of levels your soul can achieve; only God is infinite.
When you pass away, your soul is in direct contact with it's source...God.
How comfortable you will be in that situation is what you make of it in this life.
If God decides you can do better, you will be infused in another material form, inanimate, animate, animal, human or whatever other manner God deems for you to have a better existence away from your physical form.
You may even be combined with another soul to achieve more.
This is a simple explanation, but is far removed from Black & White.

the way you describe it I think I am probably more Jewish than Christian...except that I think Jesus was the Messiah....and don't lecture me about the Messianic prophecies....i already know

 

[Indeependent]

Yeah in Judaism there is no literal hell, life is either a paradise or a curse through choice.

Well, un, nope!
Your soul is what you make of it and is in constant flux.
There are an almost infinite number of levels your soul can achieve; only God is infinite.
When you pass away, your soul is in direct contact with it's source...God.
How comfortable you will be in that situation is what you make of it in this life.
If God decides you can do better, you will be infused in another material form, inanimate, animate, animal, human or whatever other manner God deems for you to have a better existence away from your physical form.
You may even be combined with another soul to achieve more.
This is a simple explanation, but is far removed from Black & White.

the way you describe it I think I am probably more Jewish than Christian...except that I think Jesus was the Messiah....and don't lecture me about the Messianic prophecies....i already know

The Messianic prophecies are actually quite misinterpreted even by Jews.
First of all, most Frum Jews don't really sit down and learn Prophets or Writings; whatever they get, they get from learning Talmud.
The most important facet of Prophecy (which actually is a future form of the Hebrew word Bow and means, "to enter") is that only Moshe's prophecy was crystal clear.

The Messianic prophecies are expressions of God's desire for mankind to behave in a Godly manner; they are NOT to be taken literally.
Prophecy is intended to influence each generation to behave in a manner behooving Devine Influence.
In fact, Moshe himself, near the end of his life, exhorted the Children of Israel that they would abandon God and God would scatter them across the face of the earth.
People would consider that to be punishment, but in fact, it isn't intended to be so.
Jews have historically looked damn good compared to everybody else and we have tried to spread the message that God loves non-Jews also.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

What you are posting has ZERO basis in Judaism...ZERO...as in NONE.
What you are posting has a very strong basis in The New Testament and The Koran.

Which matters not one iota, ass-u-me-ing The God who inspired those stories is the real deal.

If God is, either the ancient stories are His project or they're not. I'm betting not.

I'm betting my eternal life that if God is, She finds them as naive and incomplete as I do.​

 

[OZman]

I'm betting my eternal life that if God is, She finds them as naive and incomplete as I do.

I always thought that scripture was to be perceived allegorically. Looked at this way, maybe they are complete.



Psalm 78:2-3
1 A maskil of Asaph. Hearken, my people, to my instruction, extend your ear to the words of my mouth. I shall open my mouth with a parable; I shall express riddles from time immemorial. That we heard and we knew them, and our forefathers told us.

 

[BluePhantom]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

Would you please provide a concrete example from The Torah or Prophets?

Ok so I have just a few moments here before work to give an example of Sitz Im Leben as it relates to Torah. Let's take Deuteronomy 25 which mandates that a brother should marry his brother's widow if she is without a son. There were a lot of reasons why this was done that were applicable to antiquity but no longer are necessary. Just two quick ones out of many was that it helped with the problem of providing wives. It's a common myth that all Jewish men in antiquity were expected to be married. It's historically implausible because so many women died in childbirth. There just wasn't enough women to go around because they died so frequently.

But more important was that sons were required to care for their mothers in old age. There were no retirement plans, no social security, etc. A widowed woman who reached old age without a son was doomed to a life of begging, prostitution, or similar dismal circumstances. So that mandate was put in to ensure, in part, that the woman would be taken care of in old age.

There are other reasons of course and Torah lays them out, but that's an example of Sitz Im Leben as it applies to Torah. Without that historical context, it can seem really twisted and to the modern eye it's a pretty off the wall concept. For their setting in life it made perfect sense.

Ok time to go to work

 

[Indeependent]

The King James version, the authoritative bible for the largest group did not argue it was the end all, but it gave the best flavor. It went to the greek and aramaic texts, and in the old testament especially tried to keep the poetry rather than painful accuracy.

Keeping painful accuracy is horribly difficult. From the first word, which is in a conjugation impossible in english, they recognised they would have problems. And then it gets worse.

Actually it's a lot worse than you think. Yes, there are a lot of concepts that get lost in translation but there are entire genres of thought that have been lost to history. Understanding ancient Jewish Apocalypticism is vital in understanding what the New Testament (and especially The Revelation) is talking about. Understanding the cultural norms and historical context is vital to understanding what a given author was trying to say and the point he was trying to make.

It's what scholars call "sitz Im Leben' or "setting in life". If you ignore the culture of the times and what was happening at the time, you might see what was written but put it in the totally wrong context and draw the totally wrong conclusion. Just as a very simplistic, but easy to understand example, consider the recent surge of college assholes...er I mean student activists (did I say assholes? Sorry) who are demand that buildings and monuments to America's founding fathers be destroyed or re-named because they happened to be slave owners. What they overlook is the Sitz Im Leben. They condemn these men for their actions and beliefs but they don't keep in mind the culture or the state of society. They overlook what was happening at the time and ignore the complexities of the situation. They thrust 21st century morality on 18th century men and disregard the social, economic, and cultural aspects of a society 200+ years ago in favor of their own model of how the world should work and should have worked.

The same happens with the Bible. People read and think the author is writing for them...TODAY....in this setting...in this culture....in this environment. That was not the author's goal. No one writes something and says 'wow this will all make sense and be totally applicable in 2,000 years'. . They were writing for their time and for the issues facing then at that time.

We err badly when we forget the Sitz Im Leben and try to make it directly applicable to current life.

Would you please provide a concrete example from The Torah or Prophets?

Ok so I have just a few moments here before work to give an example of Sitz Im Leben as it relates to Torah. Let's take Deuteronomy 25 which mandates that a brother should marry his brother's widow if she is without a son. There were a lot of reasons why this was done that were applicable to antiquity but no longer are necessary. Just two quick ones out of many was that it helped with the problem of providing wives. It's a common myth that all Jewish men in antiquity were expected to be married. It's historically implausible because so many women died in childbirth. There just wasn't enough women to go around because they died so frequently.

But more important was that sons were required to care for their mothers in old age. There were no retirement plans, no social security, etc. A widowed woman who reached old age without a son was doomed to a life of begging, prostitution, or similar dismal circumstances. So that mandate was put in to ensure, in part, that the woman would be taken care of in old age.

There are other reasons of course and Torah lays them out, but that's an example of Sitz Im Leben as it applies to Torah. Without that historical context, it can seem really twisted and to the modern eye it's a pretty off the wall concept. For their setting in life it made perfect sense.

Ok time to go to work

Part of the mitzvah was for the surviving brother who was going to acquire the widow was an absence of lust.
All Ashkenaz Jews are mandated to perform chalitzah to avoid this issue.
Sefardim can still perform yibum.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I don't believe that the family of Abraham was or is 'special'.

That's the unforgivable sin that will send me straight to hell, ass-u-me-ing The God of Abraham as defined in those popular ancient story books is the real deal.

Your experiencing God after your body ceases to function has nothing to do with Abraham, it has to do with whether or not you're a person who provides benefit to God's universe.
I presume you do.

The answer to your question depends on how you define 'God'.

As I said, I believe that The God of Abraham, who demands that we serve Him via Judaism, if you were born lucky, or, if your blood says 'gentile', pick a pathway laid out by Saul or by Mohammad, and, if you pick wrong, you're fucked in the forever here-after just because.

Any experience based in reality that I might have with that particular God would be surprising, at least to me.

Your assessment is incorrect...a non-Jew is required to follow the 7 Noachide Laws which are pretty much practiced by all civilized people.
There is not one reference in any Jewish Scripture or Rabbinical literature that damns a good non-Jew to Hell or Purgatory or any other such nonsense.
Only false religions need damn non-adherents.

Details.

I'm speaking from a more big-picture point of view.

Like I said, if any of the religions, cults or sects that claim to have a pathway to The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Qu'ran, are even somewhat based in reality, a pit of everlasting fire awaits many, ass-u-me-ing the stories teaching behavior above words are part of that truth.

So... Assuming that The God who inspired the stories is real, what difference does it make if 'this' or 'that' expression made it through history in a particular story?

Ok lets start here...there are many pathways to God and, speaking for myself, I am not convinced that one way is the right way. We all relate to God on many levels; as a community, as individuals, as couples perhaps, but I think that HOW you relate to God is not as important as THAT you relate to God.

I am getting the strong feeling, for example, that Independent is a Jew. I am a Christian. That does not mean he is wrong or the way he relates to God is invalid. It just means we have found different paths to God. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all based off the same concept. Historically Jews and Christians have had some power struggles but I think that day is done...the ruffled feathers have been plucked. I can speak only for myself but I think of Jews as brothers and sisters in God. It's like that sibling you love to argue with but still love...you have the same parents and you can squabble among yourself, but God forbid anyone else fucks with them...you know?

I really wish Islam would mature enough to join the brotherhood that I believe Judaism and Christianity have forged...there are Biblical reasons why it hasn't happened and probably wont, but assuming Independent is a Jew (which I am assuming he is) I would feel safe is asking for his validation....are not Christians and Jews brothers in God despite the different ways we relate to Him? Have Christians and Jews not formed a pact of support and brotherhood? I can see how someone may disagree with that conclusions, but that's how I see it. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Muslims could join the Abrahamic brotherhood and quit being dicks and work with us? Sheesh...Isaac and Ismail and dead man...get over it

But you know...it's not the Jews' fault. They are not the extremists blowing shit up and acting the ass. Christians and Jews, I believe, disagree but are family nonetheless. The Muslim extremists...ugh. You know what a Christian extremist does? He pickets. Know what a Jewish extremist does? He judges. Know what a Muslim extremist does? Blows shit up and kills as many people as he can.

Seriously...how are we supposed to let these jack asses into the family? They are like the drunk uncle that no one wants to acknowledge.

Or...........putting it simpler, all paths lead to the top of the mountain. Some come from the north, some the south, some the east, and some the west, but all paths will eventually get you to the top of the mountain. Some are easier than others as well.

Me? I think that God is too big to be contained by just one dogma or belief system, and because of that, if you look at all of the major religions (even Buddhism), there are a lot of similarities, so you look for the similarities rather than the differences, and you'll get a lot farther.