The 'New' Number One Reason We Know there is No God . . . :D

[Danmark]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re ... traditions lists a very length assemblage of religions and cultures. I submit it is woefully incomplete. It is a fair assumption that the only ones that made it on the list are one's we have historical references to. This assertion is self defining. We can assume there were/are thousands more we are not aware of.

The question for debate is, "Why is YOUR particular version of "God" correct and the tens of thousands, or millions, of others wrong?

[Divine Insight]

Or will you just ignore the challenge, refuse to acknowledge it, and pretend it wasn't issued, as you did just now?

(Sorry about the font change. I just wanted to make sure you SAW it. Let's not ignore it this time, OK?)

It's a totally irrelevant challenge Charles.

I'll concede that there are books out there written by modern day Jews who are attempting to make a case that their modern views of Judaism are the same views held by ancient Jews.

That's not the point Charles. I would disagree with those authors in the very same way that I'm disagreeing with you right now.

Who are they to makes such claims? They are just modern day people with an opinion.

My counter-argument is quite simple. These ancient texts are clearly stating that they are the directives, and commandments of a God. You can argue that they shouldn't be taken "literal" until you turn blue in the face. That doesn't change the fact that this is indeed what they literally say.

Moreover, allow me to embrace your modern day veiw and accept that your modern day view of Judaism is correct.

What is the ultimate conclusion then? And here I will use your larger font for my main point as well:

The ultimate conclusion must necessarily be that the Jews don't believe that their Bible has anything to do with the directives of any God.

And I say that if this is the case then it shouldn't even be deemed to be a religion. Moreover if the Jewish Bible isn't the directives and commandments of any God why is it being used as the foundational sacred Holy Book of Judaism?

In short Charles, I'm saying that I don't buy into your argument (or the argument of modern Jews) if this is their argument.

The ancient texts clearly claim to be the directives and commandments of a God being given to Moses, and this God is directing Moses to pass this information on to the people. That's the story.

All you are telling me is that modern day Jews have come to reject these very stories as having been the directives of any God.

So your "Challenge" is meaningless to me. Even if I grant you your position all this tells me is that Judaism is a joke and it has nothing to do with directives or the moral authority of any God by the Jews own confession.

At that point I don't even see any reason to put the word "Judaism" in the same sentence with the word "Religion" unless the sentence reads, "Judaism is NOT a religion".

[Danmark]

I think we all pretty much know who the anti-theistic zealots are on this forum. Just look at those who start the majority of threads here.

That's a bit like deciding whether chocolate or vanilla tastes better, strictly based on the "facts." Faith (or lack thereof) is a subjective matter of the heart. The facts can be interpreted in numerous ways, and our interpretations tell us what sort of person we are.

Christianity has been adopted by more people in more cultures on more continents and in more languages and across more socio-economic-ethnic boundaries than any other faith tradition.

Religion also shapes cultures, so it cannot be "purely a creature of culture."

"Anti-theistic zealot" sounds both vague and pejorative. In any event upon reflection I would expect you would agree it is a clumsy measure. If it were a net, I expect it would catch as many dolphins as tuna.

Do you really think being religious is a matter of taste? I agree it is a subjective choice, but also one that can be greatly influenced by an attempt to take an objective view of the facts, tho' that is an admittedly difficult ideal. In any event, we know beyond little doubt, that the culture one grows up in is the most influential factor in the religion one follows. This is why your ad populum argument has no force, whether it applies to Christianity or Islam.

All elements of culture interact with and influence each other, that does not mean that each element, e.g. religion, is not simply one of those elements.

[EduChris]

..."Anti-theistic zealot" sounds both vague and pejorative...

Okay, perhaps I should just say, "Those whose primary goal on this forum is not to understand, but rather to attack and demean."

...being religious...can be greatly influenced by an attempt to take an objective view of the facts...

But the means we use in deciding what counts as an "objective fact" is already determined by the worldview we have adopted. For someone who has adopted a secular worldview, "the facts" will necessarily differ from "the facts" as seen by one with a theistic worldview.

...the culture one grows up in is the most influential factor in the religion one follows...

And yet Christianity, more than any other religion, has been adopted by more cultures across more eras and geographical regions than any other worldview. In other words, Christianity, more than any other religion, has been most successful in reaching out and embracing a diversity of cultures.

[Danmark]

..."Anti-theistic zealot" sounds both vague and pejorative...

Okay, perhaps I should just say, "Those whose primary goal on this forum is not to understand, but rather to attack and demean."

...being religious...can be greatly influenced by an attempt to take an objective view of the facts...

But the means we use in deciding what counts as an "objective fact" is already determined by the worldview we have adopted. For someone who has adopted a secular worldview, "the facts" will necessarily differ from "the facts" as seen by one with a theistic worldview.

...the culture one grows up in is the most influential factor in the religion one follows...

And yet Christianity, more than any other religion, has been adopted by more cultures across more eras and geographical regions than any other worldview. In other words, Christianity, more than any other religion, has been most successful in reaching out and embracing a diversity of cultures.

Good points, all. I don't disagree with any this, tho' the adoption of Christianity by other cultures and subcultures is a two way street. Christianity is modified by culture, not that that is necessarily a bad thing.

Re: purposes of debaters, I'll confess some of mine. I like to find the harmony, the points of agreement shared by religions, rather than their points of disagreement. I have more respect for the archetypal religion than the tribal. I think that what should be attacked is faulty thinking and bad assumptions. I think fundamentalism should be attacked, not fundamentalists. And I confess to having little tolerance for those who hide behind religion to foster or justify their prejudices that oppress or otherwise harm others.

[Zzyzx]

.

...Do you have some evidence that "the high level of emotional vehemence exhibited by many non-theist posters" actually exists...

I think we all pretty much know who the anti-theistic zealots are on this forum. Just look at those who start the majority of threads here.

Labeling opponents of one's religious claims, stories and statements as "anti-theistic zealots" displays emotionalism and defensiveness. The "anti-theistic zealots" as those who effectively challenge religionist claims, stories and statements – requesting that professions of knowledge concerning supernatural entities and events be shown to be true and accurate.

Lacking ability to verify knowledge claims many Theists resort to labeling, personal comments, and other diversionary tactics – rather that honorably debating the topic at hand.

Notice that the OP question is "Why is YOUR particular version of "God" correct and the tens of thousands, or millions, of others wrong?

...or exists at a level greater than that of theists?...

The point is that the subject is an emotional one for many, regardless of which side of the fence they're on.

Those on the theistic side of the fence tend to have great emotional attachment to and investment in their beliefs.

Refusal to believe the tales and claims of religion does not require emotion – but discernment, judgment, critical / analytical thinking.

...Theists have been banned here at a much higher rate than non theists due to their refusal to follow the rules, generally about making personal attacks...

Well, that's one explanation...

Is there another credible explanation for the preponderance of theists among those banned?

...To me the question of whether this theistic God exists is primarily factual...

That's a bit like deciding whether chocolate or vanilla tastes better, strictly based on the "facts." Faith (or lack thereof) is a subjective matter of the heart. The facts can be interpreted in numerous ways, and our interpretations tell us what sort of person we are.

Let's apply that to gravity – which says that if one steps off a high cliff they will fall until stopped by objects below. How can that "fact" be "interpreted" in numerous ways?

...As to why most theistic traditions have 'died out' I suggest it is because their cultures have died out...

Christianity has been adopted by more people in more cultures on more continents and in more languages and across more socio-economic-ethnic boundaries than any other faith tradition.

So what? Does the number of people or cultures or geographic distribution insure that a belief is truthful and accurate?

...Religion is purely a creature of culture...

Religion also shapes cultures, so it cannot be "purely a creature of culture."

Religion cannot influence a culture until it has been adopted or created / invented by a culture.

[cnorman18]

Or will you just ignore the challenge, refuse to acknowledge it, and pretend it wasn't issued, as you did just now?

(Sorry about the font change. I just wanted to make sure you SAW it. Let's not ignore it this time, OK?)

It's a totally irrelevant challenge Charles.

I disagree; but it apparently IS one that you don’t care to face…

I'll concede that there are books out there written by modern day Jews who are attempting to make a case that their modern views of Judaism are the same views held by ancient Jews.

I don’t think so. That would be very strange. For one thing — I’m getting rather accustomed to saying this — I never said that. In point of fact, I’ve VERY often said the direct opposite — that Judaism has changed and developed throughout the centuries, as we believe it was SUPPOSED to.

See, even in your speculations about what you might encounter if you ever bothered to read one of these books, you are wildly and bizarrely wrong.

That's not the point Charles. I would disagree with those authors in the very same way that I'm disagreeing with you right now.

Who are they to makes such claims? They are just modern day people with an opinion.

And who are YOU? Just a modern-day person with an opinion, no?

Although, of course, unlike them, you have NOT A SHRED of peer-reviewed (in both religious and secular publications) academic credentials, including proven expertise in history, literature, ancient languages and cultures. You don't even have any basic, elementary KNOWLEDGE about the Bible, or Judaism, or the ancient world. (I'd be happy to give you a small quiz off the top of my head, in real time, to prove it -- but I'd bet a year's pay that you won't take THAT challenge, either.) Slight difference in credibility and qualifications, there.

If you claim, as you seem to, that your opinions on this subject are just as valid and credible as theirs — well, that is precisely analogous to the Creationists’ claims that their opinions, e.g. that the Sun might revolve around the Earth and that evolution is false, are just as valid and credible as those of professional scientists, geneticists, archaeologists and astronomers.

That is to say, ludicrous and laughable.

No wonder you won’t accept my challenge.

My counter-argument is quite simple. These ancient texts are clearly stating that they are the directives, and commandments of a God. You can argue that they shouldn't be taken "literal" until you turn blue in the face. That doesn't change the fact that this is indeed what they literally say.

Yes, that is perfectly true; the texts are what they are. I’ve never said anything else, in spite of your many attempts to put such words in my mouth.

Moreover, allow me to embrace your modern day veiw and accept that your modern day view of Judaism is correct.

Can you ELABORATE on that a bit? Considering your many, many misstatements and distortions of what I’ve said, and your many attempts to stuff your own words into my mouth, I have no confidence at all that you even know what “my modern day view of Judaism� IS.

What is the ultimate conclusion then? And here I will use your larger font for my main point as well:

Feel free.

The ultimate conclusion must necessarily be that the Jews don't believe that their Bible has anything to do with the directives of any God.

And I see that I was right.

Once again — I’ve never said that. That may be my own personal opinion, and indeed that of very many Jews: but more, I would guess, believe otherwise, that the Bible DOES come from God, or at least the Commandments.

And here is the precise point that you have never understood, or at least admitted to understanding; it doesn’t matter.

You see, whether the Bible is the Word of God or not, we Jews still claim the right and the responsibility to amend, alter or even discard the laws and directives in it as we, as a people, think fit. That is a directive found in the Torah itself, in our reading, and that is as it should be. We are FORBIDDEN to discard our MINDS, our rationality, our capacity for reason, or our moral sensibility, in favor of ANY set of unchanging commands or laws in ANY book or set of dogmatic “doctrines.�

I don’t think you’ve ever managed to wrap your head around that concept; that even if the Book DOES come from God, we don’t have to either read it literally, or follow its laws even if we do.

And I say that if this is the case then it shouldn't even be deemed to be a religion.

So a “religion� can only be a “religion� if it is based on a supernaturalist, literalist, fundamentalist approach to God and Scripture? There’s no other way?

What about Buddhism? It’s a religion, is it not, even though it has nothing to say about God?

And by the way, who died and left YOU the Grand Poobah of what is and is not a religion? Ever heard of “FREEDOM of religion,� not to mention “freedom of THOUGHT�? Do you not believe in those things?

Moreover if the Jewish Bible isn't the directives and commandments of any God why is it being used as the foundational sacred Holy Book of Judaism?

Because “the commands of God� aren’t all that a “Holy Book� has to BE. The Hebrew Bible is “sacred� and “holy� — whatever those words mean; I would propose “unique and special� — because it consists of the collected ancient literature of my people; the first time any of us ever attempted to formulate an understanding — actually, MANY and VARIOUS understandings — not only of God, but of humans and the world and our place in it and the ways we ought to live and behave. It’s where we BEGAN. Whether it came from God or not, it is still ALL of those things.

It’s very weird to me that you can’t see the value of ANY of that, and — I say again — continue to insist on your false dichotomy that ANY book, including the Bible, would have to be EITHER the direct Word of God, OR totally worthless garbage. No other options; Divine, or Trash.

That’s one of my questions you’ve never answered, by the way: To what other book would you apply that standard?

In short Charles, I'm saying that I don't buy into your argument (or the argument of modern Jews) if this is their argument.

As you’ve stated it, or attempted to — it isn’t.

Like I said; you haven’t even begun to understand this, and STILL you feel qualified to make your pronouncements.

The ancient texts clearly claim to be the directives and commandments of a God being given to Moses, and this God is directing Moses to pass this information on to the people. That's the story.

Yes, it is. That’s the STORY. That's a key word, there.

All you are telling me is that modern day Jews have come to reject these very stories as having been the directives of any God.

Some have; some haven’t. Depends on the individual. And as I said above — it doesn’t matter. WE have to review and ratify them in every generation, finding new meaning (either positive or negative) in them, interpreting them anew in the light of changing times, whether they come from God or not.

So your "Challenge" is meaningless to me.

Well, I TRULY doubt that; but let it go. What is CLEAR is that you’re not going to pick it up — for WHATEVER reason. I have my own guesses.

Even if I grant you your position all this tells me is that Judaism is a joke and it has nothing to do with directives or the moral authority of any God by the Jews own confession.

And as I have said over and over, you don’t get this, and on more than one level.

I guess it’s worth one more try. Moving past gross oversimplifications, hoary old stereotypes, and rigid, unyielding dogmatism is SO difficult….

First: “RELIGION� is about MUCH MORE than “belief in God.� I’ve said that countless times here. In the Jewish religion, “belief in God� isn’t even a peripheral issue. It’s up to the individual, and one’s view of God is a matter of personal choice — even to the point of whether one “believes in God,� whatever that means, at all. We don’t spend our time thinking or talking about “God� and “faith� and “salvation� and allathat; that’s Christian territory. We have other things to do.

Second: The Bible is MUCH MORE than a set of “laws� or “commandments� or “directives,� whether it comes from God or not. Oral histories (not the same as “history� in the modern sense — that didn’t exist then), poetry (even love poetry), ecstatic visions, hero tales, legends, early attempts at legislation and systems of justice, records of social customs, outright acknowledged fiction (Ruth, Job, Esther), political polemic (with many, and often conflicting, agendas), love stories, folklore, parables, wonder tales, philosophy, wise sayings, war stories (much the same as today’s — to be taken with a grain or ten of salt), and much, much more. MOST of it, even in the view of the MOST Orthodox and fundamentalist of Jews of ancient times OR today, was NEVER thought to have come from God, but from “prophets,� kings, poets, or even ordinary people. And still, it all has value of its own. If you don’t get that, that’s not my problem, but manifestly your own.

Third: in the Jewish religion — this is in the Talmud — “a well-ordered logical argument has the same authority as a Divine command.� I’ve mentioned that, too, though not so often. The idea is that even a command direct from God isn’t the Final Authority; that’s in the Torah, too. Abraham, Jacob, and Moses all fought or argued with God Himself. Those are stories, but those stories have a point — and that is it; We don’t kiss our minds goodbye for ANYONE, not even God. The FINAL authority is HUMAN REASON, as expressed by the consensus of the community. And I have spoken of that here very often. And, I know what inevitably comes next: "So why bother with the Bible?" Because that’s where it STARTED. That’s the standard, and where the central principles and lessons are still to be found.

Now, ALL of these have been principles of the Jewish religion, and of our approach to Scripture, from the beginning (and even before; there are clear indications of pluralism of thought in the Torah itself); but has the Jewish religion remained unchanged since Moses’ day? It hasn’t even remained unchanged since Maimonides’ day, or since the Baal Shem Tov’s, or since World War II. To claim otherwise would be ridiculous. It changes in every generation, as it is supposed to, but still remains itself.

At that point I don't even see any reason to put the word "Judaism" in the same sentence with the word "Religion" unless the sentence reads, "Judaism is NOT a religion�.

Well, that’s your opinion; and it’s worth exactly what I paid for it.

We’ve been debating these things for almost two years, at least since November of 2012. Want to see? Okay:

From 2012: Judaism as a foundation for Christianity?

From March of this year: Time to discard religion

From a few days ago: Job: A Jewish perspective

All pretty much the same, and in all three threads you left my last post unanswered.

You haven’t presented anything new in all that time, or indeed anything at all other than “THE BIBLE SAYS IT’S THE WORD OF GOD,� as if that settles everything. You’ve never substantially responded to ANY of my arguments, just as you haven’t here; you just keep repeated that empty, mechanical mantra and the false dichotomy that you’ve always presented along with it.

In any case, it’s now on the record; you won’t even bother (or perhaps dare) to look into a humble, unpretentious, EASY little book like Judaism for Dummies. You apparently think you know everything you need to know, and there’s nothing more for you to learn. You are wise.

.....

Well, okay. Let’s just leave it here, then — with you, all alone, shouting your pontifications and judgments into the dark, without a shred of credentials or credibility or knowledge or scholarship or understanding or anything else to back you up beyond what’s in your own head. Alone and unregarded, with no one listening or taking you seriously since your opinion is to be found nowhere else but — here.

I think I’m OK with that. I'll just have to be content with the 300 or so books in my Jewish library, since you haven't written yours yet -- which I'm sure will make them all obsolete and put an end to worldwide Judaism with its deep Divine Insight and profound wisdom....

Ennnh -- maybe not.

[Divine Insight]

I'll concede that there are books out there written by modern day Jews who are attempting to make a case that their modern views of Judaism are the same views held by ancient Jews.

I don’t think so. That would be very strange. For one thing — I’m getting rather accustomed to saying this — I never said that. In point of fact, I’ve VERY often said the direct opposite — that Judaism has changed and developed throughout the centuries, as we believe it was SUPPOSED to.

See, even in your speculations about what you might encounter if you ever bothered to read one of these books, you are wildly and bizarrely wrong.

What in the world are you talking about. That's exactly my point. Your views, and the views of the authors of the books you would like me to read are nothing more than opinions of modern day Jews who are making claims about what they believe Judaism was SUPPOSED to be.

Why should I even care about that at all?

This would be like me caring about what various Christian denominations claim to believe about the Bible. I've heard tons of those arguments as well, and I don't see where any of those views hold any water or are convincing.

Moreover, you have already confessed repeatedly that all Jews do not believe the same things. Therefore all you can possibly be doing is offering my the view of your favorite "Jewish denomination" so-to-speak. Why should I care about that?

This is no different from Christians telling non-Christians, "It's our religion so don't tell us what we believe".

I dismiss that approach because no modern people "own" these ancient fables. And I would hold the very same position with the Jews.

I'm not buying into your arguments. And your claim that I'm not willing to "face" your so-called "challenge" is, IMHO, nothing but utter hogwash.

You evidently aren't understanding my position. My position is that these ancient texts were clearly stating that some God was giving humans commandments and directives through Moses and other prophets.

If your claim is that the Jews never actually believe any of that, then fine. I'll accept that. But that only leaves me with the fact that the Jews themselves are then renouncing the idea that their religion and these ancient doctrines have anything at all to do with any God.

To claim otherwise would be the greatest absurdity I ever heard. It's just ridiculous.

That's not the point Charles. I would disagree with those authors in the very same way that I'm disagreeing with you right now.

Who are they to makes such claims? They are just modern day people with an opinion.

And who are YOU? Just a modern-day person with an opinion, no?

And so what? I'm not claiming to speak for the religion of an entire culture. And I'm also not being so silly to claim to speak for an entire culture whilst simultaneously confessing that not everyone within the culture believes like me. But that's exactly what you appear to be doing.

Although, of course, unlike them, you have NOT A SHRED of peer-reviewed (in both religious and secular publications) academic credentials, including proven expertise in history, literature, ancient languages and cultures. You don't even have any basic, elementary KNOWLEDGE about the Bible, or Judaism, or the ancient world. (I'd be happy to give you a small quiz off the top of my head, in real time, to prove it -- but I'd bet a year's pay that you won't take THAT challenge, either.) Slight difference in credibility and qualifications, there.

Climb down off the Holy Horse Charles.

There are tons of atheists and theologians who don't buy into the Jewish picture. Religious claims are always a matter of personal speculations of the theologians and clergies who try to support them. Trying to trump the view of others by proclaiming peer-reviewed historical knowledge etc. doesn't cut it.

I've watched serious documentaries by archeologists who were specifically looking for evidence of these ancient Abrahamic myths and their conclusion was that these myths actually originated with the Canaanites and that the early Israelites were actually descendents of the Canaanites, and they believed in polytheism and worshiped multiple Gods long before the Abrahamic religion ever became monotheistic.

Who do you think you are talking with here? Your arguments are nothing more than the following, "If you would simply read the beliefs and opinions of the scholars who support our version of this religion you'll see that they have plenty of evidence to back up their claim.

I say that this is clearly hogwash. Because this is precisely the same arguments given by all the Christian denominations. It's also the same arguments given by Catholicism. It's also the same arguments given by all the disagreeing sects of Islam. In short, it's crystal clear that NONE of these people have convincing evidence for anything.

If they had genuinely convincing evidence it would be recognized by historians and scientists as having merit. But there does not exist anything in any of the Abrahamic belief systems that stands out as being anything more than the biased beliefs of the particular factions who are claiming to have "Historical Evidence" for their claims, etc.

If you claim, as you seem to, that your opinions on this subject are just as valid and credible as theirs — well, that is precisely analogous to the Creationists’ claims that their opinions, e.g. that the Sun might revolve around the Earth and that evolution is false, are just as valid and credible as those of professional scientists, geneticists, archaeologists and astronomers.

I can't believe you are going to go down that road.

What you have just said above is absolutely absurd. Scientists, geneticists, archaeologists, and astronomers have overwhelming evidence to support their claims. They also have reasoning that PREDICTS the future. There is no question that the scientists know what they are talking about. Atomic power plants, nuclear powered submarines, and for that matter all manner of modern day technology including computers, cell phones, GPS systems, and modern medicine are proof positive that scientists absolutely know what they are talking about.

You claim that the Jewish rabbis can prove their opinions of ancient Judaism in a similar way is absolute nonsense.

In fact, Zzyzx just started a thread that addresses that sort of thing here.

Science makes predictions and has proved itself though technology. We understand why stars blow up, what causes supernovas and how they unfold, etc. Science has a clue. Religious theologians don't.

It's that simple.

That is to say, ludicrous and laughable.

No wonder you won’t accept my challenge.

You have no challenge to offer me Charles. All you are asking me to do is waste my time reading the opinions of Jewish theologians. I already know that they aren't going to be anymore convincing than Christian theologians or Muslim theologians. After all, neither the Christian theologians nor the Muslim theologians have been convinced by Jewish theologians that the Jews are right and everyone else got it wrong.

And by your own admission even all Jews don't agree. So clearly not all Jews accept the Jewish theologians that you would like for me to read.

So quit calling it a "Challenge". It's not a challenge. It's nonsense and a waste of time. I don't need to read the opinions of every theological view to recognized that they aren't convincing.

Like I say, if they were convincing then historians and scientists would be interested in those as well. The fact that they aren't is all the evidence I need to concluded that they must not be every convincing at all.

I don't need to read the books that you suggest.

In fact, if you're so determined about this just list the titles you want me to read and I'll go read the reviews. Unless those reviews are having people screaming and shouting "Eureka! The Jews must be right because this is so convincing!", then why should I waste my time reading them?

You don't have a "challenge" for me Charles. All you have is no argument against my views, so you are attempting to distract from that by pretending to challenge me to read your favorite books. Proclaiming that if I don't take you up on your challenge that somehow magically disqualifies my position.

Sorry, but that's not how debates work.

My counter-argument is quite simple. These ancient texts are clearly stating that they are the directives, and commandments of a God. You can argue that they shouldn't be taken "literal" until you turn blue in the face. That doesn't change the fact that this is indeed what they literally say.

Yes, that is perfectly true; the texts are what they are. I’ve never said anything else, in spite of your many attempts to put such words in my mouth.

Well, IMHO, the argument that "We Jews don't take our literature literally" is nonsense.

In fact, my counter argument to that is that if you literally reject your own literature then there's no point in us even discussing it further.

Why would I want to discuss literature with someone who has already literally rejected it?

Moreover, allow me to embrace your modern day veiw and accept that your modern day view of Judaism is correct.

Can you ELABORATE on that a bit? Considering your many, many misstatements and distortions of what I’ve said, and your many attempts to stuff your own words into my mouth, I have no confidence at all that you even know what “my modern day view of Judaism� IS.

Well I think it's fair to say that your view of Judaism is that the early parts of the Jewish Bible (i.e. the Torah) should not be taken literally, and that you don't believe they represent the "Word of God".

And that's sufficient for my case.

How you might view Judaism after that is totally irrelevant to me.

What is the ultimate conclusion then? And here I will use your larger font for my main point as well:

Feel free.

The ultimate conclusion must necessarily be that the Jews don't believe that their Bible has anything to do with the directives of any God.

And I see that I was right.

Once again — I’ve never said that. That may be my own personal opinion, and indeed that of very many Jews: but more, I would guess, believe otherwise, that the Bible DOES come from God, or at least the Commandments.

And here is the precise point that you have never understood, or at least admitted to understanding; it doesn’t matter.

You see, whether the Bible is the Word of God or not, we Jews still claim the right and the responsibility to amend, alter or even discard the laws and directives in it as we, as a people, think fit. That is a directive found in the Torah itself, in our reading, and that is as it should be. We are FORBIDDEN to discard our MINDS, our rationality, our capacity for reason, or our moral sensibility, in favor of ANY set of unchanging commands or laws in ANY book or set of dogmatic “doctrines.�

I don’t think you’ve ever managed to wrap your head around that concept; that even if the Book DOES come from God, we don’t have to either read it literally, or follow its laws even if we do.

But all you are telling me here is that Jews don't care what their Bible says. They don't need to take it literally and they don't need to follow its laws even if they do.

Sounds like a bunch of heathens to me. Are you sure the Jews aren't actually the Canaanites still rebelling against God to this very day?

And I say that if this is the case then it shouldn't even be deemed to be a religion.

So a “religion� can only be a “religion� if it is based on a supernaturalist, literalist, fundamentalist approach to God and Scripture? There’s no other way?

What about Buddhism? It’s a religion, is it not, even though it has nothing to say about God?

But Buddhism isn't based on a doctrine that literally claims to be the "Word of God" whilst Buddhists reject that it is the word of God.

I'm not saying that a religion has to be based on doctrines that claim to be the word of God. I'm saying that religions that are based upon literature that claims to be the word of God whilst they claim that's its not is absurd.

Judaism would be the only religion in the entire world that does this. They have a doctrine of literature that claims to be God giving humans commandments and directives and this is the foundation of their religion, all the while they reject that it is the word of God.

It's absurd.

And by the way, who died and left YOU the Grand Poobah of what is and is not a religion? Ever heard of “FREEDOM of religion,� not to mention “freedom of THOUGHT�? Do you not believe in those things?

I'm a former Christian so I guess Jesus Christ died so I can be the Grand Poobah.

See, deep down inside I knew there was a good reason for the crucifixion after all.

Moreover if the Jewish Bible isn't the directives and commandments of any God why is it being used as the foundational sacred Holy Book of Judaism?

Because “the commands of God� aren’t all that a “Holy Book� has to BE. The Hebrew Bible is “sacred� and “holy� — whatever those words mean; I would propose “unique and special� — because it consists of the collected ancient literature of my people; the first time any of us ever attempted to formulate an understanding — actually, MANY and VARIOUS understandings — not only of God, but of humans and the world and our place in it and the ways we ought to live and behave. It’s where we BEGAN. Whether it came from God or not, it is still ALL of those things.

Well, for whatever it's worth I think they got most of the ideas from the Greeks. Because the Hebrew account of God isn't as "unique and special" as you claim. On the contrary it's very similar to Greek superstitions in many ways.

Zeus was said to be the God of Gods.

So the Hebrews made their Yahweh "The Only True God" (not much difference there)

The Greeks believed that Zeus could be appeased by blood sacrifices.

The Hebrews turned that idea into an atonement for sins.

I don't see where there is much of anything original in Hebrew mythology over Greek mythology. The Hebrew basically took the idea of Zeus, and made him into a jealous wrathful, and male-chauvinistic God. I don't see where Hebrew mythology represents any new creativity at all.

It’s very weird to me that you can’t see the value of ANY of that, and — I say again — continue to insist on your false dichotomy that ANY book, including the Bible, would have to be EITHER the direct Word of God, OR totally worthless garbage. No other options; Divine, or Trash.

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that these stories clearly CLAIM to be the words and directives of a God.

And that does come down to a true dichotomy. They either are the words and directives of a God, or they are not.

That is the dichotomy.

If they are not, then they do not represent any God. If someone wants to build a spiritual paradigm around that fine. But like I say, you may as well be building a religion around any fairytale at that point.

In fact, I would suggest that building a religion around fables that CLAIM to be the directives and words of God when they aren't even believed to be that is extremely dangerous. Such a religion could evolve to become things like Christianity or Islam.

So in that sense Judaism is DANGEROUS! Even if the Jews don't even take their own literature literally.

That’s one of my questions you’ve never answered, by the way: To what other book would you apply that standard?

I would apply it to any book that literally CLAIMS to be the word of a God.

In short Charles, I'm saying that I don't buy into your argument (or the argument of modern Jews) if this is their argument.

As you’ve stated it, or attempted to — it isn’t.

Like I said; you haven’t even begun to understand this, and STILL you feel qualified to make your pronouncements.

You have already made it clear that you feel that Jews do not need to take the words attributed to God in their literature literally, and that even if they do take them literally they don't need to obey this God.

And my question in return is, "Are you sure the Jews aren't then the Canaanites? The Canaanites refuses to obey this God literally too and surely you're aware of what supposedly happened to them.

That should be at least a metaphorical lesson to the Jews even if they don't take it literally.

The ancient texts clearly claim to be the directives and commandments of a God being given to Moses, and this God is directing Moses to pass this information on to the people. That's the story.

Yes, it is. That’s the STORY. That's a key word, there.

And according to you the Jews literally deny this STORY.

All you are telling me is that modern day Jews have come to reject these very stories as having been the directives of any God.

Some have; some haven’t. Depends on the individual. And as I said above — it doesn’t matter. WE have to review and ratify them in every generation, finding new meaning (either positive or negative) in them, interpreting them anew in the light of changing times, whether they come from God or not.

But that's the absurd part right there Charles.

You say, "The Jews "Have To" review and ratify these words every generation whether they came from God or not."

But who says they have to do this? If they didn't come from a God then who is the authority behind Judaism who is demanding that the Jews keep doing this?

Why don't the modern Jews just toss up their hands and say, "Hey the atheists are right. This is ridiculous. We don't have to keep doing this. There's no God behind these words anyway."

And that's YOUR WHOLE POINT. That the Jews don't believe these texts came from God.

So your "Challenge" is meaningless to me.

Well, I TRULY doubt that; but let it go. What is CLEAR is that you’re not going to pick it up — for WHATEVER reason. I have my own guesses.

Well give me some titles. I'll at least read some reviews. I might even read some parts of these books if they are available free online. I'm certainly not about to spend any money to buy these books. I don't have money to waste like that.

Even if I grant you your position all this tells me is that Judaism is a joke and it has nothing to do with directives or the moral authority of any God by the Jews own confession.

And as I have said over and over, you don’t get this, and on more than one level.

I guess it’s worth one more try. Moving past gross oversimplifications, hoary old stereotypes, and rigid, unyielding dogmatism is SO difficult….

Third: in the Jewish religion — this is in the Talmud — “a well-ordered logical argument has the same authority as a Divine command.� I’ve mentioned that, too, though not so often. The idea is that even a command direct from God isn’t the Final Authority; that’s in the Torah, too. Abraham, Jacob, and Moses all fought or argued with God Himself. Those are stories, but those stories have a point — and that is it; We don’t kiss our minds goodbye for ANYONE, not even God. The FINAL authority is HUMAN REASON, as expressed by the consensus of the community. And I have spoken of that here very often. And, I know what inevitably comes next: "So why bother with the Bible?" Because that’s where it STARTED. That’s the standard, and where the central principles and lessons are still to be found.

Well the part in blue above certainly sounds optimistic. It just seems to me that if the Jews were truly applying reason as the final authority they would all have become either atheists or Taoists by now.

[cnorman18]

I don’t usually edit posts, but this one cries out for it — and it’s still ridiculously long.

I’m about done anyway, in more ways than one.

I’ve spent most of two days beating my head against the wall here when I should have been recording and editing my next audiobook — two days I’d like to have back — because I thought you were worth the time. I’m no longer so sure.

The topic here is really a very limited one; how we Jews, by and large, approach Scripture.

NOT whether or not we are “right� in doing it that way.

NOT whether or not the Scriptures are literally and historically TRUE.

NOT whether or not Judaism itself is “true.�

And, finally, NOT whether or not the Bible, or the Torah, is a genuine, direct message from God.

Who could KNOW that? HOW? I personally doubt that; many Jews don’t. Most probably haven’t thought about it much. Maybe it is, maybe it’s not. In practical terms, it’s just THERE. It’s the book we read in services and have for more than two thousand years.

For sure, it’s not literally true in its historical and scientific aspects; who would expect it to be? It consists of oral legends and memories of humans, which were finally written down by humans after being passed down mouth-to-ear for no one knows how many centuries. All that is easily established by examining the text itself in detail and with an eye to actual history and the languages of the past, as opposed to a mere shallow, surface reading.

The same can be said for the ideas it contains about ethics and morality; this book contains what were among the first efforts of humans to conceive and formulate such things… Whether they were helped in that effort by visions from God or not. It’s a very old book. I feel sure that we AGREE on all these things.

So why, please tell me WHY, any rational person would INSIST that it MUST be approached as the Word of God? Because it SAYS it is?

The guy who wrote the Exodus narratives down has God saying “These are my commands.� Sure. Yes, he did. He was relaying the story as he heard it. God didn’t write that. A man did. Even if he thought God was speaking to him — and for all I know, maybe God was — A MAN WROTE IT.

Now, acknowledging that isn’t “rejecting� or “denying� anything, two of your favorite words that you keep trying to put in my mouth. We read the book; we respect the book; we try to learn from the book; but we don’t worship it, because the book isn’t GOD, even if it DID, part or whole or indirectly, COME from God.

You are demanding that we worship a book — a book that you don’t believe came from God yourself — and not only that; you are demanding that we either read this old book in an irrational and illogical manner that you don’t believe in yourself, or else discard it entirely. And that was, is, and will remain a false dichotomy, PROVEN by the fact that we do NEITHER. There ARE more than two ways to approach this book, and we prove it by DOING it every day.

You keep saying “you don’t buy it.� What’s to “buy�? Do you think I’m asking you to AGREE with me, and read the book this way too? Are you saying this CAN’T BE DONE? Well, sorry, but it IS.

Here’s a new concept that we haven’t looked at before: books can’t make claims. They have no volition, no will, no desires or needs or wants or ambitions. They’re just books. They lie there on the table and are silent. They contain words, which we read; but as I’ve said many times, the Bible doesn’t interpret itself. WE have to decide how to read and understand it, like any other book. That’s our right and responsibility, just as it is with any OTHER book — and that remains true even if the author of the stories has God telling us what his divine commands are. That’s a STORY. It wouldn’t be sane to throw our BRAINS in the garbage and just try to find all our answers in ANY book.

These are the things I’ve been trying to tell you, from about two years ago into the present day; and all you have to offer in rebuttal is “But the book says it’s the Word of God!� Well, no, not all of it; just certain stories within it. It also says that the Sun stopped in the sky for a whole day, too. Are we required to accept that as the truth, too — or are we, in your pontifical judgment, allowed to read that as a STORY, an oral legend, a metaphor or just a good campfire tale for the entertainment of the troops?

Whatever. Still beating my head against the wall, I know.

Well, let’s take a look at how I’m doing — and how responsive and on-point your answers are:

…Your views, and the views of the authors of the books you would like me to read are nothing more than opinions of modern day Jews who are making claims about what they believe Judaism was SUPPOSED to be.

Why should I even care about that at all?

This would be like me caring about what various Christian denominations claim to believe about the Bible. I've heard tons of those arguments as well, and I don't see where any of those views hold any water or are convincing.

Whoever said any of this was about you “caring� about anything? I’m just trying to explain the general Jewish approach to religion and the Bible. Whether you CARE or not is not the issue.

ONE offtopic red herring.

….This is no different from Christians telling non-Christians, "It's our religion so don't tell us what we believe".

I dismiss that approach because no modern people "own" these ancient fables. And I would hold the very same position with the Jews.

When did I or anyone ever say anything about the Jews, or anybody, “owning� anything, or about anyone telling us what to do? I’m just trying to explain to you what our approach is.

Two offtopic red herrings.

There have been MANY more, which you throw out and then drop when they don’t fly. In your last, you claimed I had said that no one but Jews could read or understand the Bible. That was a plain old falsehood — and now you simply forget about that and move on to another false claim about what I’ve said here. That’s a very bad habit, and it doesn’t make for civil or rational debate. Rather the opposite, in fact; it amounts to baiting and goading and mockery.

…There are tons of atheists and theologians who don't buy into the Jewish picture. Religious claims are always a matter of personal speculations of the theologians and clergies who try to support them. Trying to trump the view of others by proclaiming peer-reviewed historical knowledge etc. doesn't cut it.

I've watched serious documentaries by archeologists who were specifically looking for evidence of these ancient Abrahamic myths and their conclusion was that these myths actually originated with the Canaanites and that the early Israelites were actually descendents of the Canaanites, and they believed in polytheism and worshiped multiple Gods long before the Abrahamic religion ever became monotheistic.

Neither does trying to change the subject — AGAIN — to whether or not the Jewish Scriptures are literally true and historically accurate. That has NEVER been the subject here, since we started these debate TWO YEARS AGO. You’re arguing against something I’ve NEVER SAID — AGAIN — and pretending that I’m saying something I’m NOT, and had no intention of saying.

If you’d read my posts, you’d know that I’VE NEVER DENIED ANY OF THAT.

Three offtopic red herrings.

…You claim that the Jewish rabbis can prove their opinions of ancient Judaism in a similar way is absolute nonsense.

If you don’t look at their evidence, how can you claim to know that?

We DO have records from ancient times, including a 60+ volume work that addresses all these very issues — how to read the Bible, how to understand it, how judgments about Jewish law and practice are to be made; it’s called the TALMUD, and it’s the record of debates and arguments among the sages and rabbis that went on for CENTURIES. These aren’t OPINIONS about Jewish study and practice; they are matters of RECORDED FACT — and THAT is one part of what you know nothing whatever about, and refuse to even look at.

Not a red herring; just another display of all that you don’t know.

In fact, Zzyzx just started a thread that addresses that sort of thing here.

Who said anything about “PROPHECIES� in this thread?

Four offtopic red herrings.

Once more; I’m not arguing about the TRUTH of this religion. I’m not arguing about the TRUTH of the Biblical narratives. I’m just talking about how we actually do read the Bible and how we decide how we’re supposed to live, in a process that’s been going on for thousands of years.

Science makes predictions and has proved itself though technology. We understand why stars blow up, what causes supernovas and how they unfold, etc. Science has a clue. Religious theologians don't.

It's that simple.

WHAT are you talking about NOW? I’M trying to talk about how we read the BIBLE, and refer to people who know a lot about that, and can explain it, probably better than I can. What does any of THAT have to do with “predictions� and “technology� and all that?

Nothing, as far as I can see, except another flailing attempt to change the subject.

Five offtopic red herrings.

…I already know that they aren't going to be anymore convincing than Christian theologians or Muslim theologians. After all, neither the Christian theologians nor the Muslim theologians have been convinced by Jewish theologians that the Jews are right and everyone else got it wrong.

And there you go again. NOBODY’S TALKING ABOUT WHO’S “RIGHT.� The SUBJECT is how Jews read the Bible, and the place that the Bible has in our religion and culture. NOTHING ELSE, no matter HOW hard you try to change the subject to “which religion is true.�

Six offtopic red herrings.

And by your own admission even all Jews don't agree. So clearly not all Jews accept the Jewish theologians that you would like for me to read.

Again; the subject isn’t THEOLOGY, or the specifics of belief. . It’s our approach to the Bible. Different subject. The nature of the Bible and its place in the Jewish religion. There are disagreements there too, but what I’ve been telling you here is common to ALL the liberal, i.e. non-Orthodox, branches, and to MOST of the Orthodox as well. These books aren’t about proselytizing for the Jewish religion, they’re just about what it IS — and if you’d ever bother to read them, you’d find that they talk about the views of ALL the branches of Judaism, from Orthodox to Reform to Reconstructionist.

Seven offtopic red herrings.

You’re flailing, and you are avoiding the subject — and the things I’ve ACTUALLY SAID — as hard as you can. Sorry, but it’s not working.

…I don't need to read the books that you suggest.

In fact, if you're so determined about this just list the titles you want me to read and I'll go read the reviews. Unless those reviews are having people screaming and shouting "Eureka! The Jews must be right because this is so convincing!", then why should I waste my time reading them?

Oh, stop it. You’re trying to change the subject to “whether the Jews are RIGHT� again. That’s not the subject, and you know it. Nobody’s trying to get you to CONVERT; I’m just trying to explain how Jews approach the Bible, not make you into a rabbinical student.

Eight offtopic red herrings.

Stop pretending this is about anything other than your CONDEMNING the Jewish approach to Scripture as somehow irrational, stupid, or impossible. That’s where this started, and that’s where it stays; you don’t get to CHANGE THE SUBJECT to something you find easier to talk about.

Reviews? Okay. Basic Judaism by Milton Steinberg; Here they are, good and bad.

Judaism for Dummies by Ted Falcon: Reviews from Amazon.

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism by Benjamin Blech: Reviews, good and bad.

The reviews of all these books are overwhelmingly positive. They are real reviews from real people, proven by the fact that there are a few BAD reviews among them. There are NO books that EVERYBODY likes.

You don't have a "challenge" for me Charles. All you have is no argument against my views…

That’s nonsense. I’ve been trying to explain to you what the Jewish approach to the Bible IS for months now, and your response has been nothing more than “That’s impossible,� “That’s stupid,� or “That can’t be the truth,� for no better reason that that the BOOK, in your view, claims to be the Word of God.

As if books have volition and can “make claims.� We’ll look at that again later.

That’s “your view,� as I see it, and it amounts to nothing more than refusing to admit that other people can understand these things differently from you.

And THAT, I admit I don’t get at all. Who made you the Thought Police?

Not a red herring — but claiming that “all I have is no argument� is another plain old falsehood, and an obviously nonsensical one at that.

…so you are attempting to distract from that…

Excuse me? After trying to make this into a debate over whether Judaism is TRUE, and whether the Bible is HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, and dragging in scientific predictions and “prophecy� and whatever else in this post alone — you’re accusing ME of “attempting to distract�?

Really?

… by pretending to challenge me to read your favorite books.

Oh, I’m not pretending. I’m actually challenging you to read them.

Or I was. My offer is withdrawn. More on that presently.

Proclaiming that if I don't take you up on your challenge that somehow magically disqualifies my position.

WORDS IN MY MOUTH, yet AGAIN. Please show me where I ever said that, or anything like it. ALL I’ve said is that you won’t do it — which is true, is it not? I’ve given no reasons, and proposed no conclusions from that fact.

Nine offtopic red herrings.

My object is to get you to LEARN SOMETHING about that which you so vehemently condemn and denigrate — and hoping that maybe, after you DO learn a bit about it, you won’t be so quick to sneer and condemn and spit on it. But I’ve about given up hope on that.

…My counter-argument is quite simple. These ancient texts are clearly stating that they are the directives, and commandments of a God. You can argue that they shouldn't be taken "literal" until you turn blue in the face. That doesn't change the fact that this is indeed what they literally say.

Yes, that is perfectly true; the texts are what they are. I’ve never said anything else, in spite of your many attempts to put such words in my mouth.

Well, IMHO, the argument that "We Jews don't take our literature literally" is nonsense.

In fact, my counter argument to that is that if you literally reject your own literature then there's no point in us even discussing it further.

Wait a minute. When did “not read literally� magically turn into “reject�? That’s NOT the same thing.

Why would I want to discuss literature with someone who has already literally rejected it?

“Reject� is YOUR word, not mine. I have not used that word here; feel free to search for it. I have said this, or words of similar import, uncountable times here: “It is possible, and in fact necessary, to take the Bible SERIOUSLY, but not LITERALLY.�

Like I said; most of your arguments seem to be based on stuffing YOUR words into MY mouth. I never said “reject.� Period. Try another tactic.

Ten offtopic red herrings; trying to get me to defend things I never said.

Moreover, allow me to embrace your modern day veiw and accept that your modern day view of Judaism is correct.

Can you ELABORATE on that a bit? Considering your many, many misstatements and distortions of what I’ve said, and your many attempts to stuff your own words into my mouth, I have no confidence at all that you even know what “my modern day view of Judaism� IS.

Well I think it's fair to say that your view of Judaism is that the early parts of the Jewish Bible (i.e. the Torah) should not be taken literally, and that you don't believe they represent the "Word of God".

And that's sufficient for my case.

How, exactly, is that “sufficient,� and what is “your case�?

I thought your view was that Jews HAVE to read the Bible as literally true and the Word of God and accept the commands there as binding and unchangeable, or else discard the whole thing as worthless drivel. I can even quote where you admitted that that was your view, in so many words. Is that not correct?

Now how does my personal view — and it’s a bit more nuanced than that, anyway —support or prove your “case�?

How you might view Judaism after that is totally irrelevant to me.

Then why are you arguing so vehemently about it?

Again, the subject here isn’t how much you “CARE.� It’s the nature and legitimacy — and the actual EXISTENCE, apparently — of the Jewish approach to the Bible.

Or have you dropped that in favor of some other debate, and just not bothered to inform me?

What is the ultimate conclusion then? And here I will use your larger font for my main point as well:

Feel free.

The ultimate conclusion must necessarily be that the Jews don't believe that their Bible has anything to do with the directives of any God.

And I see that I was right.

Once again — I’ve never said that. That may be my own personal opinion, and indeed that of very many Jews: but more, I would guess, believe otherwise, that the Bible DOES come from God, or at least the Commandments.

And here is the precise point that you have never understood, or at least admitted to understanding; it doesn’t matter.

You see, whether the Bible is the Word of God or not, we Jews still claim the right and the responsibility to amend, alter or even discard the laws and directives in it as we, as a people, think fit. That is a directive found in the Torah itself, in our reading, and that is as it should be. We are FORBIDDEN to discard our MINDS, our rationality, our capacity for reason, or our moral sensibility, in favor of ANY set of unchanging commands or laws in ANY book or set of dogmatic “doctrines.�

I don’t think you’ve ever managed to wrap your head around that concept; that even if the Book DOES come from God, we don’t have to either read it literally, or follow its laws even if we do.

But all you are telling me here is that Jews don't care what their Bible says.

Wait a minute, again. When did “not reading literally� turn into “don’t care about�? Those are NOT the same thing, as I’ve explained over and over again; but you STILL insist on stuffing those words into my mouth and those ideas into my brain. Sorry, those are in YOUR brain and YOUR mouth.

You did it again. Redefined the argument for your own convenience.

Eleven red herrings — once again, attacking things I’ve never said.

They don't need to take it literally and they don't need to follow its laws even if they do.

But we take it SERIOUSLY, and CONSIDER it, and use it as a guide in every generation. You speak as if we just casually toss it out the window and make stuff up as we go along — and that is NOT the meaning of what I’ve told you, no matter how much you wish it were.

Like I said; twisting, distorting, oversimplifying and essentially falsifying my arguments and replacing them with your own. Red herrings out the wazoo, and no substantive rebuttal to anything I’ve said, other than stamping your foot and insisting that the text be read LITERALLY — which you don’t even do yourself.

What kind of sense does it make for a person to dictate how another religion should be approached and conducted — when that person doesn’t believe in any of the standards he wants to impose on others himself?

…I’m saying that religions that are based upon literature that claims to be the word of God whilst they claim that's its not is absurd.

Judaism would be the only religion in the entire world that does this. They have a doctrine of literature that claims to be God giving humans commandments and directives and this is the foundation of their religion, all the while they reject that it is the word of God.

It's absurd.

Once again; SOME Jews don’t accept that the Bible is the Word of God; but even those would never say they “reject� it, as you keep insisting. It still has value, and is still taken seriously, even by those Jews, like me, who say it PROBABLY isn’t. I would never say “it ISN’T� a direct revelation for God, in any part or line, without qualification, because I don’t know that.

But you seem to be locked into your up/down, totally accept/totally reject, dichotomy here, and insist that others should be locked into that irrational and illogical dichotomy too.

Sorry; we aren’t, and we prove every day that this approach is not only possible, but productive, intellectually stimulating, does NOT result in our trying to cram our religion down others’ throats (as literalists commonly do), and does NOT result in resisting or deny science, freedom of thought for others, and on and on and on.

…Moreover if the Jewish Bible isn't the directives and commandments of any God why is it being used as the foundational sacred Holy Book of Judaism?

Because “the commands of God� aren’t all that a “Holy Book� has to BE. The Hebrew Bible is “sacred� and “holy� — whatever those words mean; I would propose “unique and special� — because it consists of the collected ancient literature of my people; the first time any of us ever attempted to formulate an understanding — actually, MANY and VARIOUS understandings — not only of God, but of humans and the world and our place in it and the ways we ought to live and behave. It’s where we BEGAN. Whether it came from God or not, it is still ALL of those things.

Well, for whatever it's worth I think they got most of the ideas from the Greeks.

Now, THIS is REALLY interesting. Talk about red herrings: this is a HUGE change of subject, TOTALLY unresponsive, and TOTALLY avoiding everything I’ve just said. Well, ramble on:

Because the Hebrew account of God isn't as "unique and special" as you claim. On the contrary it's very similar to Greek superstitions in many ways.

Zeus was said to be the God of Gods.

So the Hebrews made their Yahweh "The Only True God" (not much difference there)

The Greeks believed that Zeus could be appeased by blood sacrifices.

The Hebrews turned that idea into an atonement for sins.

I don't see where there is much of anything original in Hebrew mythology over Greek mythology. The Hebrew basically took the idea of Zeus, and made him into a jealous wrathful, and male-chauvinistic God. I don't see where Hebrew mythology represents any new creativity at all.

Oh, PLEASE. A couple of vague similarities, and you think you’ve made that case?

Where are the Greek PROPHETS that demanded justice for the poor and downtrodden, and condemned kings to their faces?

Where is the Greek Job, who took the gods to task for injustice and the suffering of good people?

Where are the Greek laws establishing that all people are equal under the law, and that the murder of a slave is as serious as the murder of a king? Not to mention the prohibition of cruelty to animals, and the RIGHTS of slaves?

Where is the Greek concept of SIN, as in “morally unacceptable to the gods� — gods who had no discernible morals themselves?

Where is the Greek “ONE GOD� who shares his essence with no other, and has no body, no form, and no parts?

That may be the lamest, and most pointless and desperate, attempt at an argument I’ve ever seen.

How many red herrings is that now? Twelve? Fifteen? Depends on how one counts them, I suppose.

It’s very weird to me that you can’t see the value of ANY of that, and — I say again — continue to insist on your false dichotomy that ANY book, including the Bible, would have to be EITHER the direct Word of God, OR totally worthless garbage. No other options; Divine, or Trash.

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that these stories clearly CLAIM to be the words and directives of a God.

ALL of them? Care to defend that remark? Be careful…

And that does come down to a true dichotomy. They either are the words and directives of a God, or they are not.

That is the dichotomy.

If they are not, then they do not represent any God. If someone wants to build a spiritual paradigm around that fine. But like I say, you may as well be building a religion around any fairytale at that point.

In fact, I would suggest that building a religion around fables that CLAIM to be the directives and words of God when they aren't even believed to be that is extremely dangerous. Such a religion could evolve to become things like Christianity or Islam.

So in that sense Judaism is DANGEROUS! Even if the Jews don't even take their own literature literally.

Who DOES take their literature literally? Can you name ANY work of literature that is read LITERALLY by ANY culture? Not HISTORY, now; not PHILOSOPHY or SCIENCE or REPORTING, but LITERATURE. Stories.

Further; What about the rather common view — it is my own, in fact — that we don’t know the origins of Scripture, and some portions — we don’t know which — MAY, or MAY NOT, have come from God? Perhaps they were given indirectly, through dreams or visions, or in the dim past, and that those experiences have been carried down orally until they were finally written down?

Or the view — my own, and a perfectly legitimate one — that perhaps the only way God speaks to us is through our rational human brains, in that we can think and understand and make moral judgments; which is, by the way, the Jewish understanding of “made in God’s image.� It could hardly mean anything else, since God has no body in the Jewish tradition, and that goes back to the very beginning.

See? In both of those, no dichotomy. That’s reality — NO ONE KNOWS where the Bible ultimate began. J, E, P, and D sources, all that — but where did THEY come from? God? I dunno. Maybe. I doubt it. But you won’t catch me saying it’s IMPOSSIBLE, and few Jews (who are not atheists) would. Humans THINK, and determine what is true and false THEMSELVES. We tell stories to TEACH the things we’ve figured out. Maybe God inspired Dr. King’s “I have a dream� speech; it was certainly prophetic — “I may not get there with you� — and it was prophetic in the Jewish sense too, which is different; speaking the truth in service of justice. You don’t have to claim that “GOD SPOKE DIRECTLY THROUGH DR. KING� in order to get something of GREAT value from what he said. 

Did you know that there are multiple volumes of what is called Midrash — stories that are told of the events “behind� the stories in the Bible, like what Moses did while he was on the Mountain, about God speaking directly to the Patriarchs and their private conversations, about miracles and wonders galore that aren’t in the Bible — and that all those stories are accepted as stories, not literally true, even though God Himself is often one of the characters?

No one reads those stories as literal truth — there may be a dozen stories about what lies “behind� the same incident, and they are mutually contradictory — but they are widely studied as TEACHING stories. That is a kind of “truth,� too, though not LITERAL truth.

You DID know that there’s more than one way a story can be “true,� right? It's right out front in every post of mine, right there in my signature. Do you not understand that concept?

Can’t you get that God is, or can be regarded as, one of the characters in the Bible stories too?

That’s what “LITERATURE� means. If these documents were a record of what God actually, literally said, they wouldn’t be LITERATURE, they’d be HISTORY.

What on Earth is wrong with reading these stories reverently and taking their lessons seriously — and like any other work of literature, those lessons may change from one century to the next — with the full understanding that they are not, or at least MAY not be, LITERALLY TRUE?

And more importantly — who are YOU to say that that way of reading them SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, or should be CONDEMNED as somehow wrong or illegitimate?

YOU DON’T BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BE LITERALLY TRUE YOURSELF. Why do you deny the right to hold that same view to others, even while they continue to believe in God and practice their religion, even with that understanding?

….You have already made it clear that you feel that Jews do not need to take the words attributed to God in their literature literally, and that even if they do take them literally they don't need to obey this God.

But they don’t “reject� them casually and blithely, as you are implying. Even today, it takes YEARS for a point of Jewish law to be revised. It took more than a decade for the rabbis of the Conservative movement to rule that it’s okay for Jews to drive to synagogue on the Sabbath — and then only if they go only straight there and straight home. It’s not just “Aah, just ignore it,� as you would apparently like it to be. Note what I said; consensus of the whole community. It’s not just “ignore the laws and do what you want.� It’s like amending the Constitution, in a way; it’s a very big deal, it’s not easy, and it takes a very long time.

Part of my problem is that you take the serious ideas I’m giving you and you turn them into cartoons and caricatures. That’s not engaging in a serious exchange of ideas; that’s just mockery and polemic.

And my question in return is, "Are you sure the Jews aren't then the Canaanites? The Canaanites refuses to obey this God literally too and surely you're aware of what supposedly happened to them.

(Sigh) You’re insisting on reading the Bible as literal history again, even when you clearly know better.

But: In point of fact, the archeological evidence is that if ANY Hebrews came from Egypt, it was a very small number, and they intermixed and intermarried with the residents of the Land who were already living there. In other words, the Hebrews WERE Canaanites — and would be even if the Bible accounts were accurate, since that was where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his sons came from in the first place.

You don’t get to accept actual, secular history, and at the same time complain that people who read the Bible as LITERATURE don’t accept it as actual, historical fact at the same time.

That should be at least a metaphorical lesson to the Jews even if they don't take it literally.

And my response might be a metaphorical lesson for YOU, if you can grasp it.

The ancient texts clearly claim to be the directives and commandments of a God being given to Moses, and this God is directing Moses to pass this information on to the people. That's the story.

Yes, it is. That’s the STORY. That's a key word, there.

And according to you the Jews literally deny this STORY.

Nope. “Deny,� like “reject,� is another of YOUR words, not mine. “Not reading as literally true� just isn’t the same as “deny� — never mind “LITERALLY deny.� We accept the Scriptures as holding other kinds of TRUTH besides the LITERAL, HISTORICAL truth. But that’s a idea you don’t seem to be able to get your head around.

Thirteen red herrings. Once again, stuffing words into my mouth.

All you are telling me is that modern day Jews have come to reject these very stories as having been the directives of any God.

Some have; some haven’t. Depends on the individual. And as I said above — it doesn’t matter. WE have to review and ratify them in every generation, finding new meaning (either positive or negative) in them, interpreting them anew in the light of changing times, whether they come from God or not.

But that's the absurd part right there Charles.

You say, "The Jews "Have To" review and ratify these words every generation whether they came from God or not."

But who says they have to do this? If they didn't come from a God then who is the authority behind Judaism who is demanding that the Jews keep doing this?

You’re doing it again — twisting the sense of what I meant into something more convenient for your own arguments.

Where in the above did I say that “they didn’t come from a God�? I said whether they did or not. We “have to� in the same sense that a SECULAR government “has to� revisit its laws from time to time; that’s why you don’t have to have a buggy whip holder in your car any more, and why you don’t have to have a guy with a red flag walking in front of it when you drive it.

Fourteen offtopic red herrings.

You’re really grabbing at straws now, as opposed to actually thinking about and responding to what I actually said. So you can jump to your favorite hobbyhorse —

Why don't the modern Jews just toss up their hands and say, "Hey the atheists are right. This is ridiculous. We don't have to keep doing this. There's no God behind these words anyway.�

Yeah, like I said anything even approaching that. Once again, that’s YOUR point of view and YOUR hope, and YOUR words. None of that has anything to do with anything I said or think.

And that's YOUR WHOLE POINT. That the Jews don't believe these texts came from God.

The REAL POINT is that you WANT that to be my whole point — when (1) I never said that, as usual; (2) I’m telling you why and how we have the right to modify the laws; and (3) why the Bible has value and remains at the center of our heritage and religion, even though its origins are unclear and its authority not absolute.

Those WERE the things we were talking about; but you find it convenient to IGNORE all that and substitute a “WHOLE POINT� that I never made nor intended to make.

Fifteen offtopic red herrings; more words crammed into my mouth.

Filtering MY ideas through YOUR obsessions and prejudices isn’t exchanging ideas OR debate. It’s just game-playing.

…Well give me some titles. I'll at least read some reviews. I might even read some parts of these books if they are available free online. I'm certainly not about to spend any money to buy these books. I don't have money to waste like that.

Do you even read my posts? Or do you just skim them?

I already gave you three titles — Basic Judaism by Milton Steinberg, Judaism for Dummies by Ted Falcon, and The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism by Benjamin Blech (I didn’t give all of the authors earlier, but there they are).

And I offered to pay for any one of them myself and send it to you. How could you MISS that? I gather from this that you never saw it.

Never mind. Offer withdrawn. It’s not worth my money OR any more of my time, because it would only be beating my head against the wall again. I’m only posting this so everyone can see your attempts to change the subject, your insistence on twisting my words and putting your own words in my mouth, and all the rest — including the fact that at bottom, you have ONE argument, and one only, an argument that depends on demanding that others read the Bible in a way which you don’t even do yourself.

…Even if I grant you your position all this tells me is that Judaism is a joke and it has nothing to do with directives or the moral authority of any God by the Jews own confession.

And as I have said over and over, you don’t get this, and on more than one level.

I guess it’s worth one more try. Moving past gross oversimplifications, hoary old stereotypes, and rigid, unyielding dogmatism is SO difficult….

(I note in passing that you have deleted my “First� and “Second� arguments entirely, even though they are directly on point and relevant to this debate. Just an observation. Not a red herring, but certainly two instances of ducking the question.)

Third: in the Jewish religion — this is in the Talmud — “a well-ordered logical argument has the same authority as a Divine command.� I’ve mentioned that, too, though not so often. The idea is that even a command direct from God isn’t the Final Authority; that’s in the Torah, too. Abraham, Jacob, and Moses all fought or argued with God Himself. Those are stories, but those stories have a point — and that is it; We don’t kiss our minds goodbye for ANYONE, not even God. The FINAL authority is HUMAN REASON, as expressed by the consensus of the community. And I have spoken of that here very often. And, I know what inevitably comes next: "So why bother with the Bible?" Because that’s where it STARTED. That’s the standard, and where the central principles and lessons are still to be found.

Well the part in blue above certainly sounds optimistic. It just seems to me that if the Jews were truly applying reason as the final authority they would all have become either atheists or Taoists by now.

Well, of course it does. That’s YOUR belief, and YOUR hope, which you want to impose on everyone else — as opposed to actually taking our approach seriously. Your unwavering contempt for Judaism, even though it’s an “Eastern religion� TOO, comes through in every post. It’s getting way beyond tiresome, especially since you STILL have only ONE argument to present, and it just doesn’t make any objective sense.

Once again: The guy who wrote Exodus has God saying “These are my commands.� Sure. Yes, he did.

But why am I REQUIRED to read his story as if it were a CNN video, and not as the LITERATURE — the STORY — that is inarguably IS, and also as a medium for communicating TRUTHS a bit deeper than the surface account — which clues in the text indicate that were actually intended? Why can’t I RESPECT that story and LEARN from it — without WORSHIPING IT as if it, itself, WAS God? Why do you insist that that approach is “rejecting� it or “denying� it?

That’s just CRAZY. That’s signing over your brain to an anonymous author, AND — MUCH more importantly — guaranteeing that you’re going to MISS THE POINT.

My own rabbi said, “If you want to denigrate and demean the Bible, read it literally.� That’s the way it ALWAYS works; fundamentalists demean and devalue the Bible and make it look ridiculous by reading it literally and don’t REALIZE it, like the “Creationists� do; and atheists, often enough, demean and devalue the Bible and make it look ridiculous by reading it literally ON PURPOSE, by finding the most brutal and unjust passages and saying “This is your God!� That’s no more legitimate than the other.

I guess that’s why BOTH fundamentalists AND atheists are so annoyed, and sometimes enraged, by those of us (and not all of us are Jews) who find value in the Bible WITHOUT taking the shallow, counterproductive and irrational approach of a superficial, simpleminded surface reading of the text that both insist is the only way to approach it.

I’m tired, DI. I’m really, really tired.

This is where I’m coming from; these things are important to me. The Jewish approach to God, the Bible, and how to live one’s life makes sense to me, where Christianity never did. I’m just trying to get you to understand why I think this is a rational approach to religion that respects human intelligence and moral perceptions, and remains sensibly noncommittal and nondogmatic about the nature of God (if any), the Afterlife, and allathat “spiritual� stuff, and also about the meaning, nature, value, and “divinity� of the Bible. Like I said, this stuff is important to me, and I take it seriously and think deeply about it.

But what I’m feeling here is that this is just a game to you, and I’m just the little duck in your shooting gallery. You routinely ignore, misstate, twist, or just mock what I’m trying to say, and so consistently and so often that it’s hard to believe it’s unconscious. Further, you never — as in NOT EVER — actually ANSWER my arguments with anything more than “The Bible says it’s the Word of God� to justify all your condemnation and sneering. And like I said, that argument just doesn’t make sense — historically, logically, rationally, or any other way.

If this is just amusement to you, please have the decency to drop it. It’s very clear by now that nothing, nothing at all, is ever going to get you to reconsider any of this or look at things from anyone’s point of view but your own. That’s why I’m withdrawing my offer and my challenge. I don’t want to play any more; this has been a colossal waste of my time and creativity.

Just consider this; a person who is incapable of changing his mind is incapable of learning. Learning, by definition, is “changing one’s mind.�

If you attempt to reply to this, please don’t bother protesting that all these offtopic red herrings “ARE TOO� on the subject. Once more; my only object here is explaining how the Jewish people approach and understand the Bible and its place in our tradition and practice. NOTHING ELSE; not whether we’re RIGHT in doing so, not whether our religion is TRUE, not whether the Bible accounts are historically accurate — and on and on, as you attempted to derail the conversation over and over again. And don’t try to explain that in all the times you stuffed words into my mouth, that those “WERE TOO� the things I meant to say, either. They weren’t. If you’re going to presume to debate FOR me, you can do that by yourself without even going online.

And, with that, I’m outta here. I’m dropping my membership. Too much frustration and too much time wasted, because of too much intransigence and, to speak frankly, fake debating-as-sport as opposed to actual, civil and rational debate, which is — or was — why I come here.

A lot of people here have no interest whatever in actually exchanging ideas and LEARNING anything, but only in scoring ego points, cutting others down to size, and promoting their personal agendas, whether the sinfulness of gays or the irrationality and evils of any kind of religious belief, or any other than their own — and there aren’t many “debates� around here any more of any other kind.

This has become a kind of intellectual Fight Club, where once it was a place where people of different viewpoints could actually talk. When my sincere attempts to explain my approach, and that of my people, to religion is sneered at, derided, and condemned as stupid, hypocritical, impossible, or irrational, it’s no longer worth my time or attention.

[Divine Insight]

Just consider this; a person who is incapable of changing his mind is incapable of learning. Learning, by definition, is “changing one’s mind.�

So why should this apply to me and not to you?

You seem to be suggesting that I should change my mind to agree with you and not the other way around.

And they you define that as "learning".

I could hold this same challenge up to you. If you are unwilling to change your mind to agree with me, then you are "unwilling to learn".

In fact, historically I have indeed changed my mind quite radically. I used to be a devout Christian. I have since changed my mind and have come to the realization that these religious myths are absurd.

So I have change my mind due to having learned many thing.

I would also hold that changing ones mind isn't learning, but rather learning is what causes a person to change their views on things.

This has become a kind of intellectual Fight Club, where once it was a place where people of different viewpoints could actually talk. When my sincere attempts to explain my approach, and that of my people, to religion is sneered at, derided, and condemned as stupid, hypocritical, impossible, or irrational, it’s no longer worth my time or attention.

It's a debate forum Charles. Especially Christianity and Apologetics.

Yes, debates are in a very real sense "Intellectual Fight Clubs".

The idea is to argue for the most rational picture and to point out why other arguments are not rational and hold no water.

That's the idea behind "debate".

[Danmark]

....My own rabbi said, “If you want to denigrate and demean the Bible, read it literally.� That’s the way it ALWAYS works; fundamentalists demean and devalue the Bible and make it look ridiculous by reading it literally and don’t REALIZE it, like the “Creationists� do; and atheists, often enough, demean and devalue the Bible and make it look ridiculous by reading it literally ON PURPOSE, by finding the most brutal and unjust passages and saying “This is your God!� That’s no more legitimate than the other. . . .

I don't want you to leave Charles. I know you are frustrated. I like this point you make, that reading the Bible literally and ascribing it to 'the Word of God' does indeed denigrate and demean the Bible. The way I see it is that Christians who do this, do it sincerely. They are misguided or hopelessly undereducated. Without realizing what they are doing they are aiding and abetting atheists who are only too happy to take them at their word and ridicule them, their lack of education and their system of thought, and in the process missing what is best about the Bible, its wisdom and beauty.