Why is this called a " Christian DEbate site"

[Tex]

It seems all people do here is attack God.

It should be called an "atheist" debate site. It's most probably to get Christians to come into the lions den.

[micatala]

You do not own Christianity, neither do you own Jesus, so you can take that mindset and shove it where the sun don't shine.

I reject the fables of an ancient society of male-chauvinistic pigs. And if that offends you, all I can say is that I'm sorry, but that doesn't change a thing.

To be fair, I'm personally shocked that you would support such an immoral collection of fables as being the "Word of God", but that's your problem, not mine.

Moderator Warning


Especially the first sentence above is quite uncivil.


Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Divine Insight]

As for Genesis, you see the world we live in. Snakes do eat dust and women are in deep pain when in Labour.

So? That doesn't justify that some supposedly all-wise God had cursed those things to happen.

So again....any god you would believe in, created this mess. So your complaints fall to deaf ears.

The spiritual philosophies that I consider actually have far better explanations for why things are the way they are. They don't require that a jealous personified God had cursed anyone.

We know something must have happen for man to be on this planet. As you can see, we don't live in the eternal world where God is.

Evolution works just fine for me.

And it also fits in with my spiritual philosophy seamlessly.

Tell me....what story would be good enough for you, so you can be happy about the god you want to imagine? Death is everywhere.

Why would death be a problem in a spiritual philosophy?

Death is utterly meaningless if you believe in a spiritual essence to life.

You don't want to believe in a monster.....But if we look at the world through your eyes only a monster could have done this. So again....where is your perfect God that has not created death...Maybe I'm on the wrong planet.

Unfortunately it would be extremely difficult for me to share my spiritual philosophy with you. Partly because it would require much explanation. But even more so because you clearly would be extremely hostile toward it anyway. So it would be a total waste of my time to even try to explain it to you.

But yes, I do have a spiritual philosophy that does not require that God is a monster.

So I have the best of both worlds.

[Tex]

As for Genesis, you see the world we live in. Snakes do eat dust and women are in deep pain when in Labour.

So? That doesn't justify that some supposedly all-wise God had cursed those things to happen.

So again....any god you would believe in, created this mess. So your complaints fall to deaf ears.

The spiritual philosophies that I consider actually have far better explanations for why things are the way they are. They don't require that a jealous personified God had cursed anyone.

We know something must have happen for man to be on this planet. As you can see, we don't live in the eternal world where God is.

Evolution works just fine for me.

And it also fits in with my spiritual philosophy seamlessly.

Tell me....what story would be good enough for you, so you can be happy about the god you want to imagine? Death is everywhere.

Why would death be a problem in a spiritual philosophy?

Death is utterly meaningless if you believe in a spiritual essence to life.

You don't want to believe in a monster.....But if we look at the world through your eyes only a monster could have done this. So again....where is your perfect God that has not created death...Maybe I'm on the wrong planet.

Unfortunately it would be extremely difficult for me to share my spiritual philosophy with you. Partly because it would require much explanation. But even more so because you clearly would be extremely hostile toward it anyway. So it would be a total waste of my time to even try to explain it to you.

But yes, I do have a spiritual philosophy that does not require that God is a monster.

So I have the best of both worlds.

Don't tell me ....Your God is John Lennon.

[Divine Insight]

Don't tell me ....Your God is John Lennon.

I imagine he would make a good personified God.

I'm sure he did go on to bigger and better things.

I actually agree with Jesus when he pointed to the Torah where it says, "Have I not said, ye are gods"?

That's the God I believe in. The same one Jesus apparently believed in.

The one that resides within each and every one of us.

[AdHoc]

Ignore it, sure. But to me it represents God's love for you. Ignore it, don't believe it, sure.
But why hate it?

Having someone beaten and nailed to a pole represents God's Love?

Would you like to debate that particular issues head-to-head?

I'm game to step in the ring.
Where and when?

[cnorman18]

I respect your beliefs. Why can you not just respect mine and let it go? Jesus himself was a Jew, you know. He never disrespected nor condemned the beliefs of others; he healed the servant of a Roman centurion, who was obviously neither a Jew nor a Christian, and spoke no word of judgment or condemnation to him. Who DID he condemn? Those among his own people who professed to be holier and more pious than others and were without either compassion or humility. At least that's the way it looks in the NT that I read. Is it not in yours?

Tex:If I told you this....What would you say to me?

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of Gods one and only Son.

I would say, "I heard and read that probably several decades before you were born. I recognize those words as sacred and deeply meaningful to many, and I would never dream of mocking or belittling them in any way, as I'm sure you would never dream of mocking these: "Sh'ma Yisroel, Adonai Elohenu, Adonoi Echad." They are no longer a part of the faith tradition of which I have become a member, but I have nothing in my heart for them but affection and respect."

[cnorman18]

That is another falsehood. I have NEVER said that Jesus was not the Christ. Feel free to find a quote where I did; I have over 7,000 posts here -- better start hunting.

Tex: Word games again.....Do you believe Lord Jesus to be the Christ then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ

That would be for Christians to decide, just as whether or not he was the Jewish Messiah is for Jews to decide. I have no basis for an opinion and no particular interest in the question, so my answer can only be "I do not claim to know."

Just for the record....Anytime a Jew accept him as the Messiah.....Lord Jesus is the their Messiah. Not much you could do about that. Even if you believe the Lord was a fake.

I. Never. Said. That. Either.

If you have to KEEP putting words in my mouth, you must be having a difficult time responding to things I DO say -- which is also shown by the fact that you have deleted and ignored so very many of them in just my last few posts.

I have never met nor heard of any Jew since the first century who accepted Jesus as his or anybody's Messiah. I know of many who have accepted Jesus as the Christ and become Christians, which is of course their right; but that is not the same thing. Further, a "Messiah" who is a Messiah for some Jews and not others is no "Messiah" at all. That just isn't consistent with the meaning of the term.

[cnorman18]

The New Testament is not Scripture to Jews. That means only that it is not authoritative for us, which is not the same as saying it is false. I have no knowledge of that and do not claim to. I have, for the record, studied the NT extensively under world-class scholars at Southern Methodist University, and I regard NONE of it as "fable" or "fiction" or anything of the kind. The fact that I no longer accept it as Scripture does not mean or imply any such thing.

I do not even regard the Hebrew Bible as "the Word of God" as you probably do; I regard it as the literature of the Jewish people, and neither history, science treatise, nor the direct words of the Almighty. Again, that is not the same as saying it is "false" or a "fable."

Tex: Yet again....Very interesting.....You do not believe that the Torah is the word of God. Then where did Moses get it from....Mohammed?

Many Jews believe that the Torah was given, in fact dictated letter-by-letter, to Moses directly by God. Others, like myself, believe that the Torah was the result of a long process of oral tradition and redaction by authors unknown over something like a thousand years. Both beliefs are acceptable in modern Judaism -- but the point that might be even harder for you to grasp is that in EITHER case, the Torah is not the absolute and final authority on either belief or doctrine in the Jewish religion. That is why many laws of the Torah are no longer followed, and why in very many cases there is no evidence that they ever were, from stoning disobedient children to the Jubilee Year. The principle, on which I have written many times, is given in the Torah itself; the Torah is not in heaven, that is, now that it has been given to us humans, it is for US to determine its meaning and application in every generation, by the consensus of the wisest among us. That is not a privilege that we have claimed; it is a responsibility which we have been given.

Like I said; the Jewish religion and the Christian religion are two separate and distinct faiths with many very basic differences. You may not agree with the above; and we do not agree that a "religion" must consist of agreeing with a set of prescribed beliefs and "doctrines," nor that proper beliefs in anything have the power to "save" anyone.

We believe differently, and "beliefs", in the Jewish religion, just don't mater as much as in the Christian religion. Different religions, okay?

Why not just leave each other alone?

[Tex]

The New Testament is not Scripture to Jews. That means only that it is not authoritative for us, which is not the same as saying it is false. I have no knowledge of that and do not claim to. I have, for the record, studied the NT extensively under world-class scholars at Southern Methodist University, and I regard NONE of it as "fable" or "fiction" or anything of the kind. The fact that I no longer accept it as Scripture does not mean or imply any such thing.

I do not even regard the Hebrew Bible as "the Word of God" as you probably do; I regard it as the literature of the Jewish people, and neither history, science treatise, nor the direct words of the Almighty. Again, that is not the same as saying it is "false" or a "fable."

Tex: Yet again....Very interesting.....You do not believe that the Torah is the word of God. Then where did Moses get it from....Mohammed?

Many Jews believe that the Torah was given, in fact dictated letter-by-letter, to Moses directly by God. Others, like myself, believe that the Torah was the result of a long process of oral tradition and redaction by authors unknown over something like a thousand years. Both beliefs are acceptable in modern Judaism -- but the point that might be even harder for you to grasp is that in EITHER case, the Torah is not the absolute and final authority on either belief or doctrine in the Jewish religion. That is why many laws of the Torah are no longer followed, and why in very many cases there is no evidence that they ever were, from stoning disobedient children to the Jubilee Year. The principle, on which I have written many times, is given in the Torah itself; the Torah is not in heaven, that is, now that it has been given to us humans, it is for US to determine its meaning and application in every generation, by the consensus of the wisest among us. That is not a privilege that we have claimed; it is a responsibility which we have been given.

Like I said; the Jewish religion and the Christian religion are two separate and distinct faiths with many very basic differences. You may not agree with the above; and we do not agree that a "religion" must consist of agreeing with a set of prescribed beliefs and "doctrines," nor that proper beliefs in anything have the power to "save" anyone.

We believe differently, and "beliefs", in the Jewish religion, just don't mater as much as in the Christian religion. Different religions, okay?

Why not just leave each other alone?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... orah.shtml

Amazing....If I listen to you....Judaism is a new Religion. However I keep on opening site after site and they say nothing what you say. Are you an authority in Judaism....Are you a Rabbi at least?

[cnorman18]

Amazing....If I listen to you....Judaism is a new Religion. However I keep on opening site after site and they say nothing what you say.

You didn't look around on even THAT site enough. See below.

As for other sites -- I have said elsewhere, and many times, that websites on the Jewish religion are not reliable. Most are Orthodox, though few make that clear; the Orthodox, like fundamentalist Christians, think that their perspective is the ONLY one that is proper or correct -- but the fact is that only about 10% of Jews worldwide are Orthodox. I have said for years now that anyone really interested in learning about Judaism should really read an actual book or two, e.g. Milton Friedman's Basic Judaism or even Judaism for Dummies.

Are you an authority in Judaism....Are you a Rabbi at least?

No, I am not a rabbi; but I AM what is called a "learned layman," which has been attested to by several rabbis -- around a dozen, in fact. When one converts to Judaism, one is REQUIRED to study, and it's not uncommon for we converts to be more knowledgeable about the "book learning" side of the faith than many who are born Jewish, though we are understandably less experienced and wise in the cultural and emotional side of the community (since we were not brought up in it). I have continued to study Judaism long after my conversion; I would estimate that I have read perhaps 400 books on the subject, or more, from many perspectives and on many aspects of Judaism and Jewish history. Others have tried to paint me as some sort of lone nutball who is "making it up as I go along," as you yourself have said; I can only say that that is not the case. Everything I post is solidly founded in the spectrum of acceptable Jewish belief, and is actually a good deal less radical than some of the perspectives found on that spectrum, as you are about to see.

The link you posted is actually to a rather good site, but you ought to have looked around on it a bit more. For instance, here is their article on Reform Judaism, which contains the following on the Torah (which seems to be the subject about which you are most concerned now):

Revelation vs interpretation: Whilst these changes are some of the obvious outward signs of Reform Judaism, the key to them all is the question of what happened at Mount Sinai. For the Orthodox, it was the revelation of God given once and for all time. Aspects might be interpreted through oral traditions, but it cannot be altered or negated. Reform adheres to the notion of Progressive Revelation: that the will of God is constantly unfolding and each generation has to hear God's voice in its own time. Mount Sinai was the start, but what held true four thousand years ago for a nomadic group living in the wilderness does not necessarily apply today. Scientific knowledge and modern insights are part of God's revelation too... The Bible may be an authoritative text, but it does not have final authority. In the classic formulation of the relationship between past and present, 'tradition has a vote, but not a veto'.

Conservative Judaism, the movement with which I primarily identify, came after Reform in Jewish history. From that article, note this:

Study of Torah: Modern Jews should study Torah in harmony with their mental world and not solely through the eyes of their ancestors.... Conservative Jews regard the Torah as both divine and human, but having divine authority. They believe the Torah was revealed by God but is a human record of the encounter between humanity and God, and the Jewish people's interpretation of God's will.... The Conservative/Masorti movement practices traditional Judaism, but interprets Jewish teaching in the light of contemporary knowledge and scholarship. Conservative Judaism allows gradual change in law and practice, but only if the change is in harmony with Jewish tradition.

But look at Liberal Judaism as well:

In beliefs and practice Liberal Judaism is more radical than UK Reform Judaism, and has much in common with American Reform Judaism. The movement has a strong intellectual tradition, and believes that Jewish texts should be reinterpreted in the light of modern scholarship and Jewish laws reassessed by their practical suitability to contemporary conditions....

Liberal Jews don't believe that the Torah was written by God on tablets of stone and given to Moses. They believe it was written by human beings and should be responded to as such. Many Liberal Jews do acknowledge that much of the Torah was divinely inspired.

Liberal Jews regard the biblical writers as fallible human beings, anchored in the customs and societies of their time and place. They accept that while the Torah contains much that is spiritual and inspiring, it also contains 'plenty that is flawed, petty, and rooted in ancient politics and culture.'

So, for example, Liberal Jews don't accept that God was responsible for some of the ancient concepts and laws, such as the stoning to death of a rebellious son or the permanent ostracism from the community of Israel of the members of ancient Canaanite tribes. They believe that these were human laws that were part of the culture and moralities of their time and that have no application today.

This re-evaluation of scripture doesn't devalue the Torah. Liberal Jews regard the Torah, together with Mishnah, Talmud and Midrash, as an inexhaustible source of wisdom, guidance and inspiration. However, they believe that the Torah and other works should be interpreted in the context of the present day, rather than literally.

And of course there is Reconstructionist Judaism, one of our newer movements; among their perspectives are these:

A supernatural understanding of God (and of heavenly salvation) is misguided:
God is not a being
God does not intervene in human life
People can't know God as a person
God is the 'power that makes for salvation'
Salvation must be achieved in this world, not some supernatural 'hereafter'
The Torah is not the result of supernatural revelation

And there is Humanistic Judaism, which is the most radical of the modern movements: it goes a bit farther than I personally think necessary, but some around here might be astonished that it is considered a part of Judaism at all:

Humanistic Judaism doesn't proclaim that there is no God, but it does do without God. It sees no evidence for the existence of a supernatural being. Most Humanistic Jews regard the question of God's existence as either meaningless, or irrelevant.

It finds no meaning in the worship of God, whether or not God exists. So Humanistic Jews do not pray or refer to God or the supernatural, or use worshipful or prayer-like language....

Humanistic Judaism views Jewish history as the story of real people and real events.
The story of the Jews to be found in the Bible and the Talmud contains kernels of truth overlaid with myth and legend. Modern science, archeology, and biblical criticism are revealing the story of the Jewish experience, a story that continues into our own times...
Humanistic Jews celebrate the traditional Jewish festivals, but with the supernatural elements removed. They see these festivals as a way of commemorating the shared history, memories, and culture of the Jewish people, and as a way of sharing togetherness with the Jewish community. Family rituals such as Bar Mitzvahs are a way for a family to restate their values and their togetherness.

There are MANY perspectives within my religion; and though we disagree, sometimes intensely, on all these points (and many others -- I couldn't quote EVERYTHING on these sites), we all still affirm each other as Jews. Too, there are no hard bright lines between these "movements" or "branches" of Judaism, as is the case with most Christian denominations; the thinking of many Jews partakes of many of these modes of thought and belief, or, like my own, can cycle between several of them depending on mood and the specific subject. This is because, as I keep saying, the specific content of one's beliefs are not of central, or even peripheral, importance in the Jewish religion. Judaism is about community, values, traditions, heritage, and observance, not a set of formal beliefs that can never change -- though that is true to some extent of the Orthodox.

I hope all that helps. I quite understand your doubts and your incredulity; indeed, I have been dealing with it for some years now. Few people outside of the Jewish community really know much about modern Judaism, even though many seem to think that they do because they have read the Bible. Judaism has changed a great deal since the fall of the Temple in 70 CE; and it's an unfortunate fact that the New Testament -- and particularly Paul -- does not really portray the Judaism of even that time with particular accuracy. It's not that Paul was "lying" or anything of the kind, but he was rather out of step with the normative Judaism of his own day. Not surprising, since he was from Tarsus, a community where the culture was far more Greek than Jewish.

I'm not looking for an argument here. This is a discussion forum, not a debate forum. You are free to disagree with me as anyone is free to disagree with anyone else around here, but if you continue to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about when I'm discussing my own religion -- well, there isn't much to say, except perhaps "Read the parts of the very site you linked to and see for yourself."