ThackerAgency

Here I’ll point to the commandment about adultery. . . and Solomon. Solomon was the most blessed by God and closest to God. Why then was his blatant disregard for this commandment by taking so many wives not considered ‘disobeying’ God?

ShyGuy

No. Polygamy is perfectly permissable according to the Torah. Jacob, Leah and Rachel – remember. It is only for the last 1000 or so years that polygamy has been banned. See Wikipedia: Rabbenu Gershon as an elementary reference.

{{{{quote from linked article: Rashi of Troyes (d. 1105) said less than a century after Gershom’s death, “all members of the Ashkenazi diaspora are students of his.” As early as the 14th century Asher ben Jehiel wrote that Rabbeinu Gershom’s writings were “such permanent fixtures that they may well have been handed down on Mount Sinai.”}}}}

Here’s where the Protestant in me screams SOLA SCRIPTURA!!
;-) :-) :-)

Is. 64:6 All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

SPRINGS to mind…

Sticking with Torah, there is indeed a law against polygamy–ThackerAgency is exactly correct, Solomon broke this law soundly-and he must have known, since he was commanded to write it down for himself. It’s found in Deuteronomy 17:

14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;

15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

16But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.

17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

18And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:

19And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them:

20That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

But, we can go back much further than that, all the way to Genesis. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. …how exactly is one supposed to add to that one flesh–does it then become one and a half?? Two? Five???

Let’s just state the obvious here–the very first time a man–whether he be Abraham, Jacob or whomever, feasted his eyes upon any woman other than his wife, he was betraying that covenant. Now-it was forgivable…obviously, as is murder!…but let’s not kid ouselves into believing that G*d condones polygamy in any manner shape or form–He merely forgives it.

LOL–each and every SINGLE instance where polygamy is taught about in the Torah is a negative lesson! There is not one instance where the circumstances are described–the relationships reported, the consequences told, where a second wife is a blessing to the family…instead, there is the jealousy of Sarah, the weaping of Hannah, the pain of Rebecca and Leah. (I’m sure each and every one of their husbands suffered many a headache as well.)

Solomon’s heart WAS moved by multiplying wives unto himself: He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been. 1Kings 11:3-4

First, I’m really enjoying your posts, well, up until that last one, where you “dug” us little christians, implicitly calling Yeshua Ha’Mashiach a false prophet. (!) ;-) –no offense taken, btw. …But speaking of “You shall neither add to it nor subtract from it”

I had been enjoying your link to the Noahic Commandments when all of a sudden:

2. The unspoken four-letter Divine name in this verse, transposed to spoken form as Havaye, points to a prohibition against cursing G-d, as evident from Leviticus 24:16. (“And one who pronounces blasphemously the Name of the L-rd/Havaye shall be put to death, the entire assembly shall surely stone him; convert and native alike, when he blasphemes the Name, he shall be put to death.” Note: in the painless mode of execution translated from Hebrew as “stoning”, the convicted criminal was drugged and thrown to his death from a high tower onto a stone pavement. See Tractate Sanhedrin.)

Now, there are several instances of stoning spoken of in the Tenahk; Why risk credibility by exaggerating/spinning the definition of “stoning”?? “I mean, come on!”

Exodus 9:12-13 “You shall set bounds for the people all around, saying, ‘Beware that you do not go up on the mountain or touch the border of it; whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.

13′No hand shall touch him, but he shall surely be stoned or shot through; whether beast or man, he shall not live ‘ When the ram’s horn sounds a long blast, they shall come up to the mountain.”

(emphasis mine–but it would be kinda hard to poison him, and take him up a convenient cliff -since they were outside the camp–to ‘painlessly’ kill him all without touching him!)

Leviticus 24:22-23 ‘There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the LORD your God.’”

23Then Moses spoke to the sons of Israel, and they brought the one who had cursed outside the camp and stoned him with stones. Thus the sons of Israel did, just as the LORD had commanded Moses.

Numbers 15:36
So all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, just as the LORD had commanded Moses.

Again, kinda hard for a whole congregation to drug a person, and then for everyone to throw him off a high building (again, outside of a camp) but NO stretching of the natural reading is necessary at all, if we DON’T ADD that new definition of “stoning”…everyone just picks up a rock and heaves ho.

There’s more, but I don’t want to belabor a point.

“Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.
If there will arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of a dream, and he gives you a sign or a wonder,
and the sign or the wonder of which he spoke to you happens, [and he] says, “Let us go after other gods which you have not known, and let us worship them,”
you shall not heed the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of a dream; for the Lord, your God, is testing you, to know whether you really love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul.
You shall follow the Lord, your God, fear Him, keep His commandments, heed His voice, worship Him, and cleave to Him.
And that prophet, or that dreamer of a dream shall be put to death; because he spoke falsehood about the Lord, your God Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and Who redeemed you from the house of bondage, to lead you astray from the way in which the Lord, your God, commanded you to go; so shall you clear away the evil from your midst.”
– Deuteronomy 13:1-6

Oh dear.

“So I ask you. Was killing Jesus a good or bad thing? I don’t think we can know, I don’t think we were created to know, I don’t think there is an answer.”

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM

Deut. 29:29 says:

“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever..”

I’m thinging that may be a secret thing. I can’t say it’s been revealed.

Shy Guy, the ‘eye for an eye’ verse is just one verse in a sea of instances where it says don’t do this, do that, the punishment is this. Are we to believe that all of those are equal to the commandments because they are in the Torah?

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:42 AM

I do not understand your question. If you want, please rephrase.

I look at the Old Testament as a historical documentation of the Jewish people and their relationship to God the Creator. I don’t really see any of it as necessary to life today other than the fact that we can learn from what happened when people disobeyed God in the past.

Yes. I am most familiar with this Christian doctrine. Not the place to argue on this point. I was pointing out the explicite contradictions between what you claimed the Torah says or doesn’t say versus what are actually in the verses themselves.

Here I’ll point to the commandment about adultery. . . and Solomon. Solomon was the most blessed by God and closest to God. Why then was his blatant disregard for this commandment by taking so many wives not considered ‘disobeying’ God?

No. Polygamy is perfectly permissable according to the Torah. Jacob, Leah and Rachel – remember. It is only for the last 1000 or so years that polygamy has been banned. See Wikipedia: Rabbenu Gershon as an elementary reference.

Solomon’s downfall was taking his wives’ gods and religions. . . not committing adultery with them.

There is a misnomer about the Torah’s meaning of the word “adultery”. It only refers to cases of consensual relations when the woman is married to someone else.

Live and learn.

But Judaism has always taught that Solomon’s downfall was indeed for disobeying G-d. When did anyone say otherwise? See Crash Course in Jewish History: King Solomon.

Don’t think I have time for more now.

Granted He laid down His life. But how could mankind be so awful as to LEGALLY kill Him in the most horrific way in history? I look at it as the most terrible time in the history of man-made ‘justice’. His crucifixion pointed out the awful nature of mankind when left to their own decisions on what is good and bad.

Sorry to get off the subject of the blogging the Koran. I’ll stop now because I hijacked this thread waaay too much.

“Europe was demonstrably more murderous to Jews than the Muslim world. It was no fun to be a dhimmi, but it was better than being a Jew in medieval Europe.”
rokemronnie on April 6, 2008 at 12:14 PM

Is there comparable evidence?

“refuse to understand because they think what they believe is true so they think they can win”
Jaynie59 on April 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM

I wonder.

“because so are the other two.”
LevStrauss on April 6, 2008 at 8:55 AM

“Seeing the Koran compared with the Bible, and things like burning bushes and stone tablets with God word on them, and to know that so many people believe in such nonsense, is really very sad.”
Jaynie59 on April 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM

…make me sad

And once again, I don’t believe that people can know the difference between good and evil. 2000 years after Christ and I still don’t know whether His death was ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM

I don’t know how any Christian can view the crucifixion of Christ as anything other than good.

His life was not taken, but rather willfully layed down by Him per the will of His Father.

Without His death, His ressurection could not occur.

emailnuevo on April 6, 2008 at 8:15 AM

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone put it quite that way before. You’ve hit the nail on the head my friend. Bravo!

And RIP Mr. Heston.

I think you’re asking the wrong person.

Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 10:39 AM

I understand that now. I didn’t realize you were Jewish when I posted before. It’s like the debate yesterday with Hitchens on ‘the Rev Wright’. Hitchens is appalled by Wright’s statements but is willing to accept that he’s ‘as awful as any Christian preacher’. That dilutes his arguments considerably. But in context, we move forward.

I look at the Old Testament as a historical documentation of the Jewish people and their relationship to God the Creator. I don’t really see any of it as necessary to life today other than the fact that we can learn from what happened when people disobeyed God in the past.

Here I’ll point to the commandment about adultery. . . and Solomon. Solomon was the most blessed by God and closest to God. Why then was his blatant disregard for this commandment by taking so many wives not considered ‘disobeying’ God? Solomon’s downfall was taking his wives’ gods and religions. . . not committing adultery with them.

So I ask you. Was killing Jesus a good or bad thing? I don’t think we can know, I don’t think we were created to know, I don’t think there is an answer.

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM

I can only look at it as having its advantages and its disadvantages. If not for the historical outcomes, it would mostly be irrelevant to me.

I think you’re asking the wrong person.

we don’t consider ‘eye for an eye’ anymore do we? At one time according to the Bible that was considered the ‘good’ way to deal with justice.

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:27 AM

We Jews always knew that this particular verse was not meant literally. Even your deity, Jesus, knew that.

HOWEVER, if they were so important to Creation, and God is PERFECT (which I believe), why didn’t he give them to Adam? Why was Adam only restricted to not eating from the tree.

Here’s a little update for you, though it might be jumping the gun a bit:

QUESTION : (a) Where does the Bible say that these Seven Noahide Commandments were given to Noah, and where does it say that they were given to Adam?

If He hadn’t been killed, we wouldn’t recognize him as Messiah. But recognizing Him as Messiah, it seems preposterous that He should be killed after doing nothing wrong.

So I ask you. Was killing Jesus a good or bad thing? I don’t think we can know, I don’t think we were created to know, I don’t think there is an answer.

HOWEVER, if they were so important to Creation, and God is PERFECT (which I believe), why didn’t he give them to Adam? Why was Adam only restricted to not eating from the tree.

I always thought that it was because if the Fall hadn’t happened and Man was still living in peace with God, Man wouldn’t have needed the 10 Commandments.

HOWEVER, if they were so important to Creation, and God is PERFECT (which I believe), why didn’t he give them to Adam? Why was Adam only restricted to not eating from the tree.

And more importantly I was mostly referring to all the laws and rules and regulations later in the Bible. . . AFTER Exodus where it comes up with penalties and punishments for obscure things (I would consider more of a historical context rather than instruction from God to everybody for all time).

Again, too involved to get into on a comment post, but I’m doing my best.

From that point on the Bible is filled with mankind making rules (10 commandments, etc) that were not originally created by God in the garden of Eden.

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Man-made rules?

“So Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances, and all the people answered in unison and said, “All the words that the Lord has spoken we will do.”
– Exodus 24:3

“And the Lord said to Moses, “Come up to Me to the mountain and remain there, and I will give you the stone tablets, the Law and the commandments, which I have written to instruct them.”
– Exodus 24:12

“When He had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, stone tablets, written with the finger of God.”
– Exodus 31:18

There are other verses but these should make the point sufficiently.

In other words, I interpret it to mean that if you will die when you eat of the tree, then you won’t die if you don’t eat from it. . . sort of like a promise or covenant. Why would it matter that he’ll die if he eats from the tree (disobeys) if he would just die anyway?

Man didn’t know what was good or bad because he had no concept. He had free will to either obey God or disobey God. The test was mainly whether or not mankind ate from the ‘tree of knowledge of good and evil’. . . meaning that eating the tree means Adam determines that eating the tree is good and not evil. From that point on the Bible is filled with mankind making rules (10 commandments, etc) that were not originally created by God in the garden of Eden. Judges is filled with rules that people needed to abide by (people determining what is good and what is bad). Even up to the point where the people and the government decided that it was ‘good’ to kill Jesus.

Anyway it is too involved to get into my theological understanding of Genesis and God’s covenant on a comment post. Thanks for your interest. I hope this post made some sense.

Adam was not supposed to die, not created to die (no sin, no suffering, no pain)

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 12:27 AM

Are you sure? Contrast with:

“Now the Lord God took the man, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.
And the Lord God commanded man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat.
But of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for on the day that you eat thereof, you shall surely die.”
– Genesis 2:15-17

From a cursory reading, any of your claims can go either way.

The ‘tree of eternity’ is actually something that God created Adam with. Adam was not supposed to die, not created to die (no sin, no suffering, no pain) so why would he need a ‘tree of eternity’. The whole story is absurd and obviously made up by Mohammed.

ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 12:27 AM

What are you basing yourself on?

“And the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and He breathed into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living soul.
And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden from the east, and He placed there the man whom He had formed.
And the Lord God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant to see and good to eat, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.”
– Genesis 2:7-9

After that the Qur’an returns to the story of Adam’s fall; Satan tempts Adam to eat from the Tree of Eternity (v. 120) – not the tree of the knowledge of good and evil as in Genesis.

This is actually one of the most central tenets concerning the Covenant between God and Adam. God will tell Adam what is good and what is evil. God did not create man with the knowledge of good and evil.

The ‘tree of eternity’ is actually something that God created Adam with. Adam was not supposed to die, not created to die (no sin, no suffering, no pain) so why would he need a ‘tree of eternity’. The whole story is absurd and obviously made up by Mohammed.

The amazing thing is learning about it and realizing how screwed up the believers in this religion are. Mo basically told Bible stories and switched them around. I don’t feel anger or hate, I just feel sorry for these people.

Muslims obviously WANT to do good and right by God, they are just so far off base, and they are not able to change their thoughts because of fear. A real ‘true religion’ would not require people to remain in the religion or face death. Such a shame these faithful people are faithful to such obvious and blatant misrepresentations of the Bible.

How can it be a perfect revelation if there are such factual errors? How do Muslims reconcile this with the facts?

Particularly among Muslims, faith is very strong. If the facts don’t bear out that faith, so much worse for the facts.

Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:19 PM

This is one of the most scary things about Islam. Their faith is so strong they’re willing to disbelieve what their own senses tell them.