JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: jdl4ever on March 24, 2008, 07:28:59 PM
-
Why don't we live for so long? Was it due to the diet they ate or to the area they lived in? Or due to some unknown factor? Was there just less pollution back then? Was it a miracle of G-d?
-
book by prof natan aviezer, he thinks genetic.
example he gives is noah lived for > 900 years, but his wife lived around 100 years(can`t remember how long),
his wife`s genetics may have spread from there after the flood.
from there, deterioration in the environment brought us down from around
Ageing is a phenomena.. I think natan aviezer wrote that he thinks in those days they might have lived forever, then died due to some terrible accident e.g. killed by an animal. A bit far fetched though(like why do they all tend to live to around 1000, working downwards).
causes to consider would be environment pre flood compared to after the flood.. and further deterioration after the flood.. And also noah`s wife.
-
Early man didn't actually live for 1000 years.
They had no indoor plumbing, no toilet paper, no refrigerators, no washing machines, no central air & heating, no audio, no video, no stereo, no automobiles, no telephones, no TV, no cable, no computers, and no internet.
That is why a life span of 30 years felt like it lasted 1000 years!
:::D
-
Which Aviezer book? I dont "hold" by his philosophy on maaseh bereshit, I go by Rabbi Natan Slifkin.
-
woooooooh
I wouldn't call it maaseh beraishit.
I think the natan aviezer book he wrote that in was "fossils and faith". He also has one called "in the beginning", that I haven't read.
note- a difference between him and shroeder is he goes by plain text only to reconcile, but shroeder uses tradition too. neither method is wrong.. If you can reconcile from pshat then great.
You don't have to "hold" by any position.. These are theories none of which we can be sure is correct.
-
Someone in Párshas Noach, there's a symbol that the maximum human life span is going to drop to around 120 years, I forget where...
-
However, this could mean that it would be 120 years from that time until the Flood took place where most people were wiped out, which is probably the correct meaning because there were many people after this time who lived over 120 years.
Yeah, that's what I think it means as well.
-
However, this could mean that it would be 120 years from that time until the Flood took place where most people were wiped out, which is probably the correct meaning because there were many people after this time who lived over 120 years.
Yeah, that's what I think it means as well.
That's the pshat, but I believe the midrash says that this is also a sign that the maximum life span will slowly descend to around 120 years...
-
But then why did many people live past 120 years? That would violate G-d's will. But it does make sense that it's a hint that eventually men will live on average not past 120 years or about 120 years like you stated. Although it is not a perfect derivation since the verse didn't say "about 120 years" and even if it is an estimate, there are a few recent individuals who lived in the upper 120's to 130 years without birth records so if their story is true, 130 would be a better estimate.
-
But then why did many people live past 120 years? That would violate G-d's will.
I repeat, slowly descend.
-
seems from a graph of ages given
http://www.philipcoppens.com/g5_lifespans.jpg
note- that graph is BCE, for example, Abraham was around 1850 BCE
and combining that info with that pasuk(verse) about G-d not wanting to argue with man for so long, so shortening his life to 120..!!!!!
There was a gradual descent in years, down to that and below. G-d probably did it naturally somehow - perhaps through the environment. That is why it was not instantaneous.
-
Re: "...there were many people after this time who lived over 120 years..."
It's a shame they didn't stop smoking...they'd have lived to 130 years had they stubbed out the Marlboros!
-
woooooooh
I wouldn't call it maaseh beraishit.
I think the natan aviezer book he wrote that in was "fossils and faith". He also has one called "in the beginning", that I haven't read.
note- a difference between him and shroeder is he goes by plain text only to reconcile, but shroeder uses tradition too. neither method is wrong.. If you can reconcile from pshat then great.
You don't have to "hold" by any position.. These are theories none of which we can be sure is correct.
The book was called "Beresheit Barah" -"In the beginning"
-
I did not say the book was called that.
But you used the term talking about rabbi slifkin's philosophy of "maaseh beraishit"..
Maaseh beraishit and Maaseh Merkava are 2 mystical/kabbalistic concepts mentioned of in the talmud, but not described.. They are Lost oral traditions.
Rabbi Slifkin, is not writing on kabbalah.. As you know..
But I am just alerting you to the meaning of the term "maaseh beraishit".
It's not just 2 words strung together. It's a mystical tradition on beraishit, called that.
note- maimonideans (I think) reject all kabbalah post talmud, "but" would accept that there was a tradition of maaseh beraishit and maaseh merkava. They are lost traditions though. (I think even the RAMBAM said he did not have a tradition on them)
note- not sure what they make of sefer yetzirah - a kabbalistic text, a google search said something like- it is from the maaseh beraishit school of thought..
-
The book is here
http://www.amazon.com/Beginning-Biblical-Creation-Science/dp/0881253286
It is called "In the Beginning " and also says like a title on the bottom of the cover "Biblical creation and science".
It happens to say Beraishit Bara too(the first 2 words of the book of beraishit), in the picture. I don't think the title is beraishit bara.
And it is an english book.
I actually heard the name of the title in an interview, from the author himself. He said it was called "In The Beginning"
-
The other book was by prof natan aviezer was
Fossils and Faith: Understanding Torah and Science
http://www.amazon.com/Fossils-Faith-Understanding-Torah-Science/dp/0881256072/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b
He just uses the plain meaning of the biblical text.. not tradition.
Gerald Shroeder e.g. in Genesis and the big bang, uses tradition.
-
I did not say the book was called that.
But you used the term talking about rabbi slifkin's philosophy of "maaseh beraishit"..
Maaseh beraishit and Maaseh Merkava are 2 mystical/kabbalistic concepts mentioned of in the talmud, but not described.. They are Lost oral traditions.
Rabbi Slifkin, is not writing on kabbalah.. As you know..
But I am just alerting you to the meaning of the term "maaseh beraishit".
It's not just 2 words strung together. It's a mystical tradition on beraishit, called that.
note- maimonideans (I think) reject all kabbalah post talmud, "but" would accept that there was a tradition of maaseh beraishit and maaseh merkava. They are lost traditions though. (I think even the RAMBAM said he did not have a tradition on them)
note- not sure what they make of sefer yetzirah - a kabbalistic text, a google search said something like- it is from the maaseh beraishit school of thought..
Didnt the Rambam write a chapter in the Moreh on the Merkava?
-
I read In The Beginning.
Excellent book.
G-d created The Beginning.
-
I did not say the book was called that.
But you used the term talking about rabbi slifkin's philosophy of "maaseh beraishit"..
Maaseh beraishit and Maaseh Merkava are 2 mystical/kabbalistic concepts mentioned of in the talmud, but not described.. They are Lost oral traditions.
Rabbi Slifkin, is not writing on kabbalah.. As you know..
But I am just alerting you to the meaning of the term "maaseh beraishit".
It's not just 2 words strung together. It's a mystical tradition on beraishit, called that.
note- maimonideans (I think) reject all kabbalah post talmud, "but" would accept that there was a tradition of maaseh beraishit and maaseh merkava. They are lost traditions though. (I think even the RAMBAM said he did not have a tradition on them)
note- not sure what they make of sefer yetzirah - a kabbalistic text, a google search said something like- it is from the maaseh beraishit school of thought..
Didnt the Rambam write a chapter in the Moreh on the Merkava?
oh... would have to check. "the guide" is online on sacred-texts website..
I do recall form an english translation saying him saying in "the guide" that he had no tradition on maaseh beraishit.. would have tocheck the hebrew to know for sure.
He might have talked about the mervaka.. I don't know.
-
G-d's Will. He made it threw partly by the much better climate. Also the species before the flood was much more stronger then now. The quality of nature declines each generation, and even the fruits and vegetables that your parents and grandparents ate growing up were much better in quality then now.
This is one of the reasons why G-d will feed the rightious after Moshiah comes from the Shor BarLiviatan (a very big ancient fish) that was killed and hidden at the time of creation. One will be eaten, the other I dont remember right now. It is going to taste very good, because the fish is from ancient times thus it didn't reduce its quality in taste as opposed to the fish lets say being small, reproducing and us then eating the fresh fish.
-
G-d's Will. He made it threw partly by the much better climate. Also the species before the flood was much more stronger then now. The quality of nature declines each generation, and even the fruits and vegetables that your parents and grandparents ate growing up were much better in quality then now.
<snip>
actually, if you ask my grandma, milk nowadays doesn't go off!!
-
This is one of the reasons why G-d will feed the rightious after Moshiah comes from the Shor BarLiviatan (a very big ancient fish) that was killed and hidden at the time of creation. One will be eaten, the other I dont remember right now. It is going to taste very good, because the fish is from ancient times thus it didn't reduce its quality in taste as opposed to the fish lets say being small, reproducing and us then eating the fresh fish.
:::D
Don't start.
You reject kabbalah and are an ignoramous. And he accepts anything , without sources. If it is from a rabbi or website that he trusts, and he trusts some strange websites.
I knew you would respond and that would complel tzvi to defend his holy information.That is why I made a joke, to try to satisfy you. But no, it wasn't enough.. !!!!!
Seriously though. realise your own shortcomings, and his.
Your comments about kabbalah have been refuted by people alot more skeptical than Tzvi. If you want, then refer people to the thread you discussed it in.. The thread that you stopped responding in. (maybe you stopped responding because you upset the chassidic moderator by saying that chassidut was idolatry. Shows how ignorant you are. Of course, you prob think the same about kabbalah, so you could have avoided that).
If you were serious then you wouldn't start a serious discussion, then leave. And then provoke tzvi. When tzvi has also been challenged - in serious posts - by people alot more knowledgeable and sensible than you.
We know, you reject kabbalah.. tzvi accepts it. That is that.
Whether Tzvi is textually correct in his kabbalistic claim, or where he is correct and where incorrect.. That is another matter too beyond your knowledge for you to criticise directly. You do not even distinguish between Madonna's so-called "kabbalah" and the Arizal's kabbalah - and of course you know as much of the latter as you do of the former.
-
Actually that is from the Gemorrah. Both the big fish and about nature decreasing in quality/ decaying. (and I didn't get your joke).
-
Many sources available here is one
The word Leviathan is mentioned in Rashi's commentary on Genesis 1:21: "G-d created the great sea monsters - Taninim." Jastrow translates the word "Taninim" as "sea monsters, crocodiles or large snakes". Rashi comments: "According to legend this refers to the Leviathan and its mate. G-d created a male and female Leviathan, then killed the female and salted it for the righteous, for if the Leviathans were to procreate the world could not stand before them."
Just made a search and got this on Wikepidia
According to a midrash, the leviathan was created on the fifth day (Yalkut, Gen. 12). Originally God produced a male and a female leviathan, but lest in multiplying the species should destroy the world, He slew the female, reserving her flesh for the banquet that will be given to the righteous on the advent of the Messiah (B. B. 74a).
-
This was a time before hashem had given many miraculous things to the world such as the torah and the 613 Miztvot. While Hashem's power is infinate, what could be seen by man was likely the same throughout creation. While I don't think that the giving of miracles would take away years from our lives perhaps this could explain how Hashem was never lacking in his kindness even before they were given.
Perhaps he made our lives shorter so we could make it to the next world sooner.
-
It's not about what I "accept", it's about facts. Midrashim are not literal truths. They are legend and allegory. The Hebrew word means homelitic interpretation or allegory, from the root D.R.SH., which can mean to preach or interpret.
I think alot of that , whatever it was, was not midrash.
Some might be, I don't know.
You are confusing things by saying it is midrash.
Look at what Tzvi wrote..
"the species before the flood was much more stronger then now. "
midrash? gemara?
"The quality of nature declines each generation, "
"and even the fruits and vegetables that your parents and grandparents ate growing up were much better in quality then now. "
source?
" This is one of the reasons why G-d will feed the rightious after Moshiah comes from the Shor BarLiviatan (a very big ancient fish) "
I have read that in the artscroll.. I think on yom kippur
"that was killed and hidden at the time of creation. "
source?
"It is going to taste very good, because the fish is from ancient times thus it didn't reduce its quality in taste as opposed to the fish lets say being small, reproducing and us then eating the fresh fish. "
source?!!!!!!!
-
It's not about what I "accept", it's about facts. Midrashim are not literal truths. They are legend and allegory. The Hebrew word means homelitic interpretation or allegory, from the root D.R.SH., which can mean to preach or interpret.
I don't think it is the case that all midrashim are not literal.
And just saying it is "not literal" is not good enough.. What does it mean?
You said Tzvi was quoting midrash , you laughed at what you thought was a literal interpetation.
So what is it an allegory for? What is it teaching?
I think some midrashim are literal and some not literal.. Some of the midrashim that rashi quotes on pshat, are literal.
For example. The tenach says that Chava(Eve) bore Cayin(Cain) and Hevel(Abel). But it uses the word Et superfluously. There is a drash on that, - hooked onto the superfluous use of the word Et. Once for Cain, Twice for Abel. It hints at something..
Cain was born with one twin sister. and Abel with 2.
Sounds like a literal midrash to me..
These are not "legends".. They are oral traditions from Sinai.
Perhaps not as well preserved as Oral Law though..
We do have midrashim that cannot both be true. and one reject one if one wishes. The RAMBAN says something of that nature in the debate with pablo christiani.
(I think we should not rely on midrashim or aggada, for theology! though I suppose satmar do - with the 3 oaths!)
Midrash is not "interpretation" anymore than the Oral Law is interpretation.
They are traditions..
Drash, can be connected to a pasuk, but it's not interpretation.. The debate the rabbis often have is over what pasuk it is meant to be connected to.
-
True, midrashim are valid traditions just like the oral Torah and they do have meaning to Jews similar to the way Aesop's fables have a meaning to your average person, but they are not sources of historical absoluteness that are always to be believed literally. To take them literally is to miss the point that the rabbis were trying to teach through the legend. I was laughing at the fact that Tzvi actually seemed to take something literally that was not intended as such. I mean, do some Jews actually think that there's literally going to be a giant primordial fish fry when the Mashiach comes, and that we know for a fact that it will taste good, etc.? Question to kabbalists and chassidim: Will the reincarnated suicide bombers be participating in this event? What about other midrashim like the one about Pharaoh's daughter extending her arm many cubits in order to reach Moshe's basket in the water? Is this literal too? Some Jews need to show a little reason and not serve as "poster Jews" for every religion-bashing outfit in the world that wants to demean Judaism by pointing out its illogical and superstitious beliefs and adherents.
Personally I dont care about those who make fun, and say superstition, and all the other non-sense. Nor does it bother me that you reject it. But I do take it literal because I have learned it out in a number of places and from a number of great Rabbanim who said the same thing. Is having a giant fish to be eaten that strange? Or are we going to now claim that maybe those who believe in the 10 plagues, also believe in superstition? If the fact that nature declines in quality that perplexed?- it is even proven by those who are older then us and say that the checken (for example) they ate, tasted much better, more natural, etc. And also from the Torah we know that nowadays olives for example are much smaller in size then what we used to have expecially in Israel (because when they say Kiziet- like an olive , its not the size of todays olize but actually bigger (27 grams).
-
True, midrashim are valid traditions just like the oral Torah and they do have meaning to Jews similar to the way Aesop's fables have a meaning to your average person, but they are not sources of historical absoluteness that are always to be believed literally. To take them literally is to miss the point that the rabbis were trying to teach through the legend. I was laughing at the fact that Tzvi actually seemed to take something literally that was not intended as such. I mean, do some Jews actually think that there's literally going to be a giant primordial fish fry when the Mashiach comes, and that we know for a fact that it will taste good, etc.?
if you want to take the piss, you can take the piss out out of tenach stories that are also extraordinary. Or beliefs like resurrection of the dead. Which RAMBAM and all Orthodox jews without exception, accept as fundamantal to judaism.
so it is irrelevant
Question to kabbalists and chassidim: Will the reincarnated suicide bombers be participating in this event?
ditto. You can play these dishonest games with tenach too.
we know what it says. that's that. the purpose of a religion is not to answer every question you can dream up. You are just being dishonest. and/or illogical.
But saying you are just illogical is giving you too much credit.
What about other midrashim like the one about Pharaoh's daughter extending her arm many cubits in order to reach Moshe's basket in the water? Is this literal too?
whether it is or is not is not fundamental to judaism.
the criteria you use to dismiss things as not literal, is stupid.
If they are miraculous they are not literal.. stupid.
If people can take the piss, they are not literal... stupid.
Some Jews need to show a little reason and not serve as "poster Jews" for every religion-bashing outfit in the world that wants to demean Judaism by pointing out its illogical and superstitious beliefs and adherents.
any "religion bashing outfit" would consider you an idiot for believing tenach stories.. Just as much as believing midrash.
tzvi is right there, and he won and was right last time he argued with you to.
And stop picking on chassidim. They are not relevant here.
-
What you are saying is, you quit this argument
(you clearly lost it)
so that is why all you do now is suggest new ones. new ways to provoke people with ignorant comments.
-
Honestly thats is why you shouldn't learn Torah (not talking to Jews). You are mixing things up and trying to make a false impression that I believe in something like being in heaven with Hitler YSV (G-d forbid) and other things that are non-sense.
What you write about crap (literally), you know is non-sense, so why do you try to win over an argument by trying to defame me or anyone else.
What I wrote is not for you to debate, im not interested in debating with you (but if you challenge I have what to answer).
-
Honestly thats is why you shouldn't learn Torah (not talking to Jews). You are mixing things up and trying to make a false impression that I believe in something like being in heaven with Hitler YSV (G-d forbid) and other things that are non-sense.
What you write about crap (literally), you know is non-sense, so why do you try to win over an argument by trying to defame me or anyone else.
What I wrote is not for you to debate, im not interested in debating with you (but if you challenge I have what to answer).
Well, with the type of doctrines you believe as fact, you might as well believe you will be in heaven with Hitler. It's not that much more of a stretch. As I recall there was a thread talking about Hitler being reincarnated, which Jews on this forum were advocating. So there are Jews who believe this apparently. Therefore, the problem is not non-Jews learning Torah, it is Jews learning paganism in place of Torah. And I wasn't originally debating with you on your taking that fish story literally, I was just laughing at you. It wasn't intended to go any further than that. Q underscore Q underscore is the one who made that into a debate.
Did you see me advocate it? NO
And their was not more then 1 Jew who said that, and it is problematic, but it is for us to discuss amoung ourselves, and show why it is wrong.
And Kabbalah is in no way paganism (neither is Talmud nor what the real Hachamim in this and all generations teach).
You want to be a real noahide, then stay away from learning Torah that is not intended for you. (and I am not trying to be offensive but saying Halacha, for precisly problems like these - I know it is also problematic when a Jew posts some Torah and you cant help it that non-Jews will also learn, but its a public forum and public place, just like a Rabbi doesn't stop a lecture because non-Jews are present because the message needs to be heard for Jews, so to here. The obligation is on you not us. (By Torah I mean for example the laws, the Oral tradition, you can learn belief in G-d and a few other things that apply to you, but the point is how much more soo, its not your place to argue agains't, to add to it some of the Holliest sources of Divine Knowledge (real Kabbalah expecially from the Ari ZL Hakadosh, etc.)
-
Honestly thats is why you shouldn't learn Torah (not talking to Jews). You are mixing things up and trying to make a false impression that I believe in something like being in heaven with Hitler YSV (G-d forbid) and other things that are non-sense.
What you write about crap (literally), you know is non-sense, so why do you try to win over an argument by trying to defame me or anyone else.
What I wrote is not for you to debate, im not interested in debating with you (but if you challenge I have what to answer).
Well, with the type of doctrines you believe as fact, you might as well believe you will be in heaven with Hitler. It's not that much more of a stretch. As I recall there was a thread talking about Hitler being reincarnated, which Jews on this forum were advocating. So there are Jews who believe this apparently. Therefore, the problem is not non-Jews learning Torah, it is Jews learning paganism in place of Torah. And I wasn't originally debating with you on your taking that fish story literally, I was just laughing at you. It wasn't intended to go any further than that. Q underscore Q underscore is the one who made that into a debate.
Did you see me advocate it? NO
And their was not more then 1 Jew who said that, and it is problematic, but it is for us to discuss amoung ourselves, and show why it is wrong.
And Kabbalah is in no way paganism (neither is Talmud nor what the real Hachamim in this and all generations teach).
You want to be a real noahide, then stay away from learning Torah that is not intended for you. (and I am not trying to be offensive but saying Halacha, for precisly problems like these - I know it is also problematic when a Jew posts some Torah and you cant help it that non-Jews will also learn, but its a public forum and public place, just like a Rabbi doesn't stop a lecture because non-Jews are present because the message needs to be heard for Jews, so to here. The obligation is on you not us. (By Torah I mean for example the laws, the Oral tradition, you can learn belief in G-d and a few other things that apply to you, but the point is how much more soo, its not your place to argue agains't, to add to it some of the Holliest sources of Divine Knowledge (real Kabbalah expecially from the Ari ZL Hakadosh, etc.)
Well it will be pretty easy for me to stay away from Kabbalah because it doesn't exist as a branch of Torah knowledge. Anything taught as Kabbalah today (including the Kabbalah that is within so-called Orthodox Jewish circles) is not anything authentic, it is just paganism that some Jews extrapolate back onto the founders of their religion such as Moshe, etc. Even Rambam says that this knowledge was lost. What is known as Kabbalah today is a modern phenomenon. If true Kabbalah was available today, the vast majority of Jews, as well as all non-Jews would be forbidden to study it. And it's just as much my place to argue against the false practice and belief of it as it is for me to argue against the Satmar sect's anti-Zionism. The Arizal comes after the time that any knowledge in this area was lost, so he does not qualify as a "holiest source of divine knowledge". The Tanach, on the other hand, does qualify.
Thank you great hacham, you finally brought me to such deep understanding ::) Anyway the original argument you had was something from Talmud, and I dont see you staying out, so please keep your ignorance to yourself. like the Rock used to say "Know your role and shut your mouth" ;D
-
Honestly thats is why you shouldn't learn Torah (not talking to Jews). You are mixing things up and trying to make a false impression that I believe in something like being in heaven with Hitler YSV (G-d forbid) and other things that are non-sense.
What you write about crap (literally), you know is non-sense, so why do you try to win over an argument by trying to defame me or anyone else.
What I wrote is not for you to debate, im not interested in debating with you (but if you challenge I have what to answer).
Well, with the type of doctrines you believe as fact, you might as well believe you will be in heaven with Hitler. It's not that much more of a stretch. As I recall there was a thread talking about Hitler being reincarnated, which Jews on this forum were advocating. So there are Jews who believe this apparently. Therefore, the problem is not non-Jews learning Torah, it is Jews learning paganism in place of Torah. And I wasn't originally debating with you on your taking that fish story literally, I was just laughing at you. It wasn't intended to go any further than that. Q underscore Q underscore is the one who made that into a debate.
Did you see me advocate it? NO
And their was not more then 1 Jew who said that, and it is problematic, but it is for us to discuss amoung ourselves, and show why it is wrong.
And Kabbalah is in no way paganism (neither is Talmud nor what the real Hachamim in this and all generations teach).
You want to be a real noahide, then stay away from learning Torah that is not intended for you. (and I am not trying to be offensive but saying Halacha, for precisly problems like these - I know it is also problematic when a Jew posts some Torah and you cant help it that non-Jews will also learn, but its a public forum and public place, just like a Rabbi doesn't stop a lecture because non-Jews are present because the message needs to be heard for Jews, so to here. The obligation is on you not us. (By Torah I mean for example the laws, the Oral tradition, you can learn belief in G-d and a few other things that apply to you, but the point is how much more soo, its not your place to argue agains't, to add to it some of the Holliest sources of Divine Knowledge (real Kabbalah expecially from the Ari ZL Hakadosh, etc.)
Well it will be pretty easy for me to stay away from Kabbalah because it doesn't exist as a branch of Torah knowledge. Anything taught as Kabbalah today (including the Kabbalah that is within so-called Orthodox Jewish circles) is not anything authentic, it is just paganism that some Jews extrapolate back onto the founders of their religion such as Moshe, etc. Even Rambam says that this knowledge was lost. What is known as Kabbalah today is a modern phenomenon. If true Kabbalah was available today, the vast majority of Jews, as well as all non-Jews would be forbidden to study it. And it's just as much my place to argue against the false practice and belief of it as it is for me to argue against the Satmar sect's anti-Zionism. The Arizal comes after the time that any knowledge in this area was lost, so he does not qualify as a "holiest source of divine knowledge". The Tanach, on the other hand, does qualify.
Thank you great hacham, you finally brought me to such deep understanding ::) Anyway the original argument you had was something from Talmud, and I dont see you staying out, so please keep your ignorance to yourself. like the Rock used to say "Know your role and shut your mouth" ;D
Apparently Kabbalists love watching WWF wrestling because they're into fake stuff.
Ha haa veryy funny, ;D , and I used to watch when was little. And im not a Kabbalist, but thanks for the title.
-
Tanach stories are not legends, they are true. Belief in resurrection of the dead is clearly found in Daniel chapter 12.
If you can't follow a discussion, that is your fault.
You said (supposedly as an argument not to take any midrash literally) that religion bashers will take the piss out of you for taking midrash literally.
I said they will take the piss out of you for believing tenach stories (literally) too.
Then you go and reply that tenach stories really are literal
Very good. (yes deary, they are, but that's not the point)
Question to kabbalists and chassidim: Will the reincarnated suicide bombers be participating in this event?
You can play these dishonest games with tenach too.
we know what it says. that's that. the purpose of a religion is not to answer every question you can dream up. You are just being dishonest. and/or illogical.
But saying you are just illogical is giving you too much credit.
So you can't answer the question? Or are you just too embarrassed by the answer that a Chassidiot or a Ben Madonna would give?
You cannot and do not want to follow any logic. Let me explain the point again.
I can dream up questions on tenach stories, quesions that are not answered in tenach..
So Og was a giant huh? What size feet did he have?
Samson was strong huh? How much could be benchpress?
No, you cannot answer those questions.. And no, that does not invalidate the story about Og and the story about Samson.
Comprendez vous?
-
Honestly thats is why you shouldn't learn Torah (not talking to Jews). You are mixing things up and trying to make a false impression that I believe in something like being in heaven with Hitler YSV (G-d forbid) and other things that are non-sense.
What you write about crap (literally), you know is non-sense, so why do you try to win over an argument by trying to defame me or anyone else.
What I wrote is not for you to debate, im not interested in debating with you (but if you challenge I have what to answer).
Well, with the type of doctrines you believe as fact, you might as well believe you will be in heaven with Hitler. It's not that much more of a stretch. As I recall there was a thread talking about Hitler being reincarnated, which Jews on this forum were advocating. So there are Jews who believe this apparently. Therefore, the problem is not non-Jews learning Torah, it is Jews learning paganism in place of Torah. And I wasn't originally debating with you on your taking that fish story literally, I was just laughing at you. It wasn't intended to go any further than that. Q underscore Q underscore is the one who made that into a debate.
Did you see me advocate it? NO
And their was not more then 1 Jew who said that, and it is problematic, but it is for us to discuss amoung ourselves, and show why it is wrong.
And Kabbalah is in no way paganism (neither is Talmud nor what the real Hachamim in this and all generations teach).
You want to be a real noahide, then stay away from learning Torah that is not intended for you. (and I am not trying to be offensive but saying Halacha, for precisly problems like these - I know it is also problematic when a Jew posts some Torah and you cant help it that non-Jews will also learn, but its a public forum and public place, just like a Rabbi doesn't stop a lecture because non-Jews are present because the message needs to be heard for Jews, so to here. The obligation is on you not us. (By Torah I mean for example the laws, the Oral tradition, you can learn belief in G-d and a few other things that apply to you, but the point is how much more soo, its not your place to argue agains't, to add to it some of the Holliest sources of Divine Knowledge (real Kabbalah expecially from the Ari ZL Hakadosh, etc.)
Well it will be pretty easy for me to stay away from Kabbalah because it doesn't exist as a branch of Torah knowledge. Anything taught as Kabbalah today (including the Kabbalah that is within so-called Orthodox Jewish circles) is not anything authentic, it is just paganism that some Jews extrapolate back onto the founders of their religion such as Moshe, etc. Even Rambam says that this knowledge was lost. What is known as Kabbalah today is a modern phenomenon. If true Kabbalah was available today, the vast majority of Jews, as well as all non-Jews would be forbidden to study it. And it's just as much my place to argue against the false practice and belief of it as it is for me to argue against the Satmar sect's anti-Zionism. The Arizal comes after the time that any knowledge in this area was lost, so he does not qualify as a "holiest source of divine knowledge". The Tanach, on the other hand, does qualify.
For my opinion, what is written in the Tanach is true and maybe truest! there is no doubt that this holly book (The Holliest Book) is known for almost the whole globe, and all of the things, like names, historical events and so on, are true!!! That's a fact!!!
-
If you can't follow a discussion, that is your fault.
You said (supposedly as an argument not to take any midrash literally) that religion bashers will take the piss out of you for taking midrash literally.
I said they will take the piss out of you for believing tenach stories (literally) too.
Then you go and reply that tenach stories really are literal
Very good. (yes deary, they are, but that's not the point)
Ok, your obsession with the word piss is scary enough, but when you start calling me deary it puts this conversation into a higher bracket of scary.
In any case, you also said that it is not fundamental to Judaism whether Bitya extended her arm many cubits to reach Moshe in the water. If it's not fundamental to Judaism, then you can't compare belief in the literal interpretation of midrash like that to belief in Tanach. The Tanach IS fundamental to Judaism. If people bash Jews for believing in the facts and truths of their religion, that's one thing, but how much more unnecessary it is if Jews are ridiculed for believing in myths.
You cannot and do not want to follow any logic. Let me explain the point again.
I can dream up questions on tenach stories, quesions that are not answered in tenach..
So Og was a giant huh? What size feet did he have?
Samson was strong huh? How much could be benchpress?
No, you cannot answer those questions.. And no, that does not invalidate the story about Og and the story about Samson.
Comprendez vous?
Well, I'm also not offended by those questions. I'm sure Og's feet were big and Samson could bench a lot of weight.
The point is you cannot answer them. I asked you how much, you didn't know.
I could ask you what Samson favourite breakfast was. You would not know.
You accept tenach. But they are not written in tenach. (or midrash btw)
So if you ask your stupid questions to person that knows kabbalah, and the answer is not in the tenach midrash or kabbalistic classical texts, and the person does not know. Then it proves nothing. Apart from that he is honest, and you are an idiot for thinking it proves something against kabbalah.
But those who get upset about false beliefs like Bitya-turned-Plastic Man and Hitler in heaven are defensive against logical questioning because they know these beliefs won't stand up under scrutiny.
Ata mevin?
Of course not. They are beliefs you made up. They certainly would not stand up under scrutiny! They have no basis
If you had the brains to actually find a premise that is in a classical kabbalistic text. Or in a midrash, such as
- her arm extended to reach moses-
note- some midrashim are literal, others are not.
You would be stupid, and scrutinise the midrash by saying "how ridiculous.. an arm extending!!!!!! It cannot be literal"
When you would accept such a thing if it was written in tenach. But not in a midrash, and certainly not in a kabbalistic text.
So what it boils down to is really a fundamental belief on your part, about all midrash being non literal. And about all kabbalah being false.
Your whole approach though, of scoffing and asking irrelevant questions, is retarded.. Or dishonest , slimy, evasive and defensive.
From what you've said, you just want to accept the minimum because you don't want "religion bashers" to think you are an idiot. And you think it will really make a difference.
-
No McDonalds! ;)