[Vindictus]

Are you using a computer with a keyboard and mouse? Then it's fine. Shit, it's even easy enough to handle on touch devices, it just takes longer.

[Lord Dave]

He told him to write everything else.  Seems like a really weird thing to omit.

Did he? How do you know?

Because it's the written history of your people and the single most important event in their history?

Yes they can.  Haven't you ever heard a dog Bark?  The command most commonly used to incite a single bark is: Speak.

What is your point?

That Dogs speak.

So the first words God spoke that the people of Israel heard were never recorded?  How odd.
In fact, I'm seeing a very firm lack of anything God actually said to the 2 million Jews.  He said a lot to Moses but none to them. 

He said that Moses would speak to him, and he would respond to Moses, and the people would hear his voice. He said nothing about them hearing what he said. I've quoted the passage several times. Reread it, again.

Boy it's a good thing the scribe of this entire history is also the only person who who heard it.  You seem to keep avoiding that. 

Oh I'm not failing at that.  I'm failing to understand why the all powerful God who was SPEAKING FROM A MOUNTAIN TOP would have a voice that Moses could understand clearly but the people standing mere feet away could not.  Especially when God was trying to prove himself for Moses's sake.  You'd think he would have just made his voice (which did not require physics BTW) to be heard and understood by everyone.

The more "evidence" you show me, the more this sounds like a sham.

"You heard the voice of God right?  That mubling, rumbling sound?  That was him talking to me. "

As I said, there are variables. Was God speaking in Hebrew? Was Moses? What were the Hebrews themselves speaking? Probably a bastardised Hebrew-Egyptian. Even the ones who DID hear it probably had no clue what was said. And even if they did, they likely had no way of writing it, since Moses was probably the only one who knew HOW to write, being the only one with any real education at all. You need to stop and think before opening your yap.

Wait... YOU, of all people, are telling me that NOW the details are important?  I'm sensing a pattern here...

So a couple of things.
1. Since Moses was the only one to write anything down AND the only one who understood God, it's irrelevant what everyone lese wrote.  THEY didn't get their words in.
2. Writing is irrelevant.  See: The Oral Torah.  You know, that 4,000 year old verbal history that would have required no writing skills to add to (like adding in the sounds God made).

You really need to stop and think about what you're saying and what you've previously said.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

He told him to write everything else.  Seems like a really weird thing to omit.

Did he? How do you know?

Because it's the written history of your people and the single most important event in their history?

I'll agree that hearing his voice, and seeing him, is the most important event in our history, but not necessarily hearing what he said.

Yes they can.  Haven't you ever heard a dog Bark?  The command most commonly used to incite a single bark is: Speak.

What is your point?

That Dogs speak.

And that is relevant how?

So the first words God spoke that the people of Israel heard were never recorded?  How odd.
In fact, I'm seeing a very firm lack of anything God actually said to the 2 million Jews.  He said a lot to Moses but none to them. 

He said that Moses would speak to him, and he would respond to Moses, and the people would hear his voice. He said nothing about them hearing what he said. I've quoted the passage several times. Reread it, again.

Boy it's a good thing the scribe of this entire history is also the only person who who heard it.  You seem to keep avoiding that.

Your point being? 

Oh I'm not failing at that.  I'm failing to understand why the all powerful God who was SPEAKING FROM A MOUNTAIN TOP would have a voice that Moses could understand clearly but the people standing mere feet away could not.  Especially when God was trying to prove himself for Moses's sake.  You'd think he would have just made his voice (which did not require physics BTW) to be heard and understood by everyone.

The more "evidence" you show me, the more this sounds like a sham.

"You heard the voice of God right?  That mubling, rumbling sound?  That was him talking to me. "

As I said, there are variables. Was God speaking in Hebrew? Was Moses? What were the Hebrews themselves speaking? Probably a bastardised Hebrew-Egyptian. Even the ones who DID hear it probably had no clue what was said. And even if they did, they likely had no way of writing it, since Moses was probably the only one who knew HOW to write, being the only one with any real education at all. You need to stop and think before opening your yap.

Wait... YOU, of all people, are telling me that NOW the details are important?  I'm sensing a pattern here...

So a couple of things.
1. Since Moses was the only one to write anything down AND the only one who understood God, it's irrelevant what everyone lese wrote.  THEY didn't get their words in.
2. Writing is irrelevant.  See: The Oral Torah.  You know, that 4,000 year old verbal history that would have required no writing skills to add to (like adding in the sounds God made).

The Oral Torah was given to Moses on the Mountain Top. Along with that Written Torah. Do you not comprehend the words that are coming from my keyboard?

You really need to stop and think about what you're saying and what you've previously said.

Man, you seriously need psychological guidance, and possibly meds.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Well, the quoting is messed up, AGAIN, but the point is clear. I think I am just going to go back to the original way I used to do it.

[Particle Person]

Are you using a computer with a keyboard and mouse? Then it's fine. Shit, it's even easy enough to handle on touch devices, it just takes longer.

No, Yonah is posting from an electrical telegraph.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

Ultimately, my friends, it comes down to the following thoughts, to whit:

I. The Ancient Hebrews came into being in the Bronze Age, worshipping what they perceived to be a primitive war God known to them as El, which was essentially the same Deity that many other Mesopotamian peoples worshipped.

II. The Ancient Hebrews did come into being precisely because said war God was in fact the True One God of the Universe, who created the universe, and all that therein lies.

III. Through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (whose name God changed to Israel), a Covenant was established, that ultimately settled into the 12 sons of Israel.

IV. The 12 sons of Israel took themselves and their families into Egypt, wherein they all died, but their descendants were made slaves.

V. Moses led his people out of Egypt with Aaron his brother.

These are basics. You can agree or disagree all you wish. But to be blunt, there is no smoking gun that will prove this historical sketch right or wrong. So, arguing about it is essentially a mental masturbation technique that ultimately serves no purpose whatsoever.

Now, let us continue.

VI. The Hebrews, by now known more commonly as Israelites, have roamed in the desert for 40 years, until the entire generation who knew slavery has died off, including Moses. Only Joshua remains alive from those days (and possibly Caleb; his birthdate is uncertain).

VII. Upon entering the Holy Land (ie, the crossing of the Jordan River), all hell breaks loose. God orders the Israelites to do what, by our standards of the 21st Century, would be deemed as horrifically atrocious acts. That these acts were committed can't be denied, and anyone who does is a fool.

VIII.What must be remembered is that this was the BRONZE AGE! How do you expect people to behave? Furthermore, what do you expect people to understand in the behaviour of other people? I mean, seriously. If the Israelites had behaved any gentler than they did, they would have been the ones ending up with their heads on pikes!

So lets not all sit around and imagine that a bunch of Bronze Agers are going to sit around a fucking campfire with one another and sing a camp song like "Kum bay ya". Maybe you are willing to be that fucking naive and stupid, but I am damn sure not. I left that kind of pie in the sky idealism behind ALONG time ago, when I grew from childhood to manhood. Little boys must needs grow up.

I don't like genocide any more than the rest of you. I certainly would not approve of it today. But in the Bronze Age? It went with the territory. That's what people understood. In fact, that usually was the ONLY thing people understood. Shit happened, man, and you learned to live with it. Life was brutish, nasty, and short.

And guess what? In spite of the UN (what a stupid joke that is), things haven't changed that much, have they?

[Rama Set]

I think we have made it clear that we expect people being commanded by the very source of morality to behave much much better than is shown. If there was evidence against God then this is it. It's this conundrum that forces apologists to make up ridiculous theories like "divine command theory". You are crazy for excusing it.

[DuckDodgers]

So wait, God's message is irrelevant and the only important thing is that he was seen and heard?  Doesn't that make the Torah irrelevant then?

[Yonah ben Amittai]

I think we have made it clear that we expect people being commanded by the very source of morality to behave much much better than is shown. If there was evidence against God then this is it. It's this conundrum that forces apologists to make up ridiculous theories like "divine command theory". You are crazy for excusing it.

Like I said, if you want your head on a pike, you are welcome to it. But had you lived then, you would have done EXACTLY as they they did. And don't tell me you wouldn't have, or I'll laugh in your face.

So wait, God's message is irrelevant and the only important thing is that he was seen and heard?  Doesn't that make the Torah irrelevant then?

I did not say that. Moses received the Torah from God and wrote it. And of course there was Oral Torah. The people accepted it when they received it from Moses. But they knew its value because they had seen and heard God. You people are really more obtuse than I realised. I mean, wow.

[Rama Set]

I think we have made it clear that we expect people being commanded by the very source of morality to behave much much better than is shown. If there was evidence against God then this is it. It's this conundrum that forces apologists to make up ridiculous theories like "divine command theory". You are crazy for excusing it.

Like I said, if you want your head on a pike, you are welcome to it. But had you lived then, you would have done EXACTLY as they they did. And don't tell me you wouldn't have, or I'll laugh in your face.

If this is purely a Brinze Age issue, what changed in God that made him decide genocide should not be commanded anymore?  What makes you think he won't command it again?

[Lord Dave]

I'll agree that hearing his voice, and seeing him, is the most important event in our history, but not necessarily hearing what he said.

And that is relevant how?

You claimed they don't.  I proved you wrong.  My analogy works.

Your point being? 

That Moses could have put what God said into either of the two things he wrote down but didn't.  In fact, he could have very very easily put them in.  Doesn't it seem odd to you that he didn't? It would be like if NASA decided not to broadcast the moon landing and instead just announced "We're on the moon and walking around."

The Oral Torah was given to Moses on the Mountain Top. Along with that Written Torah. Do you not comprehend the words that are coming from my keyboard?

No, the Oral Torah was dictated to Moses on the Mountain Top.  But my point is that if the Oral Torah, which is passed by word of mouth, can survive for 4,000 years, why didn't the first words God said to the Jews also survive?  Even if no one understood it, don't you think every single Jew there remembered the first word God spoke for the rest of their lives?  Or are the actual words of God so uninteresting unless Moses delivers them?

Man, you seriously need psychological guidance, and possibly meds.

This is a logical fallacy but I'm going to say it anyway:
So far no one here is agreeing with you.  Not even the other Jews of the forum.  Your arguments have constantly been challenged and no one seems to be disagreeing with the challenge.  We also point out your double standards when you try to make your case.  Yet despite this you are completely incapable of doubting anything you say and have gone so far as to insult me for following without question but then praise yourself for following without question. (or an answer, if you did have a question)

Doesn't that make you wonder if you are really as correct as you think?  Doesn't that make you question why you're so devoted to a book that has such glaring questions?  As I said before, God himself could not change your mind.  This is most commonly called brainwashing and often requires psychological guidance.  Are you really sure I need it?  Because I'm not the one who accepts a 4,000 year old story as fact when it's missing some very key details.  I'm not the one accepting "God wants us to figure it out ourselves" when we question the rules.  I'm also not the one who claims to have an answer (like about eating pork) but then ignores the fact that the answer is irrelevant in today's modern age and considers it "icky" simply because your holy book says so.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

I think we have made it clear that we expect people being commanded by the very source of morality to behave much much better than is shown. If there was evidence against God then this is it. It's this conundrum that forces apologists to make up ridiculous theories like "divine command theory". You are crazy for excusing it.

Like I said, if you want your head on a pike, you are welcome to it. But had you lived then, you would have done EXACTLY as they they did. And don't tell me you wouldn't have, or I'll laugh in your face.

If this is purely a Brinze Age issue, what changed in God that made him decide genocide should not be commanded anymore?  What makes you think he won't command it again?

Read the Hebrew Bible. The book goes from a very narrow understanding of God to a very universal understanding of him. The idea of a universal deity commanding a genocide is incomprehensible. I recommend particularly Isaiah, and the later Prophets.

I'll agree that hearing his voice, and seeing him, is the most important event in our history, but not necessarily hearing what he said.

And that is relevant how?

You claimed they don't.  I proved you wrong.  My analogy works.

You didn't prove anything, but if that makes you feel better, ok.
Your point being? 

That Moses could have put what God said into either of the two things he wrote down but didn't.  In fact, he could have very very easily put them in.  Doesn't it seem odd to you that he didn't? It would be like if NASA decided not to broadcast the moon landing and instead just announced "We're on the moon and walking around."

Not particularly. Given that Torah means "Instruction", and what God said on that occasion was probably not "Instruction" or "Teaching" in any way, why would he?

The Oral Torah was given to Moses on the Mountain Top. Along with that Written Torah. Do you not comprehend the words that are coming from my keyboard?

No, the Oral Torah was dictated to Moses on the Mountain Top.  But my point is that if the Oral Torah, which is passed by word of mouth, can survive for 4,000 years, why didn't the first words God said to the Jews also survive?  Even if no one understood it, don't you think every single Jew there remembered the first word God spoke for the rest of their lives?  Or are the actual words of God so uninteresting unless Moses delivers them?


If something is not understood, and you don't know how to write in the first place, how are you going to write it down? You are full of brilliance today.

Man, you seriously need psychological guidance, and possibly meds.

This is a logical fallacy but I'm going to say it anyway:
So far no one here is agreeing with you.  Not even the other Jews of the forum. 

There are no other Jews in the forum, at least not religious ones. So, your point?

Your arguments have constantly been challenged and no one seems to be disagreeing with the challenge.  We also point out your double standards when you try to make your case.  Yet despite this you are completely incapable of doubting anything you say and have gone so far as to insult me for following without question but then praise yourself for following without question. (or an answer, if you did have a question)

Doesn't that make you wonder if you are really as correct as you think?  Doesn't that make you question why you're so devoted to a book that has such glaring questions? 

It only has glaring questions if you have less than about a 5th grade education.

As I said before, God himself could not change your mind.  This is most commonly called brainwashing and often requires psychological guidance. 

As I have said before, I shall say again. The Jews as a people have been around, and will be around, long before and long after you and your ilk have come and gone from the stage of history and been forgotten. Who is the the brainwashed one? The one who thinks he is the master of all he surveys because Richard Dawkins told him he was, or the one who admits that there is a power greater than himself to which he should submit in humility?

Are you really sure I need it?  Because I'm not the one who accepts a 4,000 year old story as fact when it's missing some very key details.  I'm not the one accepting "God wants us to figure it out ourselves" when we question the rules.  I'm also not the one who claims to have an answer (like about eating pork) but then ignores the fact that the answer is irrelevant in today's modern age and considers it "icky" simply because your holy book says so.

We've been over this. Aside from the health concerns, which are still valid, there is also simply the matter of discipline. Doing it by virtue of the fact that God has asked us to. If you cannot understand that, then how intelligent can you be? Of course, you are an atheist, and therefore deem yourself and your petty wants to be the center of the world. Who is the selfish one?

[Rama Set]

I think we have made it clear that we expect people being commanded by the very source of morality to behave much much better than is shown. If there was evidence against God then this is it. It's this conundrum that forces apologists to make up ridiculous theories like "divine command theory". You are crazy for excusing it.

Like I said, if you want your head on a pike, you are welcome to it. But had you lived then, you would have done EXACTLY as they they did. And don't tell me you wouldn't have, or I'll laugh in your face.

If this is purely a Brinze Age issue, what changed in God that made him decide genocide should not be commanded anymore?  What makes you think he won't command it again?

Read the Hebrew Bible. The book goes from a very narrow understanding of God to a very universal understanding of him. The idea of a universal deity commanding a genocide is incomprehensible. I recommend particularly Isaiah, and the later Prophets.

I agree it is incomprehensible.  How do you reconcile that God did make such a command and that you yourself believes that the command is still in effect, and that it is only the difficulty in showing Palestinians to be Amalekites that saves them from extermination?  Indeed you showed that you were willing to order extermination of them for merely claiming to be natives to Israel.  Are you from the Bronze Age?

[Rushy]

Why does god insist on playing a big game of telephone? A high school psychology student can tell you that is the best way to give everyone the wrong message. If god wanted everyone to know something, would it really be that much of a bother just to tell everyone himself? Seems sort of convenient one man gets to dictate what god said and no one else can verify it.

[Yonah ben Amittai]

QUOTE OF RAMA SET: "I agree it is incomprehensible.  How do you reconcile that God did make such a command and that you yourself believes that the command is still in effect, and that it is only the difficulty in showing Palestinians to be Amalekites that saves them from extermination?  Indeed you showed that you were willing to order extermination of them for merely claiming to be natives to Israel.  Are you from the Bronze Age?"

Because of the universal nature of God, God is also the God of the "Palestinians". Therefore, although the commandment has not been abolished, I am inclined to believe personally that God would be happier with a controlled deportation rather than extermination. And further, I think the reason there ARE no more Amalekites is simply because God does not WANT his people exterminating ANYONE. As you have all correctly pointed out, unlike in the Bronze Age, we understand that there are better ways to deal with problems then wholesale elimination of a people, however distasteful a people they may be.

Why does god insist on playing a big game of telephone? A high school psychology student can tell you that is the best way to give everyone the wrong message. If god wanted everyone to know something, would it really be that much of a bother just to tell everyone himself? Seems sort of convenient one man gets to dictate what god said and no one else can verify it.

Have you read the Torah (the Pentateuch)? Have you even picked up a copy to determine the length of it? Do you think that God was going to recite the whole thing to all 2 million Hebrews sitting there, and expect them to remember it, when they couldn't even write to take notes? Moses was the only one who could write, presumably. God, talk about a college course and a half! For a bunch of slaves that had virtually no education at all, you expect God to sit them all down for forty days and recite the entire Law to them?

And that doesn't include the Oral Torah. But surely, Moses probably had many questions about one law or other that he had to clarify with God. Can you imagine if 2 million people had had to ask questions and have them answered. It would have taken far longer than forty days! At least with one person, Moses, who received the Law from God directly, it took forty days, and then he could give it to the people, and they could ask questions as they came up.

Furthermore, starting with Ezra, the entire Book of the Law was read every 7 years. All the People of Israel were gathered together and obligated together to hear the Torah read. I am not sure how it was done, I just know that it was. Without modern sound equipment, I am wondering if they gathered in cohorts and had one reader per fifty, or something to that effect. I don't know. I have to explore the matter more thoroughly.

[Space Angel]

In a time where more and more people are walking away from organized religion, and are becoming more cynical towards the spiritual beliefs based on ancient religions, how do you think Judaism and Jewish traditions will survive the next 100 years (assuming the human race makes it another century)? Also, do you think that the spiritual beliefs are just as important as cultural traditions, or does one trump the other?

[Yonah ben Amittai]

In a time where more and more people are walking away from organized religion, and are becoming more cynical towards the spiritual beliefs based on ancient religions, how do you think Judaism and Jewish traditions will survive the next 100 years (assuming the human race makes it another century)? Also, do you think that the spiritual beliefs are just as important as cultural traditions, or does one trump the other?

Where in the world are you speaking of? In Western nations, yes, people are turning from organised religion. But in the rest of the world, it is growing by leaps and bounds. I don't know what part of the planet you live in, but it is clearly NOT the global South, unless its Australia or New Zealand.

Roman Catholicism and the Anglican Church (the Church of England) in Africa are HUGE! 70% of Anglicans live in Africa, for example, rather than in say, England or the US, or white countries where you would think it would be obvious (Canada, Australia, or New Zealand). And it is growing there like crazy, as is the Lutheran Church, and the Roman Catholic Church.

Islam, as much as I despise it, is in NO danger of dying out. If anything, the radical forms of it are experiencing growth.

Judaism tends to remain static. About half of all Jews are cultural Jews, and the other half are ethno-religious Jews, such as myself. I see no signs of Judaism dying out, though.

Certainly being a Jew is partially cultural. That can't be disputed. Judaism is a civilisation as much as it is a religion. In fact, Judaism is a civilisation before it is anything else. The Religion is a part (perhaps the largest part, but still a part) of the the broader civilisation. The civilisation is made up of the cultural, ethnic, linguistic, historic, and of course, religious aspects of what it means to be a Jew.

So, I think that Civilisation is the best way to describe being a Jew, and that Religion is the largest component of said Civilisation. For further information on this, I encourage you to read Judaism as a Civilization, by Mordecai M. Kaplan, the master work on the subject. Although published originally in 1934, it has remained in print, and continues to be the "go-to" book on the topic. I can't recommend it enough. It is brilliant.

[Space Angel]

In a time where more and more people are walking away from organized religion, and are becoming more cynical towards the spiritual beliefs based on ancient religions, how do you think Judaism and Jewish traditions will survive the next 100 years (assuming the human race makes it another century)? Also, do you think that the spiritual beliefs are just as important as cultural traditions, or does one trump the other?

Where in the world are you speaking of? In Western nations, yes, people are turning from organised religion. But in the rest of the world, it is growing by leaps and bounds. I don't know what part of the planet you live in, but it is clearly NOT the global South, unless its Australia or New Zealand.

Roman Catholicism and the Anglican Church (the Church of England) in Africa are HUGE! 70% of Anglicans live in Africa, for example, rather than in say, England or the US, or white countries where you would think it would be obvious (Canada, Australia, or New Zealand). And it is growing there like crazy, as is the Lutheran Church, and the Roman Catholic Church.

Islam, as much as I despise it, is in NO danger of dying out. If anything, the radical forms of it are experiencing growth.

Judaism tends to remain static. About half of all Jews are cultural Jews, and the other half are ethno-religious Jews, such as myself. I see no signs of Judaism dying out, though.

Certainly being a Jew is partially cultural. That can't be disputed. Judaism is a civilisation as much as it is a religion. In fact, Judaism is a civilisation before it is anything else. The Religion is a part (perhaps the largest part, but still a part) of the the broader civilisation. The civilisation is made up of the cultural, ethnic, linguistic, historic, and of course, religious aspects of what it means to be a Jew.

So, I think that Civilisation is the best way to describe being a Jew, and that Religion is the largest component of said Civilisation. For further information on this, I encourage you to read Judaism as a Civilization, by Mordecai M. Kaplan, the master work on the subject. Although published originally in 1934, it has remained in print, and continues to be the "go-to" book on the topic. I can't recommend it enough. It is brilliant.

I live in the US, and although we have our fair share of radicals and extremists here I feel like a good number of North Americans look down on organized religion (although there are compromises like "Faitheism" or like independent spiritual believers who don't follow any one church or set doctrine). 

Do you see expansion of non-Jewish religious institutions around the world as a good thing, or is it doing more harm than good? Like in poorer nations like in Uganda for example where there is a surplus of religions trying to convert the people there to their way of thinking and approaching spirituality; like Roman Catholicism, and the Anglican Church as you mentioned.

Thank you for the article, it seems like an interesting read.

[Ghost of V]

I thought they mostly practiced Voodooism in Africa?

[Space Angel]

I thought they mostly practiced Voodooism in Africa?

I thought voodoo was Haitian in origin, but it looks like it has its roots in Africa.