0
   

just how plagiarised is judaism

 
 
brahmin
 
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 02:12 pm
the 6 day creation concept comes from the Enuma Elish.
the flood myth from the Gilgamesh.

most of the 10 commandments and mosaic law can be traced to the egyptian book of the ead and to the teachings of atenism

i dunno how true it is but post exilic judaism is said to be traceable to a people called the Pharisees.


all of that begs the question - just how original/plagiarized is judaism and jewish literature.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 6,951 • Replies: 98
No top replies

 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 02:19 pm
Hi Brahmin, interesting question.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 02:51 pm
I'd say the borrowed pretty heavily . . . but you don't do your thesis much good when you write drivel such as this:

Quote:
i dunno how true it is but post exilic judaism is said to be traceable to a people called the Pharisees.


The Pharisees were Jews, not a separate people. The name derives from a Hebrew word meaning "separated," and refers to spiritual separation, separation in aid of attaining purity. They were a sect within Judaism, and were a political and social movement as well.

I'd say you'll learn a lot if you do a web search for Pharisee.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 03:10 pm
what i meant was that post exilic judaism, was shaped by the pharisees. is that true or not??

i didnt know that they were a sort of jews.

even if they were how true is it that the pharisees were heavily influenced by their interactions with the iranians/persians/parsees ??
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 03:15 pm
Setanta wrote:
I'd say the borrowed pretty heavily . . .


can you elaborate on that.

i mean just how heavily. the 10 commandments are supposed to have been "delivered" to moses....so if these were actually er borrowed from egyptian religions.... then the very basis of judaism as indeed all judaic religions can be said to be ...plagiarised.

how come the 6 day creation concept exactly mirrors whats written in the enuma elish??

how come jewish literature changed/got new additions everytime they came in contact with other schools of thought (at least thrice.... first from the people of iraq, then from the egyptians, and then from the iranians).
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 03:32 pm
Quote:
the doctrines of the Pharisees, namely resurrection , belief in angels, belief in Messiah, Heaven and Hell, etc., were exactly the beliefs of the Persians and that the Pre-Exilic Jews either did not belief in these, or had a totally different conception of them.



true???
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 03:48 pm
I don't believe that anyone can say with complete assurance what the core beliefs of Jews were before the exile. Certainly it is reasonable to see much of the Judaism after the exile as deriving from Persian theological principles. For example, i would not ascribe monotheism in Judaism to Atenism, but rather to an exposure to Zoarastrianism. There is an almost identical sequence in Zoarastrianism and the early books of the Torah (which were edited after the exile) from polytheism, to the Hebrew God being the greatest of the Gods, to that God being the true god while all others are false, and finally to simple monotheism, i.e., that one's God is the only God and all other claims are delusions. Much of the mythology as is embodied in texts like Gilgamesh would have been picked up at this time, too. We have no way of truly knowing what Jewish scripture was before the exile. Before the exile, all the drama in Jewish religion and politics was centered around the struggle between the Jawists (those who believed in the God Jaweh, or Jehovah, who probably was not seen "monotheistically" at that time) and the worshippers of Baal/Moloch. It is entirely possible, and in fact, from many clues, probable, that most Hebrews were worshipers of Baal/Moloch rather than of Jehovah. In the account of the exodus from Egypt, while Moses is up on the mountain, chatting with God, the boys and girls down below make an idol of a golden calf. The calf was a common symbol of Baal/Moloch.

The Pharisees were formed at about the time the Jews had returned from the exile, and had begun editing the Pentateuch. Later, a group of Jewish ascetics were formed, living lives of self-denial and spiritualism, with a strict adherence to the law, who are known as the Essenes. It quickly became common to refer to almost all Jewish mystics as Essenes. If that boy Jesus ever actually existed, he may have been an Essene, or may have been schooled in their mystical doctrines, as what is recounted of his teaching is so close to what we know of them, and he was particular in saying that he observed the law (the law meaning Jewish religious law, from which they made no distinction with the civil practice of law, among themselves, at least).

The Sadducees were another Jewish sect which formed at about the same time as the Essenes, perhaps a century later, and, like the Essenes, did not last much past the first century of the common era. The great Jewish historian of this time frame, Flavius Josephus, was himself a Pharisee, which suggests that they survived. Most aspects of Jewish life and culture were wiped out when Titus suppressed the Jewish rebellion and destroyed the Temple in 70 CE. Flavius Josephus was a "Romanized" Jew, and it is possible that many of the Pharisees survived within the Empire as he did.

The Essenes take on a particular significance because of the Dead Sea scrolls, which are ancient copies of the books of the Torah dating back to the late 4th or early 3rd centuries BCE--and which are believed to have been an Essene library. Only one book is missing, if i am correct in my recollection, and it shows that it is probable that the Torah has descended to the present almost unchanged since the redaction in the 6th century BCE.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:25 pm
One who believes in a monotheistic purposeful creator will readily see great differences between the texts.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:37 pm
Given that there is no good reason to assume that the ancient Hebrews were originally monotheistic, and that from even the redacted version of scripture to which one now has reference there is evidence of polytheism at the beginning--there is little reason to assume that even the Jews originally believed in a "purposeful monotheistic creator."
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:41 pm
The major reason being the text as we have it today.

This is not to assert that there were no other spirit beings or angels, but simply to say that, at one time, they were all subject to a single sovereign.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:42 pm
Oh, and hi, Set.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:55 pm
Good evening (imagine Alfred Hitchcock saying that in his inimitable and lugubrious fashion--i know you're old enough to remember that).

I just made some coffee . . .
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:57 pm
I think most theologists and biblical scholars today agree that modern-day Judaism -- i.e. the type which recognizes a Rebbe [rabbi] as the head of a congregation -- is a direct descendant of the Pharisaic branch of pre-Christian Judaism. The Essenes and the Saducees (the Saducees were the priestly branch who sacrificed animals at the Temple) kind of fade from history after the start of the Diaspora in 70 CE.

Set is absolutely right in surmising that the young Jesus was at least exposed to the ascetic life-style and teachings of the Essenes. There is no doubt that his cousin, John the Baptist, was an Essene, if we take the stories contained in the so-called New Testament at face value. And there is much in the behavior of Jesus, as described in those same Gospels, which smacks of an Essene world view. For one thing, it would explain why he is quoted as being down on both the Saducees and the Pharisees. He liked neither the Rabbinical scholarship of the Pharisees, nor the overly commercialized and barbaric practices of the Saducee prieshood. They were, after all, rival sects to any Essene.

But this strays far afield of the original question, which had to do with "plagiarism" in the Torah, I believe. I think plagiarism is far too strong a word. The beliefs and religious practices of any people are invariably influenced by those of other people they come in contact with. Thus the Roman pantheon corresponds almost exactly to that of the Greeks; Teutonic myths have Keltic elements in unexpected places; etc. etc. That the Jews would have adopted a number of beliefs from the Egyptians and, later, from the Persians after the so-called Babylonian captivity, is almost inevitable. Certainly, the six-day creation myth is not original. It derives from the fact that the numeral seven was considered a mystic and magical number by not only the early Persians but numerous Mesopotamian folks as well.

Set is also right on the mark in stating that the original concept of Yahweh (Jehovah) was not necessarily monotheistic at all. Jehovah, the Jews said, is our god and he's tough -- he can beat up your god, Baal. If you read the Book of Genesis (first book of the Torah) carefully, you'll find this confirmed. Baal was real to them, as real as Jehovah. It is only much later that the "prophets" begin to speak of one god and relegate all the others to the scrap-heap of superstition.

Borrowing from other sources isn't quite the same things as plagiarism.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 08:59 pm
Merry Andrew wrote:
Borrowing from other sources isn't quite the same things as plagiarism.


Here, let's have that again.

As i recall, God didn't say that any of this would be on the test.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 09:02 pm
Setanta wrote:
Good evening (imagine Alfred Hitchcock saying that in his inimitable and lugubrious fashion--i know you're old enough to remember that).

I just made some coffee . . .


Damn! So did I. What a waste. We could have shared.
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2008 12:38 am
bm
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2008 12:38 am
Merry Andrew wrote:

Borrowing from other sources isn't quite the same things as plagiarism.


borrowing is but an euphemism for plagiarism.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2008 12:49 am
BM, breakfast time.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2008 08:38 am
BM
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2008 10:05 am
Everyone comes here for their morning bowel movements ? ! ? ! ?

What a disgusting thread ! ! !
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » just how plagiarised is judaism
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/22/2021 at 06:32:02