mY fIrSt ToPiC

i know i TALK alot ! Very Happy

0 Replies

dauer wrote:

cavfancier wrote:
Let's take Judiasm as an example of where later revision, based on politics, took over. The oldest living text discovered from the Old Testament has been translated and published in a book called 'The Book of J', edited by Harold Bloom. In this text, Yaweh is portrayed and defined as a dual god, posessing, in perfect harmony, both the male and female principles. This was a god of love, VERY similar to the Christ. The nature of the Hebrew god to an avenging patriarchal figure was a rewrite by future rabbis. All mentions of the female side of the Jewish god were eradicated, except for remnants preserved by the Kabbalists, who were persecuted for their beliefs

J is not an actual text. It is one piece of a breakup of the torah that scholars use based on similar ideas and styles. There is no such document. The torah is like a quilt that represents many different groups. It's almost like an attempt for unification. Deuteronomy has actually been attributed to a text spoken of in II Chronicles 34:14. To say that it was the rabbis altering texts presumes too much. The Talmud speaks of love as well as justice and does its darndest to get around sentencing people to death or supporting violence. It says a sanhedrin that sentences 1 man to death in 70 years is a bloody court. Most of the rabbis were against Bar Kokhba. Akiba was one of the few that supported him. I'm not saying the rabbis were all good, but your theory seems rather thin unless you can give some more evidence. You're just simplifying the politics and sectarianism of the time.

It is clear that there were indeed many groups. Sadducees, pharisees, essenes, zealots, and the boundaries weren't even always religous. The Cairo Geniza has evidence to that effect. The Damascus Document is a secterian document. And I'm sure you are familiar with the findings at Qumran.

Dauer

Point taken, but even as a fragment, when compared with Kabbalistic texts such as the Zohar, an argument could be made for a dual Jewish god. This is a discussion, of course. As with any religious talk, for me the point isn't necessarily to find the absolute truth, but to explore possibilities, and expand personal horizons, so that none of us become blinded by dogma.

0 Replies

Quote:

neccessarygrace said :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
memyself: You say you believe in free choice yet you want to say you subscribe to Islam. Islam is dogmatically deterministic, nothing happens (including your choices) unless God wills it to be so. Islam also tries to promote that humans are free to choose God's will or not choose it, but these two thoughts together are paradoxical. You can't have free choice while believing that God controls every happening and action (again, including your choices). A orthodox muslim will commonly look at something such as a murder or crime and declare that it was the will of God that that person do such an act, in effect, that God willed (caused) that choice to be made. Is that free will? Is that choice?

well......is what i said enough..??
cuz i have more ... Confused

0 Replies

cavfancier: you say "These of course are just the Abrhamic religions, all tied togther to a common mythology and purpose, all sadly used for the wrong reasons through the ages." There needs to be a differentiation between how religions have been used (for good and bad) and what the logical outcome is of their axioms and suppositions. Too often Islam is slandered by those who have used it for evil purposes ie. terorrism. The same goes for all religions.

As far as the rest of the conversation goes, I need to study more before I tread those waters. I do know that the post regarding the Jewish scriptures being a "quilt" of sorts is accurate. It's certainly not laid out in chronological order, nor is it in order of when it was written. It has been grouped topically, with pieces being added and rearranged throughout centuries. Example: there is lots of speculation and thought that the creation stories were in fact written down and compiled as late as the 8th century BC (don't quote me exactly on that date, but i'm pretty sure that's roughly the estimates). Dauer thus makes very clear and correct points. It would be unfair to make the assumption that the priests or any other body "rewrote" the nature of God.

0 Replies

Memyself: what book are you quoting so extensively as your source of information?

0 Replies

neccessarygrace wrote:

cavfancier: you say "These of course are just the Abrhamic religions, all tied togther to a common mythology and purpose, all sadly used for the wrong reasons through the ages." There needs to be a differentiation between how religions have been used (for good and bad) and what the logical outcome is of their axioms and suppositions. Too often Islam is slandered by those who have used it for evil purposes ie. terorrism. The same goes for all religions.

As far as the rest of the conversation goes, I need to study more before I tread those waters. I do know that the post regarding the Jewish scriptures being a "quilt" of sorts is accurate. It's certainly not laid out in chronological order, nor is it in order of when it was written. It has been grouped topically, with pieces being added and rearranged throughout centuries. Example: there is lots of speculation and thought that the creation stories were in fact written down and compiled as late as the 8th century BC (don't quote me exactly on that date, but i'm pretty sure that's roughly the estimates). Dauer thus makes very clear and correct points. It would be unfair to make the assumption that the priests or any other body "rewrote" the nature of God.

I completely agree with your statement regarding slander of religion. It does indeed cross through all faiths, towards other faiths. Dauer did indeed make very good points. I think though, that "rewriting the nature of god", if that's how you interpreted my statements, was probably hasty, clumsy writing on my part. This happens with complicated subjects. Smile

I will try to source a good link to Jewish history and biblical revisionism. Keep in mind, with all these different groups involved, who held different beliefs, it was quite the task to try to bring them all together. The Book of J is important not because it is a definitive text, but because it indicates a possible version of Yaweh that is distinctly different from the one we read of now. Also, as I've stated, there is support in the mystic texts. So, rather than imply that anyone rewrote the nature of god (that would be impossible, as none of us can know the true nature of god, being mortal), I would suggest that there was a lot of revision that went on in both the OT and the NT. Accounts from the apostles vary wildly in the NT, as they do in the OT. That is why, for me, it's hard to say which story, from any religious text, is "truth". So, I have to sift through the apocryphal just to find the message. Prophets and prosletyzers in ancient times had the very difficult task of spreading the word of god to an extremely diverse group of generally uneducated people. The parable was born, in order to put the general message of god into a particular cultural context that local folks could understand. The problem was, rather than unite, many of the converted reverted back to tribalism and felt that their interpretation of the message was different from their neighbour's. The prophets probably just shook their heads and said "We've done our best. It's up to them now."

0 Replies

Cav, I don't disagree with you on the dual God idea. I disagree with you that the other stuff was edited in at a later time by the rabbis.

Frankly, El Shaddai means God of Breasts and I have heard of hermaphrodite statues found for El Shaddai in parts of Israel. I have also heard that in the 1st temple there was a statue of God's consort. Beyond the meaning of El Shaddai, the rest of that is hearsay that I cannot confirm.

But I think it is very likely that either God had a consort who was then nixed in the name of monotheism, the two of them becoming one, or God was a hermaphrodite God who became immaterial, or God was a number of different gods whose attributes were combined -- many names, many representations -- to make what came out in the end.

And it's probably not a good idea to use kabbalah to speak about ancient ideas. If you're looking for older mysticism to glean from, try the original merkaba mysticism. I don't know much about it except that it's based on Ezekiel's Chariot.

Dauer

0 Replies

"But I think it is very likely that either God had a consort who was then nixed in the name of monotheism, the two of them becoming one, or God was a hermaphrodite God who became immaterial, or God was a number of different gods whose attributes were combined -- many names, many representations -- to make what came out in the end."

Yes, I think this would be accurate. However, Merkaba is generally considered a branch of Kabbalah, and I think it's naive to think that a certain amount of revisionism did not happen with the OT as we know it. Please, don't confuse this with the Torah proper. Yikes, this is a fine discussion. The link I wanted to post regarding Merkada is not loading, so this one will have to do: http://www.observations.org/Spirit/Mrkba/MrkGeom2.html

0 Replies

Here is a better link, with some nice pictures of The Tree of Life. While Merkava mysticism may be the earliest roots of Kabbalah, the two are intrinsicly linked: http://www.crystalinks.com/kabala.html

0 Replies

cav: Yes, it seems you are correct about merkaba. However, it is important to establish what you mean by OT proper. If you mean the Christian OT then I agree. Even Origen said the septuagint was corrupt. I can get the quote if you want. If you mean TaNaKh -- Torah, Nevi'im, Ketuvim -- then this leaves room for further exploration. I've never really looked at the targums so I don't know if they go beyond Torah. But as I understand it they mostly confirm the masoretic texts.

0 Replies

I am definitely referring to the Christian OT, dauer. Christians have no real perspective on real Jewish texts, and no sense of the connection between the two faiths, based on the version of the OT they read. Again, clumsy wording, but no true understanding of the OT can be achieved in translation. I happen to feel the same way about the NT. I am no expert in either Hebrew or Greek, but I do believe that washed-out English translations of these texts cannot possibly posit any sense of 'truth'. It's like that old game, broken telephone. The original message is obscured by the misinterpretation.

0 Replies

So true, and the more Hebrew I understand the more I understand the problems. It's not even a romance language. The roots relate in entirely different ways. There's no such word as sacrifice. The hebrew word conveys no such meaning. I don't know if it's as bad for Greek. And here's Origen on septuagint just for fun.

--
"Again, through the whole of Job there are many passages in the Hebrew which are wanting in our copies, generally four or five verses, but sometimes, however, even fourteen, and nineteen, and sixteen. But why should I enumerate all the instances I collected with so much labor, to prove that the difference between our copies and those of the Jews did not escape me? "

"I marked with an asterisk those passages in our copies which are not found in the Hebrew. . . sometimes the meaning even does not seem to be akin? And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]

And then...

St. Jerome (early 5th century) decided to re-translate from the MT rather than rely on the Septuagint saying: "I was stimulated to undertake the task by the zeal of Origen, who blended (the Septuagint) with the old edition Theodotion's translation"

And also by Jerome:

"the Seventy (aka Septuagint) have said more than is found in the Hebrew. But the asterisks indicate what has been added by Origen from the version of Theodotion. "

I didn't gather those quotes.

0 Replies

neccessarygrace:
Laughing

, its not just one book.... its a whole bunch,
and they're not mine , i just go to the librery copy the information i need ,and the stuff that im interested in.
sometimes i research through the internet..print out what i need and keep it....
simple. :wink:

0 Replies

CoastalRat wrote:

I am really quite curious about this since I try to keep up with such things. Can you provide any info on where this comes from? Unless my scientific knowledge is way off, the only way for the sun to "rise" from the west would be for the earth to reverse its rotation. For that to happen, the earth's rotation would have to at some point stop completely in order to begin again in the other direction. The result of that stoppage would create all kinds of survivability questions.

So please back up this quote that supposed scientists say the sun will some day rise in the west. I really want to know if some quack is out there saying this.

How can I know how this could happen? The sun could move not the earth (sun dose move) and as o0memyselfandi0o wrote and what I heard that the sun has slightly moved from its position.

We also believe that there will be days, one day equals to week and one day equals to month and one day equals to year.

Anyway this could be explained (my explanation): couple of months, something unique happened in the sky and all the world went out and watched it. It was the movement of mars and how it became closer to earth.

Well that is a physical power. I read at scientific site that the Mars has slowed down in rotation and thus the day and night expanded.

This could happen to earth. Any closer planet (especially if bigger) come closer to earth would generate a power that slow down the earth.

This what I read "

Quote:

For the past few weeks, Mars has appeared to slow in its eastward trajectory, almost seeming to waver, as if it had become uncertain.

On Wednesday, July 30, that steady eastward course will come to a stop. Then, for the next two months, the planet will move backward against the star background - toward the west. On Sept. 29 it will pause again before resuming its normal eastward direction.

All the planets exhibit retrograde motion at one time or another. Ancient astronomers were unable to come up with a satisfactory explanation for it. The motion is tricky. For one thing, while behaving in this strange manner, Mars will also appear to deviate somewhat from its normal course; the retrograde motion will appear to bring it a little below its regular orbital track.
"
http://www.space.com

dose that explain or gives any clue that the sun could arise from west?
I don't know, beyond my knowledge.

0 Replies

Neccessarygrae wrote:

Islam basically teaches that God waves his hand and declares forgiveness upon some and not on others,

o0memyselfandi0o wrote:

Well sure god does ....there has to be justice....god..well ANY god should not forgive all humans....god will forgive to those who ask for forgivness.
God's hands r always open for those who ask for forgiveness

Yes this is true but that dose not mean god dose not forgive people don't ask for forgiveness. Sometime you do something god forgives all your sins for what you did without you feel about it. But the most important thing is that god forgives all the sins with the exception to one sin (according to Quran) which believes of more than one god.
If someone died at the age of 90, for example, and he spent 89 years and 11 months and 29 days of his life away from god and at the last day woke up and asked for forgiveness, then all his sin are removed. It is the same of someone dose terrible sins and just before he dies ask for forgiveness, then you are zero sins. Of course that exclude any person knows he is dieing and he knows that his time has come. But that includes someone decided to go back to god and had car accident after few minutes and died (sudden death). Allah is the merciful and Islam is the religion of mercy, never gave up, never says god won't forgive me.
Allah loves us (human) and he preferred us for many of his creatures.
Also god forgives at judgment day, he forgives all the time.
Note: asking for Forgiveness is way different in Islam comparing to others.

Quote:

it is very deterministic meaning that all people are eternally destined for either paradise or hell. However, you state that Islam holds everyone responsible for his or her actions,

this is very complicated issue. Fate\ destiny is very complicated and Islamic scientists wrote books or chapters about it.
o0memyselfandi0o brought some texts about the definition of it and as you can read, it is complex.

Quote:

memyself: You say you believe in free choice yet you want to say you subscribe to Islam. Islam is dogmatically deterministic, nothing happens (including your choices) unless God wills it to be so. Islam also tries to promote that humans are free to choose God's will or not choose it, but these two thoughts together are paradoxical. You can't have free choice while believing that God controls every happening and action (again, including your choices). A orthodox muslim will commonly look at something such as a murder or crime and declare that it was the will of God that that person do such an act, in effect, that God willed (caused) that choice to be made. Is that free will? Is that choice?

You are mixing things here. You have the ability to choice and yes god controls everything.
I would use this formulas.
1) You choice + God Choice = it happens.
2) You Choice + God dose not choice = it dose not happen.
3) You dose not choice + god choice = it happens.

Let me use examples of above.

1)you choice to kill someone, good choice you would, you kill that person (you have chosen at the beginning , here you had a free choice)
2)You choice to commit suicide (you want to die) but you don't die (let assume that someone saved you or whatever the reason).
3)You choice not to travel outside your country, but the company (or your country or political reasons or for better life, etc) forces you and you do.

My examples are very simple, there are many others, more complicated but you can measure when you do something against your will or you do it with your will.
The first choice proves you have free choice and that is most of the time.

But I don not know what is " orthodox muslim" , from where did you bring that?

0 Replies

glad_to_be_muslim ,
thanx for passing by and making it so easy......easier than before.
if anyone have ANY question i'll be glad to answer....if i couldn't ill search for answers and come back.... Smile

Neccessarygrace , if u needed more info about this destiny issue i'd
be glad to give u the site from were i brout the information :
(www.dislam.org )
its has alot of other stuff about islam......if u want the destiny articles :

( http://www.dislam.org/catindex3.html#divinedestiny )

so much fun ,

0 Replies

glad_to_be_muslim wrote:

CoastalRat wrote:

I am really quite curious about this since I try to keep up with such things. Can you provide any info on where this comes from? Unless my scientific knowledge is way off, the only way for the sun to "rise" from the west would be for the earth to reverse its rotation. For that to happen, the earth's rotation would have to at some point stop completely in order to begin again in the other direction. The result of that stoppage would create all kinds of survivability questions.

So please back up this quote that supposed scientists say the sun will some day rise in the west. I really want to know if some quack is out there saying this.

How can I know how this could happen? The sun could move not the earth (sun dose move) and as o0memyselfandi0o wrote and what I heard that the sun has slightly moved from its position.

We also believe that there will be days, one day equals to week and one day equals to month and one day equals to year.

Anyway this could be explained (my explanation): couple of months, something unique happened in the sky and all the world went out and watched it. It was the movement of mars and how it became closer to earth.

Well that is a physical power. I read at scientific site that the Mars has slowed down in rotation and thus the day and night expanded.

This could happen to earth. Any closer planet (especially if bigger) come closer to earth would generate a power that slow down the earth.

This what I read "

Quote:
For the past few weeks, Mars has appeared to slow in its eastward trajectory, almost seeming to waver, as if it had become uncertain.

On Wednesday, July 30, that steady eastward course will come to a stop. Then, for the next two months, the planet will move backward against the star background - toward the west. On Sept. 29 it will pause again before resuming its normal eastward direction.

All the planets exhibit retrograde motion at one time or another. Ancient astronomers were unable to come up with a satisfactory explanation for it. The motion is tricky. For one thing, while behaving in this strange manner, Mars will also appear to deviate somewhat from its normal course; the retrograde motion will appear to bring it a little below its regular orbital track.
"
http://www.space.com

dose that explain or gives any clue that the sun could arise from west?
I don't know, beyond my knowledge.

You still have not pointed me to any scientist who says that the sun may one day rise from the west. It makes no difference if the sun changes its position relative to the earth. The sun rises in the east because of the rotation of the earth on its axis, not because of the direction the earth moves around the sun. The fact that Mars will appear to move backwards in the sky has no bearing on anything I asked.

You made a statement that scientists say the sun may one day rise in the west just as the Koran states. I ask again, what scientists? I ask only so I may look it up and see how this would be possible. Call it curiosity.

0 Replies

CoastalRat wrote:

You still have not pointed me to any scientist who says that the sun may one day rise from the west. It makes no difference if the sun changes its position relative to the earth. The sun rises in the east because of the rotation of the earth on its axis, not because of the direction the earth moves around the sun. The fact that Mars will appear to move backwards in the sky has no bearing on anything I asked.

You made a statement that scientists say the sun may one day rise in the west just as the Koran states. I ask again, what scientists? I ask only so I may look it up and see how this would be possible. Call it curiosity.

I have never made that? where is my statement?

I said it is in Islam and i do not know any scientists said that and i guess it is beyoned human kwnoledge.

Sun arise from west ,as i said, is the biggest sign and is the deadline. That what i wrote.

Question

0 Replies

I said that Laughing

i heard that a while ago....
a couple of times.....
and dont worry...ill get u the source very soon Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

where are you o0memyselfandi0o?

I don't see you here.....

i have started another thread Rlegion & science.

you may be able to praticbate in it Surprised

0 Replies

mY fIrSt ToPiC

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know