Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   No Stealing, Unless from Egyptians
JIM
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 27 (72692)
12-13-2003 1:42 PM


The Eighth Commandment, what more can I say?
No Stealing, Unless from Egyptians
Thou shalt not steal
Not a bad idea, but again, there's no clarification that comes with this commandment either. Therefore we have to take it as an absolute commandment against stealing. Surly, I think all of you can come up with a few if not more situations where stealing should be okay. Should it be okay to steal food for a starving child if all else fails? What about enemies stealing each other's plans during war? Or someone stealing the gun from a crazed killer? I don't honestly believe stealing should be considered wrong under all circumstances.
It's also interesting to note how these have been called the basis for the common law of Americathe same country that stole its land from the Native Americans.As usual, the God of the Bible seems to ignore His own commandments. In one example, He orders Moses to tell the Hebrew children to rob the Egyptians: "When you go, you will not go empty-handed. Every woman shall ask her [Egyptian] neighbor or any woman who lives in her house for jewelry of silver and gold and for clothing. Load your sons and daughters with them, and plunder Egypt" (NEB Exod. 3:21-22).
"In Gen. 28:14-15 God promised Jacob that his descendants would be like the dust of the earth and all the families of the earth would be blessed by him and his descendants. God also said he would watch over Jacob wherever he went and would not leave him. Yet, Jacob was the swindler who stole the birthright of his brother, Esau."
Even if God could live up to his own commandment, this seems like a difficult issue to conquer. How would you re-phrase it to make it infallible?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Brian, posted 12-13-2003 1:54 PM JIM has not replied
 Message 3 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-27-2003 7:58 PM JIM has not replied
 Message 4 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 12-27-2003 10:06 PM JIM has not replied
 Message 5 by Abshalom, posted 12-28-2003 3:58 AM JIM has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 2 of 27 (72695)
12-13-2003 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JIM
12-13-2003 1:42 PM


Hi,
This is a pretty straightforward explanation.
The command not to steal wasn't given until after the Exodus, the examples you have given happened before God said it was bad to steal.
Sorry, I wish I could agree with you here, but these examples are irrelevant as Moses had not recieved the Commandments yet.
Perhaps if you wanted to say that the Israelites 'stole' the land from the Canaanites then you would have more of a case.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JIM, posted 12-13-2003 1:42 PM JIM has not replied

  
AlmostBlue
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 27 (75372)
12-27-2003 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JIM
12-13-2003 1:42 PM


The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Loosely taken from the Soncino Pentateuch by Dr. JH Hertz :
" and ye shall spoil (strip) the Egyptians" or: "veNitzaltem et Mitzrayim" in Hebrew. The word translated as spoil/plunder/strip has in its Hebrew root the letters Nun/tzadi/Lamed. Words with this root occur 212 times in scripture. In 210 instances its meaning is admitted by all to be: to snatch(from danger), to rescue (from a wild beast), to recover (property). Its direct object is never the person or thing *from whom* the saving or the rescuing or the snatching has taken place, but always the person or thing rescued. The usual translation is unwarranted for two reasons. It takes the persons from whom things are snatched as the direct object and it necessitates an entire reversal of the meaning of NaTzaL from "save" to "strip." In accordance with the other 210 instances where NTzL means "save" etc. the meaning of 3:22 MAY be something akin to "and ye shall SAVE the Egyptians," namely: clear the name and vindicate the humanity of the Egyptians. Don't associate bitter memories of the Egyptians as eternal oppressors, etc. Part on 'good' terms so that you can observe the commandment in Deut. 23:8 "thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian."
*end Hertz*
But assumming it meant strip/empty out, it could be justified as JUST WAGES for 200 (or 400 years, depending on your count) that the Israelites provided as FREE slave labor.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JIM, posted 12-13-2003 1:42 PM JIM has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Brian, posted 12-28-2003 6:23 AM AlmostBlue has replied

  
Itachi Uchiha
Member (Idle past 5615 days)
Posts: 272
From: mayaguez, Puerto RIco
Joined: 06-21-2003


Message 4 of 27 (75389)
12-27-2003 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JIM
12-13-2003 1:42 PM


JIM writes:
Not a bad idea, but again, there's no clarification that comes with this commandment either. Therefore we have to take it as an absolute commandment against stealing. Surly, I think all of you can come up with a few if not more situations where stealing should be okay. Should it be okay to steal food for a starving child if all else fails? What about enemies stealing each other's plans during war? Or someone stealing the gun from a crazed killer? I don't honestly believe stealing should be considered wrong under all circumstances.
Solutions:
1. Buy the food youre gonna give to the kid. If you cant buy it, start worrying about what youre gonna eat also. Remember every action has a consequence, if the cops catch you youll go to jail and the kid will stay starving.
2. They are in war. Everything is fair in love and war. but then again its cheating and theres no honor in that knid of victory
3. let the cops deal with the crazed killer and keep yourself out of trouble. Most likely youll be killed before getting the gun.
4. if somebody steals your car because he needed to go to work will you consider that right? Stealing is always wrong.
JIM writes:
He orders Moses to tell the Hebrew children to rob the Egyptians: "When you go, you will not go empty-handed. Every woman shall ask her [Egyptian] neighbor or any woman who lives in her house for jewelry of silver and gold and for clothing. Load your sons and daughters with them, and plunder Egypt" (NEB Exod. 3:21-22).
I said before every action has a reaction. Its just what they deserved. they had the hebrews in slavery for hundreds of years where they stole their freedom which is the most precios posesion we have, they stole their possesions,pride women and children and treated them like work horses. If someone steals your jewels wont you fight to take them back.
JIM writes:
"In Gen. 28:14-15 God promised Jacob that his descendants would be like the dust of the earth and all the families of the earth would be blessed by him and his descendants. God also said he would watch over Jacob wherever he went and would not leave him. Yet, Jacob was the swindler who stole the birthright of his brother, Esau."
esau is a jackass. he sold his rights years before to jacob for thinking with his stomach. He exchanged those rights for a stew. jacob knew he wasnt being serious but still gave him his word. Jacob made sure he got what esau promised him, so he didnt steal anything

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JIM, posted 12-13-2003 1:42 PM JIM has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 27 (75411)
12-28-2003 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by JIM
12-13-2003 1:42 PM


Jim says, "Jacob was the swindler who stole the birthright of his brother, Esau."
As Jazz points out in his post just above, the story goes that Esau traded his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of red lentil gruel. Read the story, as it is all tied together by the color "red" indicating an underlying theme.
[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 12-28-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JIM, posted 12-13-2003 1:42 PM JIM has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 6 of 27 (75412)
12-28-2003 6:23 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by AlmostBlue
12-27-2003 7:58 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Hi,
But assumming it meant strip/empty out, it could be justified as JUST WAGES for 200 (or 400 years, depending on your count) that the Israelites provided as FREE slave labor.
It would not have been entirely free, they were fed and housed of course, but apparently life wasn't that bad under the Egyptians as many Israelites wanted to go back there.
According to the enslavement myth the Israelites were employed to build the cities of Pithom and Rameses, these would be primarily for the Pharaoh, why should the Egyptian 'general public' be held responsible when they didn't have any say in the enslavement of the Israelites?
Whether this 'stripping out' actally happened or not is highly debatable as even the Hebrew Bible gives contradictory information about this.
Exodus 11:2 claims that Tell the people that men and women alike are to ask their neighbors for articles of silver and gold."
And
Exodus 12:35-36 The Israelites did as Moses instructed and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold and for clothing. The LORD had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians.
But, apparently they didn't have time to ask for silver and gold as:
Exodus 12:39 With the dough they had brought from Egypt, they baked cakes of unleavened bread. The dough was without yeast because they had been driven out of Egypt and did not have time to prepare food for themselves.
Although Exodus 12:39 claims that the Israelites had been driven out of Egypt, apparently they actually fled without the Pharaoh's knowledge:
Exodus 14:5a 5 When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled
But did they flee? According to Exodus 13:18:
So God led the people around by the desert road toward the Red Sea. [1] The Israelites went up out of Egypt armed for battle.
they had time to arm themselves.
So whether they actually did plunder the Egyptians is not clear from the text.
Another piece of contrary evidence is what ever happened to the gold and silver they allegedly took? There is no Egyptian material culture at all in the Palestinian sites claimed as Israelite, there is nothing at all in fact that can be construed as Egyptian in the new settlements of the bronze age/Iron age villages of the Palestinain hill country.
I think that the plundering of the Egyptians is just another case of ideological history on behalf of the Israelites.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-27-2003 7:58 PM AlmostBlue has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-29-2003 4:25 PM Brian has replied

  
AlmostBlue
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 27 (75645)
12-29-2003 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Brian
12-28-2003 6:23 AM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Brian writes: "It would not have been entirely free, they were fed and housed of course, but apparently life wasn't that bad under the Egyptians as many Israelites wanted to go back there."
Imagine saying that to an African-American about his ancestors' experience in the US over the centuries; Massa beat/whipped/raped me, but I had housing and food... to address the point though, while a minority longed to return to Egypt, the overwhelming theme of this story is the hard labor/ oppressive life / removal of dignity, etc. the people's cry and Gd hearing this cry...this theme and awareness is echoed throughout the rest of the pentateuch as well as other books (i.e. Psalms/Isaiah)and was the formative experience for the nation (see the many occurrences of "Remember you were a slave in Egypt", such as when exhorting the people to not oppress the orphan, widow, et al)
Your point about the "general public" is well taken. I have no idea about that.
Re Pharoh being surprised they left, remember that Moses never says to "let my people go," but rather "let my people go that they may serve me (i.e. Gd). The idea was for the Israelites to worship in the desert for 3 days and then return. This of course opens the can of worms of why didn't Moses 'level' with Pharoh, especially since the burning bush episode is clear that the exodus is 'permanent.'
Presumably, the Gold and Silver was used to build the portable tabernacle (I don't thing silver is used there though). As far as there being a lack of archeological evidence for this, the "argument from silence" doesn't necessarily mean the events did not take place. Time may tell...
To get back to the original issue of plundering/stripping/stealing. If it truly meant that in the sense of an egregious wrong, why would the Israelites document this shameful behavior for eternal posterity?
Thanks for your comments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Brian, posted 12-28-2003 6:23 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Brian, posted 12-29-2003 4:40 PM AlmostBlue has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 8 of 27 (75649)
12-29-2003 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by AlmostBlue
12-29-2003 4:25 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Hi,
My comments about the 'slaves' being well looked after were tongue in cheek. Of course, the Israelites were never in Egypt and the Exodus certainly never happened so the story of the 'stripping' is more wishful thinking than anything else.
We had a guy here a few months back who was going on about the Egyptian government taking out a lawsuit against Israel for the return of these treausres! LOL, the guy was a bit weird but you may be interested in reading the posts when you have a few minutes to spare.
The discussion starts HERE and is a good example of how gullible people can be, his claims had no substance to them at all.
Thanks for the reply.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-29-2003 4:25 PM AlmostBlue has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-30-2003 11:58 AM Brian has replied

  
AlmostBlue
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 27 (75819)
12-30-2003 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Brian
12-29-2003 4:40 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Brian writes "Of course, the Israelites were never in Egypt and the Exodus certainly never happened..." - With all due respect, I wish I was as certain of that as you are...please let me know how you know this for a fact. You probably will invoke the lack of archeological evidence and/or the lack of Egyptian writings of what would have been a great event (albeit a negative and humiliating one for the Egyptian side - that in itself may hint as to why there is no Egyptian description for posterity about the Exodus, i.e. why *should* they have recorded this defeat by a group of slaves and their invisible Gd). An approach that should be considered is that of Israelite national memory. The Bible speaks of approx 600,000 military-age men taking part in the exodus; this extrapolates to 2 million people. Let's assume the Bible is a forgery (all or in part)that was written at the latest by 300BC (the Septuagint "fixes" Exodus) by some commitee. The commitee will go out on a limb by writing about this mass exodus that has "always" been a part of the national history of the Jews and then say to them, in effect, "this is what happened to us and it's always been part of our national memory/identity". More than one person would surely stand up and say, "hey, how come I've never heard about this ancient history that we Jews are supposed to have had?? *MY* grandfather never told me about this identity-forming event..." In addition, if this story had been contrived, why would the Jews willingly bring upon themselves the very difficult obligations involved in observing the Passover festival. Ask any jew (especially the wife!) today what is involved in this (triple-cleaning of the house, kashering the stove, passover-only dishes, passover-only food, no bread/beer/pasta etc.)and you will appreciate that *something* happened in the past to cause this people (even non-religious Jews) to commemorate each spring without fail. Jews have been called many things, but gullible or unquestioning or stupid has not been among them - see the talmudic dialectics for example). Jews rarely agree on much - the old joke about how America with 280 million people does just fine with 2 major political parties while little Israel with approx 5 million Jews needs some 30 political parties holds a kernel of truth... happy new year to all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Brian, posted 12-29-2003 4:40 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 12-30-2003 3:22 PM AlmostBlue has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 10 of 27 (75849)
12-30-2003 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by AlmostBlue
12-30-2003 11:58 AM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Brian writes "Of course, the Israelites were never in Egypt and the Exodus certainly never happened..." - With all due respect, I wish I was as certain of that as you are...please let me know how you know this for a fact.
I thought everyone who has studied this knows it for a fact, but unstead of me repeating myself you can read my opinions here
You probably will invoke the lack of archeological evidence and/or the lack of Egyptian writings of what would have been a great event (albeit a negative and humiliating one for the Egyptian side - that in itself may hint as to why there is no Egyptian description for posterity about the Exodus, i.e. why *should* they have recorded this defeat by a group of slaves and their invisible Gd).
This is a tired old argument, no offence intended, but the major problem with this argument is that the Egyptians really wouldn’t have needed to record this defeat for there to have been any evidence of it. Now it doesn’t really matter which pharaoh we say was the pharaoh of the Exodus, the Bible doesn’t actually say who it is but if the defeat was as enormous as the Bible claims, if two or three million people suddenly got up and wandered out of Egypt one day then it would leave a fingerprint of some sort in the archaeological record. There are none.
People seem to forget that the Egyptian Empire didn’t stop at the Red Sea, it encompassed Palestine as well, so the Israelites had no where to run too.
An approach that should be considered is that of Israelite national memory. The Bible speaks of approx 600,000 military-age men taking part in the exodus; this extrapolates to 2 million people.
You do know it is humanly impossible for a group to grow from 70 up to 2-3 million in 400 years? It is even more incredulous for it to happen in 215 years if we take another tradition’s record.
Let's assume the Bible is a forgery (all or in part)that was written at the latest by 300BC (the Septuagint "fixes" Exodus) by some commitee. The commitee will go out on a limb by writing about this mass exodus that has "always" been a part of the national history of the Jews and then say to them, in effect, "this is what happened to us and it's always been part of our national memory/identity". More than one person would surely stand up and say, "hey, how come I've never heard about this ancient history that we Jews are supposed to have had?? *MY* grandfather never told me about this identity-forming event..."
Almost every culture that I have studied has an ‘origins’ myth, these explain where the ethnic group came from, when these ancient myths were made up the population were not as critical of these tales as we modern humans are, they had much more important things on their minds.
In addition, if this story had been contrived, why would the Jews willingly bring upon themselves the very difficult obligations involved in observing the Passover festival. Ask any jew (especially the wife!) today what is involved in this (triple-cleaning of the house, kashering the stove, passover-only dishes, passover-only food, no bread/beer/pasta etc.)and you will appreciate that *something* happened in the past to cause this people (even non-religious Jews) to commemorate each spring without fail. Jews have been called many things, but gullible or unquestioning or stupid has not been among them - see the talmudic dialectics for example).
Many cultures have obligations like this, it doesn’t mean that the celebrated event is true. Does the celebration of Xmas mean that there was a virgin birth in which God’s son was born, does the Easter celebration mean that Jesus really did rise from the dead, do people worshipping Jesus as the Messiah promised in the Tanakh mean that he is the Messiah? I think not. Cultures have festivals, it doesn’t follow that observing these festivals mean that the event actually happened.
Perhaps something happened, but it certainly didn’t happen the way the Hebrew Bible claims it did.
Jews rarely agree on much - the old joke about how America with 280 million people does just fine with 2 major political parties
Well we don’t want to confuse Americans by giving them more than two choices do we, imagine if they had more than two at the last election! (Just joking guys before you lynch me)
while little Israel with approx 5 million Jews needs some 30 political parties holds a kernel of truth... happy new year to all.
If you would like to discuss the historicity of the Exodus we should really continue the discussion at the thread I linked to at the beginning of this post since it is off topic here. I would welcome the opportunity to resurrect the discussion of the Exodus.
Happy New year to you as well.
[This message has been edited by Brian, 12-30-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-30-2003 11:58 AM AlmostBlue has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 12-30-2003 9:15 PM Brian has not replied
 Message 12 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 12-30-2003 11:07 PM Brian has not replied
 Message 14 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-31-2003 4:25 PM Brian has replied

  
ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 11 of 27 (75911)
12-30-2003 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Brian
12-30-2003 3:22 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Of course, the Israelites were never in Egypt and ...
People seem to forget that the Egyptian Empire didn’t stop at the Red Sea, it encompassed Palestine as well, so ...
Sorry, but this just struck me as an interesting couplet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 12-30-2003 3:22 PM Brian has not replied

  
ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 12 of 27 (75923)
12-30-2003 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Brian
12-30-2003 3:22 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
... if two or three million people suddenly got up and wandered out of Egypt one day then it would leave a fingerprint of some sort in the archaeological record. There are none.
Precisely!
quote:
The event is suppose to take place in Egypt, yet Egyptian sources know it not. On the morrow of the Exodus Israel numbered approximately 2.5 million (extrapolated from Num. 1:46); yet the entire population of Egypt at that time was only 3 to 4.5 million! The effct on Egypt must have been cataclysmic -- loss of a servile population, pillaging of gold and silver (Exod. 3:21-22, 12:31-36), destruction of an army -- yet at no point in the history of the country during the New Kingdom is there the slightest hint of the traumatic impact such an event would have on economics or society.
[and later ...]
... we can now genuinely speak of unanimity of the evidence. Whoever supplied the geographic information that now adorns the story had no information earlier than the Saite period (seventh to sixth centuries B.C.). The eastern Delta and Sinai he describes are those of the 26th Dynasty kings and the early Persian overloards: his toponyms reflect the renewed interest in the eastern frontier evidence for this period by fort building and canalization. He knows of "Goshen" of the Qedarite Arabs, and a legendary "Land of Ramessses." He cannot locate the Egyptian court to anything but the largest and most famous city in his own day in the northeastern Delta, namely Tanis, the royal residence from about 1075 to 725 B.C., ...
-- Egypt, Cannan, and Israel in Ancient Times by Donald B. Redford
Nor is the problem limited to the Exodus narrative. Studies of settlement patterns provide abundant and growing evidence repudiating the conquest model of Israelite origins, so much so that this model is no longer taken seriously by any of the leading voices in Syro-Palestinian archaeology.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 12-30-2003 3:22 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by FrankM, posted 12-31-2003 12:53 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
FrankM
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 27 (76006)
12-31-2003 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by ConsequentAtheist
12-30-2003 11:07 PM


Re: Moses education and morals
Moses couldn't help himself, he was a foster child raised in the House of the Pharaoh, treated like a son, but at some time he found out he could not succeed his surrogate father and be Pharaoh. When he coveted this power and started planning his deceit is not revealed by his scribes rather truncated biography. That he was treated like a son is revealed by his possession of a "staff" that was reserved for the House of the Pharaoh, ordinary priests and selected officials had lesser staffs.
As a trusted member of the House of the Pharaoh he had authority over matters that could not be questioned by lesser officials, thus he could move freely amongst the Israelites and plan a departure. There seems to have been some kind of exodus, but there was more to it than stealing gold and silver. What was taught to the male members of the House of the Pharaoh doesn't seem to be revealed anywhere, and therein probably lay the basis for Moses ability to manipulate the Israelites.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 12-30-2003 11:07 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
AlmostBlue
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 27 (76059)
12-31-2003 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Brian
12-30-2003 3:22 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Brian's points are well taken, but due to the late hour before 12/31 I have only a moment to briefly address his last point. I had written:
"In addition, if this story had been contrived, why would the Jews willingly bring upon themselves the very difficult obligations involved in observing the Passover festival. Ask any jew (especially the wife!) today what is involved in this (triple-cleaning of the house, kashering the stove, passover-only dishes, passover-only food, no bread/beer/pasta etc.)and you will appreciate that *something* happened in the past to cause this people (even non-religious Jews) to commemorate each spring without fail. Jews have been called many things, but gullible or unquestioning or stupid has not been among them - see the talmudic dialectics for example)."
To which Brian responded:
"Many cultures have obligations like this, it doesn’t mean that the celebrated event is true. Does the celebration of Xmas mean that there was a virgin birth in which God’s son was born, does the Easter celebration mean that Jesus really did rise from the dead, do people worshipping Jesus as the Messiah promised in the Tanakh mean that he is the Messiah? I think not. Cultures have festivals, it doesn’t follow that observing these festivals mean that the event actually happened.
Perhaps something happened, but it certainly didn’t happen the way the Hebrew Bible claims it did."
As someone who has in his close family both devout Jews as well as evangelical Southern Baptists, and has seen both ends of the spectrum up close, I am probably better qualified than most to make the following observation about religious observance (without making any judgment about which is "better"): When a religious Christian sincerely accepts Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior, while he may have struggled with inner passions or behaviors, he is also
accepting Paul's antinomism (i.e. faith vs. works). Celebrating Christmas, Easter, etc may require church attendance and a reaffirmation of belief (maybe even charity/good works if the aninomism is not accepted), but he can still eat at any restaurant he wishes, and not be involved in the *physical* effort I described regarding preparing the Jewish house for passover. While respecting the Christian's belief and commitment, one also has to recognize the difficulty involved in keeping the "Law" for the observant Jew. Yes, cultures have festivals, however, the difficulty in observance is not at all equal (I'm tempted to digress into the other limits Jews observe such as dietary constraints, two weeks of sexual abstinence each month, etc. to illustrate that *something* had an impact that would make this "stiffnecked" people keep this restrictive lifestyle. Perhaps another board - thxs)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 12-30-2003 3:22 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Brian, posted 12-31-2003 4:32 PM AlmostBlue has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 15 of 27 (76060)
12-31-2003 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by AlmostBlue
12-31-2003 4:25 PM


Re: The meaning of Ex. 3:22 unclear
Hi,
Just a quick word to wish you and your family a very safe and a very Happy New Year.
I hope to speak to you in the New Year and look forward to some mutually beneficial discussions.
Best Wishes.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by AlmostBlue, posted 12-31-2003 4:25 PM AlmostBlue has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024