Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    We were presented in the first class with information that I had never
    heard before.
    
    Historians no longer believe that the Israelites settled Caanan from
    the outside.  They believe that as the Egyptian and Hittite influence
    waned, that Caananites migrated from the Caananite City-States to the
    Mountains in small family and extended family groups.  Over time they
    united into clans and then tribes and then into a loose federation of
    tribes.
    
    Then the Philistines, were defeated by Egypt and Settled in Palestine. 
    They began expanding as the newly emerging Hebrew tribes were
    expanding. Saul, became the first military leader successful against
    the Philistines.  After Saul, David, in a serious of political
    intrigues and assasinations established the Davidic dynasty .
    
    Fascinating stuff.
     

    Patricia:
    
    You are going to find many treasures here...the challenge is that
    sometimes we have to dig for them.
    
    My knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures is minimal and my knowledge of
    the feasts is somewhat foreign to me.  I truly hope and believe this
    class will broaden your scope of how the old testament compliments the
    new.  Soak it up and just be sure that what you hear is in harmony 
    the teachings of Jesus...who he was...and what qualified him as
    Messiah.
    
    Are you going to be focusing on history or on the prophets?
    
    -Jack

    Do yourself a favor and get "Messianic Prophecies from a Dead Sea 
    Scroll" by Catherine Geever, Margaret and Preston Heinle too.  They are
    in Arizona State University's theological department and wrote this
    book as their thesis project (Password Communications, ISBN 1-57074-275-8).
    It contrasts the Dead Sea Scroll's Messianic Prophecies with the Masoretic 
    Text.  Your teacher will probably be interested in it as well.
    
    Mike

 ZZ    Saul, became the first military leader successful against
 ZZ    the Philistines.  
    
    Yes.  Unfortunately Samson could have had this honor had he kept his
    eyes on YHWH.  One might say the Philistines were to Israel as Rome was
    to Israel on a smaller scale.  
    
    -Jack

    Actually the approach used is to understand the history, literature,
    and theology of the Old Testament from its own perspective and not as a
    long preface to the New Testament.
    
                                       Patricia

    Well that should be interesting.  Is the professor Jewish or Christian?
    
    

    the professor is Jewish.

    Then that would make sense...not tying it in to the New Testament.
    
    I would strongly enourage if possible taking a course with a prof who
    is able to tie in New Testament precepts with Old Testament prophecy.
    
    If you recall in Matthew, Mark, and  Luke, there are so many times
    where the writer says, "Thus was the prophecy fulfilled...."
    It also helps complete the picture as to what Paul and the writer of
    Hebrews was trying to communicate.
    
    -Jack  

ok. time for a dumb question. do the jews have the same books
in their scriptures as the christians have in the OT?



ignorantly yours,

andreas.

    I believe so but I'm not sure how they are broken up.  I've heard the
    term, "Second Isaiah" mentioned in here and don't know if the Hebrew
    scriptures have Isaiah split into two books unlike what's in my Bible.
    
    -Jack

    I learned that last night.
    
    The Hebrew Bible has the same contents as the protestant bible but the
    books are arranged slightly differently.
    
    1Kings & 2Kings are the same book
    1Samuel & 2Samuel are the same.
    
    Also twelve of the prophets (the minor prophets) comprise one book in
    the Hebrew bible rather than twelve.  
    
    There may be some other differences also.  The Hebrew Bible is
    comprised of three sections.  The Torah, The Prophets, and the
    Writings.

    It's also interesting to note that the writings (I assume the Psalms,
    Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon) also contain within them
    prophecies of the Messiah.  
    
    -Jack

    Jack,
    
    I suppose that you never considered that the writers of the New
    Testament had excellent knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures and wrote
    their stories in such a way to show the progression from the Jewish
    Faith to the Christian faith?
    
    That the continuity between the two was written in by the authors?

   ZZ     I suppose that you never considered that the writers of the New
   ZZ     Testament had excellent knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures and wrote
   ZZ     their stories in such a way to show the progression from the Jewish
   ZZ     Faith to the Christian faith?
    
    Actually, they were accounts, not stories.  Furthermore, Jesus is
    always quoted as saying, "Thus the fulfillment of the prophet
    (whomever) is being fulfilled.
    
    You may recall from Luke chapter 4, Jesus was reading the old Testament
    in the synagogue to the chief priests and elders.  He then closed the 
    book and made one small statement that turned these religious people
    into an angry mob....
    
    "This Scripture has been fulfilled here today."
    
    Now imagine that.  Jesus claims prophesy to himself...and is
    subsequently ushered to a cliff to be thrown off!
    
    Patricia, never forsake the opportunity to harmonize Old Testament
    prophesies with New Testament.  The gems are there...they need to be
    discovered.
    
    -Jack

    The Hebrew OT is called the "Tanach."

    I had a good second class last night.
    
    We discussed Genesis 1 through Genesis 11.
    
    We are learning about and discussing the source theory of the old
    testament.  (JEPD)
    
    Genesis 1 through the very beginning of Genesis 2 is identified as
    the Priestly source written during the time of Babylonian exile.
    
    Genesis 2-11 is mostly the Yahwist Source written from oral tradition
    sometime around 1200 BCE.  The Priestly Sources is also interwoven at
    places.  It is easy to distinquish in Genesis since the Yahwist source
    used the Proper name for God and the Priestly tradition does not use
    the Proper name for God until after telling the Moses story in early
    Exodus.
    
    We spent a lot of time discussing the two Creation and Expulsion
    traditions, the Flood story, and the Tower of Babel.
    
    It took a long time discussing the Creation stories.  The teachers
    theory is that most of us read these stories through a Pauline
    interpretation, particularly Romans 5, and thereby miss what the story
    really says.
    
    The particular example was the idea of immortality.  In Far Eastern
    mythology what separates humans from Gods is knowledge and immortality.
    
    The story of the tree of knowledge and life is the story of the
    differences between humans and God(s).
    
    From Paul's account we come to believe that humans were immortal before
    the 'sin' of Adam and Eve.  A careful reading of the mythology shows
    that humans had the potential of immortality if they ate of the tree of
    life, but they infact had not eaten of the tree of life and were never
    immortal.  Fascinating stuff.
    
    We also discussed the parallel Babylonian myths of Marduck and Tiamet
    which originated from the Sumerian myths.
    
    We discussed the two flood stories and their parallel in the Gilgamesh
    myth and finally the story of the tower of Babel which was identified
    as a parody of the Babylonian creation story.  In that story, at the
    time of creation God built the city of Babylon and the temple on top of
    the ziggurat.  The Priestly account of the tower of Babel, written
    during the Babylonian exile where they obviously knew the
    Marduck/Ziggurat story, tells that Marduck did not build the Ziggurat
    but that humans created it andit was not acceptable.  In a sense the
    story is say that the Hebrew God not the Babylonian God is the real
    creator God.
    
    It was a very interesting class.
    
                                          Patricia

    Did anybody think to ask why there is a lineage in the Chronicles all
    the way back to Adam?  This would be interesting because the Jews are
    devout at keeping family lineages...particularly in the Old Testament.
    Family lineages and myths are absolute no no's in Hebrew culture.
    
    The Genesis account was written by Moses.
    
    -Jack

>    The Genesis account was written by Moses.

After which oral tradition?  Or do you not even acknowledge the existance
of one?

Richard

    Another good question, when you get to them, is why the OT Messianic
    passages are different in the Masoretic Text and the DSS.

    I have finished rereading Genesis and the accompanying texts.  Genesis
    is really fascinating.  The first 11 chapters are seen as explaining in
    an mythologial way the reasons for common occurances, particularly why
    is life so hard, why do so many women die during childbirth, why are
    there many languages and ethnic groups, why do snakes slither on their
    bellies.  
    
    Genesis also attempts an answer to the question, "why are women
    subordinate to men".  What is interesting in not the answer, but the
    question.  The mythology arouse to explain what was.  Women as early as
    the first Israeli's question why the subordinate status.  Woman's
    consciousness raising did not begin in the 1960's!
    
    Genesis is the folk lore in which the Israeli's defined themselves. 
    What I like best about Genesis is the Covenants.  Even as it is
    unfortunate the covenants are recorded as between God and men, the
    convenants stand as wonderful inspiration.  God speaks to humankind
    repeatly reminding God's people that "I will be your God, and you will
    be my people.  Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are the chosen.  But
    the convenant with them will be a covenant for all nations and for all
    people.  The Universal love of God for all of humanity is shown from
    the beginning.  From Genesis.
    
    Of course we cannot neglect the covenant between God and Noah.  That
    covenant is between God and all living things.  Even the animals are
    included in the Covenant.
    
    It is the convenant, the promise that makes this religion unique. God's
    promise is unconditional.
    
                                      Patricia
    
    When looked at in terms of a primitive way of explaining everyday facts
    of life, interesting observations can be made.  

 ZZ   It is the convenant, the promise that makes this religion unique.
 ZZ   God's promise is unconditional.
    
    Yes, these covenants are beautiful in that they eventually lead to the
    New covenant Jesus made with the Church...
    
    Noah's Covenant does in fact deal with all creation.  
    
    The Abrahamic Covenant calls a nation.
    
    The Mosaic Covenant calls a people.  I copied the above you wrote to
    address this.  This covenant is actually conditional.  They were
    required to follow the law in order to maintain the promise.  If you do
    this, then I will do this, etc.
    
    Finally, The Davidic Covenant calls an eternal kingdom.  Of course the
    Mosaic and Davidic Covenants come after Genesis but it is interesting
    how the sequence works.
    
    -Jack

    I hate to dwell on this but you know of course I am going to.  It would
    appear the professor feels Genesis is folklore.  Getting back to the 
    lineages again...an interesting question you may want to ask the Prof
    is this.  Based on the lengthy lineages found in Genesis...that being
    Adam all the way to Abraham, exactly when did the names within the
    lineages become folklore?  No doubt the Jews believe Abraham to be a
    REAL person...therefore, it would make sense that someplace within the
    family line the names would have to have been made up...Adam not being
    a real person.
    
    I think it would be a great sign of seeking truth by asking the nitty
    gritty questions like that and I'd especially be interested in what you
    find out!
    
    -Jack

    jack,
    
    Who is "The Professor?"
    
    

    Professor Roy Hinckley from Gilligan's Island!
    
    No, Patricia is taking an Old Testament course at Newton Andover.  Her
    Professor is the one I was referring to.
    
    -Jack

    The geneologies are the part of the folklore that tells about the
    coming into existance of the Israeli cities and the Israeli tribes. 
    The names of many of the Hebrew cities find their name in the folklore
    as the sons of the Patriarch's.  Jacobs 12 sons being an example.  12
    is a mythological number and one of the 12 mythological tribes is named
    after each of the 12 sons.  Benjamin, Judah, Rueben (who is ostricized
    for sleeping with his fathers concubine) and each of the rest.

    So, did the twelve sons of Jacob actually exist or were they a part of
    the folklore?
    
    I ask because Two of the sons of joseph, Manassah and Ephraem hold a
    historical importance in Israeli history.  Also, the bones of Joseph
    were carried from Egypt and placed in the burial ground of the
    Patriarchs.  
    
    -Jack

    I've heard some rabbis in Reformed Judaism also call *some* of the Torah
    folklore.  Obviously Reformed is the more liberal arm of Judaism.  
    
    I'm seriously thinking about taking some classes in this area at a
    major university since I have some credits to burn.  I'm curious as to
    how many believe this is folklore and what else they brand folklore
    besides the Creation.
    
    Mike

    Scholarly evidence points to  folklore.
    
    I don't think there is any good scholarly reason to believe that
    anything in Genesis is based on historical fact!

    there's that word again.  I think it's been worn out to the point that
    it doesn't mean anything now.

    It would seem to me that Hebrew Scholars over in Israel who are
    Orthodox might find the Genesis account as folklore somewhat offensive.
    Same with the Conservative.
    
    I would be interested in knowing how Nimrod, The Great Hunter for the
    Lord...who was a grandson of Noah, could possibly have founded what we
    know as modern day astrology and yet be a fictitious person.  
    
    -Jack

Re: .30 Jack

>    I would be interested in knowing how Nimrod, The Great Hunter for the
>    Lord...who was a grandson of Noah, could possibly have founded what we
>    know as modern day astrology and yet be a fictitious person.  
    
If he really founded astrology then he couldn't have been fictitious.  If
he was fictitious then he couldn't have founded astrology.

Similarly, if Noah was the first tiller of the soil then he couldn't have
been fictitious.  If he was fictituous then he couldn't have been the
first tiller of the soil.

There's logic for you! :-)

Side note: isn't there a contraction between these two verses:

	Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground.
					Genesis 4:2b (RSV)

	Noah was the first tiller of the soil.
					Genesis 9:20a (RSV)

By the way, where does it say in the Bible that Nimrod was the founder of
astrology?  Here's all I can find about him in Genesis:

	Cush became the father of Nimrod; he was the first on earth to be
	a mighty man.  He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore
	it is said, "Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD."  The
	beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, and Accad, all of them
	in the land of Shinar.  From that land he went into Assyria, and
	built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and
	Calah; that is the great city.
					Genesis 10:8-12 (RSV)

				-- Bob

    ZZZ        Noah was the first tiller of the soil.
    
    Hi Bob:
    
    My guess would be the context is he being the first tiller of the soil
    after the flood.  Of course thats a simple explanation but the only
    one I can think of.
    
    Re: Nimrod, there are some very good commentaries on Leaders of the Old
    Testament and Old Testament history.  "The Two Babylons" by Hislop,
    although I don't necessarily agree with him on everything he wrote,
    find that his research has been quite interesting regarding the
    Babylonians and Assyrian culture.
    
    The verse you brought up actually speaks mountains regarding
    Nimrod...more than is there.  For example, it states that he built
    Ninevah.  As a leader, Nimrod had a great influence on the culture and
    practices of the Assyrian Nation.  Assyria was drenched in baal worship
    and they were very astute in the knowledge of the cosmos for their
    time.  You may recall the Tower of Babel, which was actually
    constructed for the purpose of observing the stars, or in that culture,
    reaching to God...their god that is.  The true God didn't scatter them
    for attempting to reach a true God but because they aspired to
    propogate the reaching of an idol.  Astrology was a core believe in the
    Assyrian nation and Nimrod built Ninevah, the center of idolatry.
    
    Ninevah had the distinct pleasure of having Jonah drop in to warn them
    of the judgement to come for their idolatry.  They did in fact repent
    but soon fell back into their old ways and were summarily wiped out 100
    years later.  This is why I fear for America.
    
    -Jack

Jack,

Your argument that Nimrod was the founder of modern astrology is based on
the Bible's statement that Nimrod founded the city of Nineveh, which
became the capital of Assyria, which practiced astrology.  Even if this is
true, how do you know that Nimrod was the person who founded astrology?
Astrology might have developed in Assyria after Nimrod's time, or it might
have been developed in another country before it was practiced in Assyria.

				-- Bob

    I don't dispute this necessarily.  I have read about this from
    theological historians and considering Nimrod is the chief architect of
    the Ninevite culture, and since Assyria practiced astrology, one could
    assume Nimrod laid the groundwork for astrology and other false
    religions.
    
    -Jack

    
    I didn't know astrology was a religion, Jack.  When did that get
    decided, and by whom?
    
    Cindy

    Cindy:
    
    The stars are used as a medium to speak of one's life and what
    objectives a person might want to take.  At least this is what I see in
    the newspapers every day.  
    
    I equate this to prayer...always seeking an answer for one's life. 
    Therefore, I see it as a religion.
    
    -Jack

    Nimrod's widow is the one who started the pagan worship symbol of the
    mother-(child)son and faked a virgin birth after an illicit affair.
    She and her son went on to become known in countries and cultures all
    over the early world.  They were even represented and worshiped in 
    China and Japan.
    
    btw - anything that detracts a person's focus from God could be
    considered a religion.

    Mike

Re: .37 Mike

>    Nimrod's widow is the one who started the pagan worship symbol of the
>    mother-(child)son and faked a virgin birth after an illicit affair.
>    She and her son went on to become known in countries and cultures all
>    over the early world.  They were even represented and worshiped in 
>    China and Japan.
    
What's you source for this, Mike?  Jewish tradition?  Was the name Nimrod
known in China and Japan, or is just a case of the stories being similar?

				-- Bob

    Bob:
    
    Good question.  I haven't actually read up on this in a while so I
    don't remember all the details.  I know you are asking Mike
    here...sorry!
    
    I do know that The Two Babylons goes into alot of detail regarding
    Nimrod.  I'll try to find the book but I think I've loaned it to
    somebody.
    
    -Jack

    Re.36                      
    
    Jack,
    
    Newspaper horoscopes are basically worthless...except Patric Walker is
    usually quite good and a lot more insightful than most.  
    
    Now, go to a *real* astrologer (which I do), or a Vedic astrologer 
    (which I also know), and you have another order of magnitude entirely.
    One thing I have noticed in hindsight is just how accurate 'the stars', 
    really are, when read with more insight than tabloid kind.  In fact, 
    most of my major spiritual experiences happened during major identifiable 
    transits in my life - of Uranus, Saturn, and Chiron.  Interestingly
    too, that the elements (earth, fire, water, air) that make up my
    astrological chart(s), also correspond remarkably to my own Ayurvedic
    pulse diagnosis with regard to my underlying doshas and imbalances.
    
    One obvious difference here though, is I follow the Kosmic Muffin's
    wise advice which is, "It's a wise person who rules the stars, and a
    fool who is ruled by them."
    
    Re: religions - I guess then, that just about anything is a religion, 
    under your own definition.  
    
    Cindy

    I tend to live by the rule....God cannot stop a car that isn't moving. 
    Therefore, sometimes I discern God's will in this way...God, I am going
    to move ahead and if it isn't your will, then stop me!  Then there are
    other times when God simply lays on my heart it isn't a good move. 
    Some might call it a gut feeling.  
    
    You did in fact equate astrology with spirituality.  So if it is a
    spiritual activity, then religion is in fact a proper term for it.
    
    -Jack

    ZZ    too, that the elements (earth, fire, water, air) that make up my
    ZZ    astrological chart(s), 
    
    Interesting.  There is a cartoon for kids called "Captain Planet"  The
    children in this cartoon are controllers of these elements.  
    
    -Jack

    Mike, I don't know if Nimrod was known in China and Japan or not, but
    the virgin mother-child pagan symbols were.
    
    Mike

    
    Jack,
    
    To me, astrology is a science, not a religion, although astronomers
    would probably disagree profusely to this.  The dictionary I have
    tends to back up the 'science' definition over religion, when comparing
    it to the Catholicism definition.
    
    I did not equate them...I merely drew a parallel between the transits
    and when I happened to have some spiritual experiences.   
    
    Cindy

Re: .43

Thanks, Mike.  Where did you get the information about Nimrod's widow and
child, though.  Did it come from the Bible, is it a tradition, or what?

				-- Bob

    last night the genesis stories were described not as folk lore which is
    my term, but Epic, similar to Homer's epics.
    
    The "J" tradition is the major story line in Genesis and Exodus and
    Joshua.  The "J" tradition was  assembled by a scribe in the court of
    David.  Assembled, because some of the stories, hymns etc date much
    earlier, but the myths and hymns were woven into the Genesis and Exodus
    accouunts during the time of David by a scribe from his court. 
    
    The "Epic" describes the kingdom established by David, and sets the
    Davidic kingdom's origin back into primieval time.  The geneologies
    describe the tribes of Israel at the time of David and Israel's
    relationship with the other nations at that same time.  Esau is Edon.
    Lot's children from incest are Moab and Aram.  Laban is one of the
    other tribes.  The success of the Israel tribes against these neighbors
    at the time of David is retold in the Epic.

    Just so I understand...
    
    The Genesis accounts are allegorical to what was going on during the
    Davidic period?  In other words, the Epics of the Mosaic period were
    only hidden pictures of what was happening around David's reign?
    
    -Jack

MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I press on toward the goal"          7 lines  12-OCT-1995 09:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >Just so I understand...
    
    >The Genesis accounts are allegorical to what was going on during the
    >Davidic period?  In other words, the Epics of the Mosaic period were
    >only hidden pictures of what was happening around David's reign?
    
    >-Jack
    
    Of course you know that the Epics of the Mosaic period are not in
    Genesis.  The Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Jacob & the 12 sons are all
    allegorical of what was happening in the Davidic period.  At least
    those accounts from the 'J' source.
    
    I believe the same answer is true for the Exodus stories but we will
    discuss that next week.
    
    The Genesis mythology had its origins in Mesapatomea.  Abraham was from
    Mesapotemea.  One of the major purposes of the "j" genesis account was
    to show the passing of World significance from Mesapotamea to Israel.
    
    The Exodus stories play a similiar function.  Showing the passing of
    World significance from Egypt to Israel.
    
    Mesapotemea and Egypt were the two superpowers during the birth of
    Israel.  The Epics show how God moves the forefront of History from
    Mesapatemea and Egypt to Israel.  The promises that God makes to
    Abraham of Land, descendents, and blessings are ultimately fulfilled in
    the Davidic era.
    
                               Patricia
    
    

    As I understand it, the contents of Genesis are not completely
    allegorical, the latter material being more historical.
    
    Richard
    

    Yes.  I never for example, considered Joseph to be allegorical.  I
    think we will find that the belief Joseph is a myth to be quite rare.
    
    -Jack

>    To me, astrology is a science, not a religion, although astronomers
>    would probably disagree profusely to this.  The dictionary I have
    
    Cindy, my Astronomy professor at ASU talked about this the 2nd day of
    class.  Here is basically why astronomy is a science and astrology
    isn't: the Scientific Method model.  Sciences follow this model.
    
          1. Observations/Experiments ------<-------<-
          2. Data Reduction/Analysis/Conclusions      ^
      -<--3. Hypothesis/Model                         |
      |   4. Further Tests for Confirmation ---->------
      ->--5. Theory/Revision of Theory                |
          6. Testable Predictions -------------->------
          7. Better Theory/Scientific Literature/Educational Textbooks
    
    Astrology is not science, it is a religion.
    
    Mike

>Thanks, Mike.  Where did you get the information about Nimrod's widow and
>child, though.  Did it come from the Bible, is it a tradition, or what?
    
    I've seen it my Bible Encyclopedia set (Zondervan) as well as in the
    class text for a "Ritual/Symbol/Myth" religion class at college.  Both
    detail pagan symbolism.  I've even listed the names in here in another 
    topic.
    
    Semiramus (Nimrod's widow) & the boy-child Tammuz
    Isis & Horus
    Venus & Cupid
    Ishtar & ?
    Mary & Jesus
    
    Mike

    
    Mike,
    
    I'm not at all surprised to hear how your Astronomy professor
    categorizes it.  (;^)
    
    Having studied Engineering Science in college, I'm quite familiar
    with The Scientific Method.....
    
    Cindy

It seems to me that the stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph etc. fit
the pattern of having an allegorical originator for each nationality/tribe.
In the same way that Egypt was the son of Ham and the allegorical father
of the people of Egypt, and Canaan was another son of Ham and the
allegorical father of the people of Canaan, Jacob was renamed as Israel
and became the (I believe) allegorical father of the people of Israel.
Ishmael was the allegorical father of the Arabs, Esau was the allegorical
father of the Edomites, and there was an allegorical father for each of
the 12 tribes of Israel.

				-- Bob

    Well think about it Cindy, who applies the scientific method to
    astrology?  I've never heard of astrologists who follow the scientific 
    method.  In addition, how many astrologists need the tools of physics,
    chemistry, and calculus to interpret the stars?
    
    Mike

    
    
    Re.55
    
    Mike,
    
    >I've never heard of astrologists who follow the scientific method.  
    
    Yes, exactly.  And that's why you hold the opinion that you do, along
    with your Astronomy professor.
    
    >In addition, how many astrologists need the tools of physics,
    >chemistry, and calculus to interpret the stars?
    
    The ancient systems of astrology were very much integral sciences,
    especially in the Mayan and Vedic civilizations.  Today though
    - especially in the tabloid sections of newspapers where the virtually
    meaningless daily astrology column appears - most of this has been
    lost.
    
    Cindy
                                  

    Bob:
    
    Why do you believe Abraham was allegorical.  I mean...what exactly is
    it about this figure that might make you disbelieve he actually
    existed?
    
    -Jack

    Other than one inscription identifying the Israelites(circa 1200 bce) there
    is no historical evidence other than the  Bible for the existence of the
    Israelites before the 900's BCE.  The more that is learned about the
    period the more the stories of the Israeli origin as found in the Bible
    are consider Epic and not historical.  My instructor believes that we
    do not get any real solid historic information to very close to the
    time of David.

    Does your instructor follow closely the holidays...particularly Yom
    Kippur and of course Passover??  It would seem to me the significance
    of these Holidays would be totally meaningless had not the Egyptians
    been smited by the hand of God.
    
    Interestingly enough, in the gospels Jesus attributes much of the
    foundation to scripture from Moses and the Prophets.  In fact, Jesus
    rebukes heavily the Pharisees for thier disbelief in the writings of
    Moses.
    
    Secondly, we see yet again in the synoptic gospels that Jesus is
    transfigured.  I believe this to be an actual occurance...why not, God
    can do whatever he pleases right??  Now during this incident, Moses and
    Elijah appear.  Since Moses lived some 1200 years BC, this would tell
    me your prof's theory these people were allegorical is unfounded.
    
    It's a real shame your instructor isn't a Christian as she cannot
    really tie in her "knowledge" of Old Testament with the life of Jesus,
    since to her it would seem Jesus would have little relevance.
    
    -Jack
    

Re: .57 Jack

>    Why do you believe Abraham was allegorical.  I mean...what exactly is
>    it about this figure that might make you disbelieve he actually
>    existed?
    
Because he is supposed to be the father of the Israelites, i.e. each
Israelite is supposed to have been directly descended from him.  I don't
think that's the way nationalities originate.  I think it's more likely
that the Israelites descended from a large number of different original
parents.

It would be like saying that everyone in Britain is descended from one
original Briton, or that everyone in America is descended from one
original American.

				-- Bob

    I think it is quite plausible.  My Grandparents had 12 Children and
    between the twelve, 59 grandchildren.  Great Grandchildren is unknown 
    but obviously humankind had to have begun in one of two ways...
    
    1. There was one woman and one man who procreated, (Adam and Eve)
    
    2. God created a number of beings simultaneously and they all
    procreated!
    
    -Jack

Or else homo sapiens evolved from earlier species, becoming differentiated
from them over a period of time until at some point you could say that it
was a separate species.

I think nationalities such as the Israelites arose much later than the
origin of the species.

				-- Bob

    Bob:
    
    Then if that be the case, how would the statement, "Let us make man in
    our image after our likeness" be allegorical, considering we simply
    evolved?  This would presume we are not spiritual beings.
    
    -Jack

Re: .63 Jack

I don't understand the question.  Certainly I think the Genesis creation
account is allegorical.  This doesn't necessarily mean that humans aren't
spiritual beings.  Maybe that's part of the message that the allegory was
supposed to convey, that man was created in the image of God, i.e. that
man is a spiritual being.

				-- Bob

    I know that as I have reread Genesis and Exodus this time around and as
    I study them as EPIC and not historic fact, I have found a new
    inspiration from the stories.  As I have read the stories of God's
    covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the words, "I will be your God
    and you will be my People" have assumed new meaning for me.
    
    Reading those words as spiritual story, they are transformed to me into
    God saying directly to ME, I will be your God and you will be my
    People.".  Each one of us is a child of God.  Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
    are archetypal figures that can be felt within the heart of each one of
    us.
    
                                     Patricia

 ZZ   Each one of us is a child of God.  Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
 ZZ   are archetypal figures that can be felt within the heart of each
 ZZ   one of us.
    
    This would be nice but unfortunately it is not in harmony with some of
    the teachings of Jesus himself.  
    
    The reason God chose Israel as his people was because through the
    Davidic covenant, God was going to establish an eternal kingdom and the
    Messiah was to come out of the nation of Israel (back to the Isaiah 53
    discussion again).  This of course can be confirmed because many of the
    nations surrounding Israel were wiped out due to their idolatry.  They
    were NOT children of the most high but actually referred to as enemies
    of the most high.
    
    Remember this?  "The lord said unto my Lord, I will make thine enemies
    a footstool for my feet."  Jesus made a distinction between those who
    were the sheep of his fold and those who were not.
    
    -Jack

>    Remember this?  "The lord said unto my Lord, I will make thine enemies
>    a footstool for my feet."  Jesus made a distinction between those who
>    were the sheep of his fold and those who were not.
    
Yes, who is and who isn't becomes abundantly clear by their attitudes,
actions and omissions as indicated in Matthew 25.31-46.

Richard

    Correct...which proves that we are no all the sheep of his fold unlike
    what Patricia stated!
    
    -Jack

    .68
    
    Yes, some of us are God's goats.  But we're all God's children, whether
    we're sheep or goats.
    
    Richard
    

    We're all God's creation that's for sure.  
    
    -Jack

    Yesterday's OT class was great. 
    
    We had a surprise guest lecture from a visiting scholar from Jerusalem. 
    A man who heads an institute for the dead sea scrolls.  He gave us
    first hand information about the scrolls and the problems of
    translating the scrolls.  He showed us slides of a five small fragments
    as they are pieced together and how he is using computer enhancement
    techniques to try to translate the section.  The goal is to have all
    the scrolls translated and published by the millenium.  After the
    millenium he believes that the real work will be enerstly pursued. 
    I.E. rethinking the History of Israel at the time of the Qurum
    community based on the new evidence from the scrolls.  Absolutely
    fascinating stuff.
    
    After that the instructor raised through her material on Exodus.  It is
    truly amazing what is right there in the bible yet hidden from common
    view without some help in seeing it.  We read and review the three
    different versions of the defeat of the Egyptians at the Dead sea.
    
    One the beginning of Exodus 15 also known as Miriams Hymn is one of the
    oldest writings in the Bible dating from before 1100 BCE.  The second,
    the J tradition from about 1000 BCE and the third the priestly
    tradition.  
    
    These are the scenes where the Egyptian charioters are drown in the Red
    Sea.
    
    Within two chapters of Exodus, we can witness how the tradition emerges
    and changes over the 500 year period.  Insight that is  missed
    and understanding that is lost by those grasping onto false premises
    about the construction of the Bible.
    
    I also recieved the inspiration last night for the content of my Paper
    for the semester.  I am going to do my paper on Miriam's song.  Exodus
    15.  (First half.)
    
    
    Also we learned,  that there is no ARAM in the J tradition.  Aram is a
    product of the Priestly tradition.  Of course!
    
    Knowledge is powerful!

    
    Oooo - neat, Patricia!
    
    The same thing is going on with the Vedic scriptures.  The original
    interpretations of the Sanskrit were not quite up to par for many
    historical reasons, and so efforts are underway to go back and look
    deeper into them.  It's amazing what is coming out of those efforts, 
    especially that some of the stories once thought to be only mythical, 
    actually have a basis in history.
    
    Cindy

    The topic for next weeks lesson is the book of judges.  I read the book
    of judges and then the assigned reading in the two texts corresponding
    to the book.
    
    Judges has that horrible story in it about the man who to save himself
    from being raped by the townmen, push his wife/concubine out for the
    crowd to use and abuse.  She dies on the doorstep.  The next day the
    man gets angry when he tells her to get up and she does not move.  She
    cuts her body into 13 parts and sends one to each tribe.
    
    I am constantly horrified when I read stories like this.  Even more I
    was offended that neither text even mentioned the story.  It felt like
    the authors were making believe that the story did not exist.
    
    Are any of you men offended when you read stories like this?  How do
    you emotionally deal with these stories?  What is your feeling about
    them being included in "Holy Scripture"  Anyone else offended that the
    textbooks don't even mention them?
    
                                  Patricia

    Patricia:
    
    I would say that on (one of those rare occasions :-)), I am in complete
    agreement with you.  I find the whole account to be disgusting, though
    it is historical nonetheless.  I find it amazing that the text of the
    course material would omit this account.  Judges was actually
    considered a very dark period in the history of Israel.  I believe this
    incident is one of the best testimonies as to the depravity of the
    nation, I fail to see why such a monumental example would be omitted.
    
    Patricia, the account is an example of chicken little.  Men who didn't
    have the integrity or the proper understanding as to how women should
    be treated.  "Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the Church." 
    What did this guy expect when he invited such vile behavior upon his
    concubine?  The noble thing for him to do would be to give his life for
    her.
    
    -Jack

    There's no way this story couldn't be disgusting (haven't we discussed
    this before?).  It should be a lesson to all of us on what can happen
    when we abandon God and live our own depraved lives.
    
    Mike

>    Judges has that horrible story in it about the man who to save himself
>    from being raped by the townmen, push his wife/concubine out for the
>    crowd to use and abuse.

Did you notice how there is an echo of the story of Sodom in this?

>    Are any of you men offended when you read stories like this?  How do
>    you emotionally deal with these stories?  What is your feeling about
>    them being included in "Holy Scripture"  Anyone else offended that the
>    textbooks don't even mention them?

I am offended by it.  And that's why I brought it up in Note 987, "The Value
of Judges 19, 20 & 21."

Shalom,
Richard

    Thanks for the pointer Richard.
    
    I'll take a look!.
    
    
                              Patricia

    Richard,
    
    I reread the string!.
    
    
    Not too much has changed, since a year ago when it was written!
    
    Knowing that the Hebrew Scriptures is a collection of oral tales weaved
    into its current format, I wonder whether there was originally one
    story that was included in both Genesis and Judges, or whether there
    truly was two different stories.   
    
    What do you think?

.78

>    What do you think?

I dunno.

I once heard that the Bible is like a gold mine:  Not everything you find in
it is going to be gold.

Shalom,
Richard

    I believe the account has historical significance as the trible of
    (Dan?) was more or less disowned by Israel for this incident, if I
    remember correctly.
    
    The Jewish people consider this an historical account and a part of
    their heritage.
    
    -Jack

    Unless I am confusing this with another account.
    
    -Jack

    I think they were Benjaminites.  

    Ironically, Benjamin was the only sibling to Joseph from Rachael.
    
    This incident is considered a historical account for Israel.  It is NOT
    folklore.
    
    -Jack 

re Note 1143.80 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN:

>     The Jewish people consider this an historical account and a part of
>     their heritage.
  
        Jack,

        I understand that you offer this evidence in all sincerity,
        but is it safe to say that you use this particular evidence
        selectively, i.e., you don't always consider that what the
        Jewish people think is very important in understanding the
        true meaning of the Hebrew scriptures?

        Bob

      ZZ      i.e., you don't always consider that what the
      ZZ      Jewish people think is very important in understanding the
      ZZ      true meaning of the Hebrew scriptures?
    
    Yes, I do that because I am not 100% familiar with modern Jewish
    theology.  I do believe however that the account is there for a reason,
    and be it important or not, the tribe of Benjamin was in fact exiled
    from the other tribes, it is still considered an historical event.  Not
    folklore.
    
    It would seem that if somebody stated 200 years from now that the
    Holocaust was folklore, it would be considered dispicable by the people
    of today.  
    
    -Jack

    I would like to know who 
    
    "the Jewish people" are that Jack cites as believing that this piece of
    folklore is factual.
    
    I know several Jewish people including my instructor who also teaches
    at Hebrew college who do not consider it factual.
    

    Patricia, orthodox Jews consider the whole Tanach factual, as do
    Christians.

    Mike,
    
    When I have more time I will research that statement that Orthordox
    Jews believe in the factual nature of the Bible.  Your comment makes
    clear that you understand that "The Jewish People" as a unified body
    don't hold that belief.

    By the way Mike.  Christians don't hold the Bible to be factual.
    
    Only some Christians do.  Or haven't you noticed!

 I deleted my .87





 Jim

    ZZZ    By the way Mike.  Christians don't hold the Bible to be factual.
    
    Patricia, I would say there are more that do not than do...professing
    Christians in the United States that is.  
    
    Jesus asked the Pharisees the rhetorical question, "You have Moses and
    the Prophets and yet you do not believe them.  If you do not believe
    the words of Moses, then how will you ever receive my words?"
    
    Amazing.  Jesus believed the words of Moses.  He believed them to be
    factual and even God breathed.  I think what amazes me is that Jesus
    set the example, and yet when the rubber meets the road, there is such
    a tremendous lack of faith in this country.
    
    -Jack

    I know you have faith in your ability to know exactly what Jesus said,
    did, and believed.
    
    Some of us are just a little more humble about our own ability to know
    the mind of Jesus.
    
                                 
    

re Note 1143.93 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN:

>     Jesus asked the Pharisees the rhetorical question, "You have Moses and
>     the Prophets and yet you do not believe them.  If you do not believe
>     the words of Moses, then how will you ever receive my words?"
>     
>     Amazing.  Jesus believed the words of Moses.  He believed them to be
>     factual and even God breathed.  

        You are reading a whole lot more into that quote than is
        literally there.

        Bob

>    When I have more time I will research that statement that Orthordox
>    Jews believe in the factual nature of the Bible.  Your comment makes
>    clear that you understand that "The Jewish People" as a unified body
>    don't hold that belief.
    
    correct.  Reformed Jews are typically more liberal than the Orthodox
    (Ashkenazi) Jews.
    
    Mike

>    By the way Mike.  Christians don't hold the Bible to be factual.
>    
>    Only some Christians do.  Or haven't you noticed!
    
    True Christians do.  The "Christians" that don't are following a Jesus
    not known to God or God's Word.

re Note 1143.97 by OUTSRC::HEISER:

> >    By the way Mike.  Christians don't hold the Bible to be factual.
> >    
> >    Only some Christians do.  Or haven't you noticed!
>     
>     True Christians do.  The "Christians" that don't are following a Jesus
>     not known to God or God's Word.
  
        It must be really "special" being you, and knowing that
        anything that disagrees with what you already believe is not
        worth regarding at all!

        You really think that the almighty God is honored by being
        equated to a thousand pages of text!

        Bob

    He said so Himself so debate the point with Him.

mike,

it seems as if you might be confused as to the relationship
between being Ashkenazi and being Reform, Conservative or
Orthodox.

the Ashkenazim are the descendants of the Jews who migrated
to Northern Europe. the word Ashkenazi refers to Germany.

the Sephardim are the descendants of the Jews who migrated
to Spain. the word refers to Spain.

being of a Reform, Conservative or Orthodox congregation doesn't
correlate with where one's ancestors came from in Europe. 

peter

    Bob:
    
    It is very easy to retort a reply by saying something to the effect
    of..."It must be very special you knowing the mind of Jesus...or some
    such."  And yes there is always that possibility that I do read in to
    it too much.
    
    I am however not so gullible as to believe something anybody tells me
    unless I check it out for myself.  The point I was making a few replies
    back is that no matter what Jesus was trying to tell the pharisees, the
    bottom line is the HE DID attribute the works of the Old Testament to
    Moses.  It has been suggested that much of the Pentatuch is folklore
    and I am suggesting by the words of Jesus himself that this is
    nonsense.
    
    -Jack

    Last night we did talk about Judges 19 - 22.  The instructor used the
    term Deuteronomistic historian to describe the author of the books
    Joshua through 2Kings(JOS, JUD, Sam, 1&2Kings)  The "historian" had a
    series of stories that he wove together into the chronology that is
    judges.  The stories were sequenced by the author.  THe authors theme
    which was identified as being most explicit in the book of judges is
    the cycle of Apostasy, crying out, God hearing the cries, God sending a
    deliverer(judge).  The instructor believes(contrary to the majority
    opinion that those four chapters are an appendex to judges) that those
    four chapters are used to drive home the 'historian's" point.  Four
    times the phrase "And that was the time when there were no kings" is
    quoted, with the concluding words of judges being "And that was the
    time when there were no kings, and all men did as they pleased."
    
    The author, A historian from a Davidic court, was telling the story of
    Israel between the ideal times of Moses and Joshua and the days of
    David and the Davidic monorchy.  Gildea, the Benjamite city in which
    this atrocity occurs, is coincendently the city of Saul.  Bethlehem,
    the city where the concubine is from and where the man receives even
    more than the expected hospitality, is the city of  David.  The story
    is told cast Saul in a negative light and David in a positive light.
    
    It legitimitizes the David monarchy.  The author of the story was
    familiar with the Sodom and Gomorah story.  Some of the words of the
    judges story parallel those in the Sodom and gomorah story.  the point
    being made is that Sauls home city is even more perverted than Sodom
    and Gomorah.
    
    I had a lot of problems with the instructor calling the deuteronomistic
    author a historian because it seems to me that he was a story teller,
    weaving snippets of folk lore into a chronicle.
    
    The point that the concubine in the story is treated as dirt by her
    husband as well as the city folk is seen as anciliary to the point.
    
    I'm not sure I like the Old Testament very much!
    
    Our text also points out that Yahwew of the book of judges is a God of
    War.  In good times, the Israeli people of the period concentrated on
    agriculture and worshipped Baal, the God of agriculture.  In times of
    war, the worship Yahweh, God of battle.
    
    Did the God of war, win the battle with the God of agriculture?
    
                                 Patricia

    
    re .93

    > Jesus asked the Pharisees the rhetorical question, "You have Moses and
    > the Prophets and yet you do not believe them.  If you do not believe
    > the words of Moses, then how will you ever receive my words?"


    Funny. I see this as an indictment on literalism. The Pharisees, like
    today zealous Fundamentalists, claim supreme knowledge, or insight,
    into the Bible -- the written word -- and yet fail to "hear" the
    message -- the spiritual word.
    
    Eric

    Good point Eric!
    
    The Pharisees, the men who could quote from the Torah and the Prophets,
    yet who could not here the word.

   ZZ     "And that was the time when there were no kings" is
   ZZ     quoted, with the concluding words of judges being "And that was the
   ZZ     time when there were no kings, and all men did as they pleased."
    
    While it is true that is does refer to this, it also states in
    Deuteronomy of the coming kings and the coming kingdom.  The above
    verse doesn't necessarily mean that the Kings were in place prior to
    the time of the writing of Judges...however, it may have in fact been
    the case.
    
    The book of Judges is attributed to Samuel and gives a 300 year
    historical account of the nation of Israel.  Now considering that
    Samuel did ordain Saul and David as King, there is all likelihood that
    Samuel wrote Judges during the time of Sauls reign.  
    
    -Jack

 	Hearing the Word will just be head knowledge, that's
	if one doesn't meditate on it and sound it down into
 	ones symbolic heart. As James 1:22-25 NWT "However,
        become doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving
        yourselves with false reasoning. For if anyone is a hearer
	of the word, and not a doer, this one is like a man looking
	at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself,
	and off he goes and immediately forgets what sort of man he
	is. But he who peers into the perfect law that belongs to
	freedom and who persists in [it], this [man], because he
	has become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work,
	will be happy in his doing [it]."

	Phil.

    ZZ    today zealous Fundamentalists, claim supreme knowledge, or insight,
    ZZ    into the Bible -- the written word -- and yet fail to "hear" the
    ZZ    message -- the spiritual word.
    
    Yes, and thank goodness we don't have that problem in this notes
    conference Eric! :-)   
    
    I think the passage bears looking into.
    
    "How can you believe, you who receive honor from one another, and seek
    not the honor that comes from God only."  
    
    Eric, as a fundamentalist, I believe acknowledging the need, i.e.
    addressing the sin nature, is one of the most humbling things a person
    can do.  Reading on...
    
    "Do no think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that
    accuses you, even Moses in whom ye trust."
    
    Important point.  The Pharisees here entrusted the law.  They did not
    recognize nor did they care to recognize who the messiah was or why he
    came.  Now I realize there are fundamentalists out there who are big
    mouths, who get carried away, etc.  Jack Martin not withstanding! :-)
    However, I believe this point is worthy of hearing.  An acknoweldged
    sinner shows humility.  Recognizing ones own need shows humility.  The
    pharisees DID NOT recognize their need nor did they recognize the
    messiah who they were speaking to.  They trusted the law and the law
    reveals sin and sin brings about death.  Does this logic make sense?
    
    Reading the last verse..."FOR IF YE HAD BELIEVED MOSES, YE WOULD HAVE
    BELIEVED ME; FOR HE WROTE OF ME.  BUT IF YE BELIEVE NOT HIS WRITINGS,
    HOW SHALL YE BELIEVE MY WORDS?"
    
    Eric, would you agree at least that Jesus acknowledges Moses was a
    recorder and a writer of scripture?  If so, and if Jesus who is the
    greatest teacher on earth is written about by Moses, then this
    concludes the writings of Moses, the Pentatuch, IS NOT folklore.  Does
    this logic follow any kind of reason?  I think so but what do you
    think?
    
    -Jack

re Note 1143.107 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN:

>     They trusted the law and the law
>     reveals sin and sin brings about death.  Does this logic make sense?
  
        This logic makes sense, but supports Eric's claim.  To the
        Pharisees, the law was the written scriptures.  They trusted
        the law because they trusted the scriptures.  Now whether the
        scriptures were grossly wrong, or whether the Pharisees
        misinterpreted on a grand scale, is really irrelevant. 
        *Trusting the reading of the Scripture to lead you to life is
        wrong, dead wrong.*  That is certainly one of the most
        important things Jesus is saying here.

        Bob

    ZZ        *Trusting the reading of the Scripture to lead you to life is
    ZZ        wrong, dead wrong.*  That is certainly one of the most
    ZZ        important things Jesus is saying here.
    
    Your conclusion is based on faulty logic.  The Pharisees were so
    entrenched in honoring one another and self righteousness, they didn't
    see the underlying messages Moses was bringing to them...that being the
    coming of Jesus Christ.  Trusting and reading the scripture brings us
    words of life.  If Jesus is God, and God is the word, and Jesus is the
    way, the truth and the life, then the Word and Jesus are synonomous.
    Not to say we worship the Bible but to hold it in high esteem.
    
    Trusting and reading the scripture to bring us life is absolutely
    right, for there is no other way to understand or know what the intent
    of Jesus was.
    
    -Jack

>    Trusting and reading the scripture to bring us life is absolutely
>   right, for there is no other way to understand or know what the intent
>    of Jesus was.
 
    Trusting and reading the scripture to bring us life is idolatry.  It is
    relying upon an icon, a piece of work made by human hands and denying
    the holy spirit the ability to break through and guide our lifes.
    
    It is fearing the spirit and trying to rely upon something temporal and
    concrete.  It is a need based attempt to have something concrete rather
    than living by grace.

    
    Re.102
    
    Patricia,
    
    Can you expand on the God of agriculture/God of War bit, please?  It's
    very interesting in that this is a striking parallel to Hinduism in
    many ways.  I've been looking for that kind of a reference for quite
    some time in Christianity/Judaism.
    
    Cindy

ZZ    Trusting and reading the scripture to bring us life is idolatry.  It is
ZZ    relying upon an icon, a piece of work made by human hands and
ZZ    denying the holy spirit the ability to break through and guide our lifes.
    
    Patricia, I understand what you are saying, but have to disagree.  The
    ancient Hebrews revered the scripture as I have no doubt your prof can
    corroberate.  Consider the fact that the Law had to be moved from place
    to place under specific guidelines set by God.  Consider the whole
    nation of Israel at the end of the Babylonian exile stood in total
    silence and sheer reverence when Ezra the high priest read the law.  
    
    "This book of the law shall not depart from my mouth, but I shall
    meditate upon it therein day and night and be careful to do everything
    written in it.  Then I will be prosperous and have success."  
    
    These words were from Joshua, one of God's greatest chosen servants and
    Spiritual leaders.  To bow down to the Bible and worship it would not
    be appropriate.  To hold its words in reverance and high esteem would
    in fact be appropriate.  Go to a synagogue some day and see how the
    Rabbi handles the Talmud.  
    
    Jesus stated that he brings words of life, and he is the light of all.
    I believe his words and THE Word are synonomous.
    
    -Jack

>it seems as if you might be confused as to the relationship
>between being Ashkenazi and being Reform, Conservative or
>Orthodox.
>
>the Ashkenazim are the descendants of the Jews who migrated
>to Northern Europe. the word Ashkenazi refers to Germany.
>
>the Sephardim are the descendants of the Jews who migrated
>to Spain. the word refers to Spain.
>
>being of a Reform, Conservative or Orthodox congregation doesn't
>correlate with where one's ancestors came from in Europe. 

peter, thanks for the info.  I was assuming that the Ashkenazim were an
    example of Orthodoxy because everything I've read seems to indicate
    that.  From my readings, it seems most of them still use the uniform of
    a Jewish prayer warrior (tallit, tephillim, etc.).
    
    Mike

    Patricia,
    
>    deliverer(judge).  The instructor believes(contrary to the majority
>    opinion that those four chapters are an appendex to judges) that those
    
    My research agrees with the majority opinion - they appear to be
    appendices.
    
>    I'm not sure I like the Old Testament very much!
    
    I didn't either once.  I didn't even like the NT much either ;-)  A
    good study in typology cured that.  Now I enjoy the OT more, I think.
    
    Mike

>    Funny. I see this as an indictment on literalism. The Pharisees, like
>    today zealous Fundamentalists, claim supreme knowledge, or insight,
>    into the Bible -- the written word -- and yet fail to "hear" the
>    message -- the spiritual word.
    
    Eric, that's quite a sweeping generalization!

    cindy,
    
    Paganism is a fertility religion.  It honors the cycles of the year. 
    The gods and goddesses of paganism are deemed to bring about fertility.
    
    The Israeli people of ancient Israel emerged from Canaan.  In early
    Israel, every nation had there own god and Yahwew arose as the God of
    the Israeli.  As the religion evolved, Yahweh evolved as the only God. 
    Hebrew Monotheism arouse.
    
    In the earliest stories, particularly in the stories of the Hebrew
    expansion into Caanan, Yahweh is pictured as a God, mighty in battle. 
    A God that can bring defeat to all of Israel's enemies.
    
    Through the Old Testament(Hebrew Scriptures) the Israel people are
    shown as a people who waver between the worship of Yahweh and the
    worship of other Gods and Goddesses particularly Baal and His female
    consort Asherah.  Of course from the perspective of the theologians who
    wrote the Bible, this wavering back and forth is considered Apostacy.
    
    If we read the Old Testament and bracket the denounciation of the pagan
    practices, we learn a lot about cultural patterns, and the religious
    life of the people.  The God potrayed in the old testament evolves from
    a tribal war God to a Universal God.  In the New Testament, God is no
    longer potrayed as a God of war.  In fact Jesus himself turns the war
    mentality upside down.  He comes to establish the kingdom of God, but
    not by war, but by being cruxified.  By turning the other cheek.
    
    Unfortunately, my bias right now is pretty negative on the Old
    Testament.  But then again, the books I am studying right now, Joshua,
    Judges, Samuel 1+2 Kings, are not nice stories.
    
    I am struggling!
    
    
                                   Patricia
    
                     

    G-d had to first secure Israel in the land before the battles could
    stop.  As it happens today, their neighbors continually test them.  G-d
    won't do battle again until it's time to judge those that reject Him.
    
    Baal is tantamount to Lucifer.
    
    Mike

    
    > Eric, that's quite a sweeping generalization!

    Yes, I suppose it is. But, generally speaking, I think it's correct.

    Patricia, 
    
    You mentioned that ancient Israel had Canaan origins.  Are you
    referring to the Post Egyptian era during the time of Moses?
    
    Abraham is considered the Father of Israel by the Jews.  I believe
    Abraham came from the land of the Chaldeans.  They are an Assyrian 
    people.
    
    -Jack

    Let's put it this way!
    
    I don't believe 600,000 Israel men and their women and children marched
    through the desert for 40 years to arrive in Palestine.
    
    I believe that is part of the national epic.
    
    Now a smaller group of Israeli slaves may have in fact wandered through
    the desert into Canaan,

    The stories help me to understand the American experience of 
    
    Manifest Destiny!

ZZ    I don't believe 600,000 Israel men and their women and children
ZZ    marched through the desert for 40 years to arrive in Palestine.
    
    Just curious.  What exactly is it that makes you disbelieve this?  I
    mean, consider the God we serve and all of Gods attributes...The
    creator of the universe.  600,000 people is more or less six times the
    population of Framingham...a mere pittens.
    
    -Jack

1143.121

>    The stories help me to understand the American experience of 
>    Manifest Destiny!

It was the very justification used.

Richard

    The story of the settlement of Dan, was similiar to the wiping out of
    the Indian population as well.
    
    Found in Judges 17-18?
    
                                       Patricia

    
    Re.116
    
    Patricia,
    
    How interesting!  That's how I see the progression in Hinduism of 
    their avatars - from the more primitive to warlike to peaceful.  
    The earlier avatars were indeed warriors.  (The earliest ones were 
    of the beginnings of life on Earth.)
    
    Thanks,
    
    Cindy

    I can't forget the article in this mornings Globe about the 27 year old
    man accused of assassinating Yitzhah Rabin.
    
    The judge asked him if he were familiar with the ten commandments.
    
    His answer back, was something to the effect, "Is that all you know of
    the Bible?"
    
    Unfortunately his answer is biblically sound.  Unfortunately his answer
    is more Biblically sound than the judges?
    
    Here is a man that could test what he felt the spirit was calling him
    to do by  a literal interpretation of the books of Exodus, Joshua, and
    Judges and affirm his hideous choice.
    
    It matters what we believe about the Bible!
    The doctrine of the innerancy of the Scripture is not a harmless
    doctrine!.  It's a doctrine that could be used to justify all kinds of
    things, even murder!.

I don't think his answer was Biblically sound at all. I think it showed 
the characteristics of one who in his own mind places himself above other
people, above the laws that govern the society, and above the Torah. It
is an arrogant and dangerous attitude.

Leslie

    It is an arrogant and dangerous attitude.  I totally agree.
    
    But you and I know that not too far after the Biblical commandment
    of "Thou shall not kill" there is the story of God commanding the
    Israeli to wipe out every Caananite man, woman, and child!.
    
    If I remember correctly, there are person put to death for not obeying
    that commandment to exterminate the Caananites.
    
    The books of Exodus, Joshua, Judges are books that I find very
    difficult to read, to comprehend, and to find sacred!.
    
    It matters what we believe about these books.
    
    Do these book contain the literal commandments of God?  I certainly do
    not think so!

>        <<< Note 1143.126 by POWDML::FLANAGAN "let your light shine" >>>
>    
>    The judge asked him if he were familiar with the ten commandments.
>    
>    His answer back, was something to the effect, "Is that all you know of
>    the Bible?"
>    
>    Unfortunately his answer is biblically sound.  Unfortunately his answer
>    is more Biblically sound than the judges?
    
    Hogwash!
    
>    Here is a man that could test what he felt the spirit was calling him
>    to do by  a literal interpretation of the books of Exodus, Joshua, and
>    Judges and affirm his hideous choice.
>    
>    It matters what we believe about the Bible!
>    The doctrine of the innerancy of the Scripture is not a harmless
>    doctrine!.  It's a doctrine that could be used to justify all kinds of
>    things, even murder!.

    Only if you don't comprehend the concept of context.  Murder isn't
    condoned by God in the Bible.
    
    Mike

re.126

Hi Patricia,

you said.... 

    The doctrine of the innerancy of the Scripture is not a harmless
    doctrine!.  It's a doctrine that could be used to justify all kinds of
    things, even murder!.

	That's right. "Crucify Him, crucify Him" was cried out by people who
thought the same way. Anybody who wants to do such a deed will find a reason if
they feel they need one. There are many people who commit such crimes "just cuz
it's fun". In the end, believing in the inerrancy of something, whatever that
is, isn't really the issue. You've gotta believe that person (or people) who
murdered Mr. Rabin would have done it in spite of the Bible, even though they
try to invoke it as a justification. Even the world sees thru the fallacy of
their arguements.

regards,
ace

    We have had many discussions in here, that killing is not murder if
    God commands it.  God commanded the Hebrews to kill the Caananites.
    
    Every man woman and child!.  Canaan is the promised land, Promised in
    the covenant with Abraham to the Hebrew people.  The book of exodus,
    Joshua and Judges  record messages that purport to be from
    God ordering killing.  I don't believe those messages are from God.  I
    believe they are from the authors of the books justifying deeds that
    were done.
    
    Unfortunately, I can clearly see how the Exodus, Joshua, and Judges
    stories could be used by someone who believed that every word in those
    books was spoken by Yahweh, as the reason to assasinate a
    ruler, covenanting with Non Hebrew people in the "Promised Land".
    
    The misuse of the Bible is very dangerous!.  The theory of innerrancy
    is very dangerous.   

re .131

	True Patricia, but my point is that many things are misused to justify a
cause. That doesn't make the item misused wrong or in error. You wouldn't blame
the Beatles for Sharon Tate's death would you? For that matter, you wouldn't
blame the author of the book of Revelation for Sharon's Tate death would you?

	There are other explanations for the issues you have about certain books
in the Old Testament. For instance, perhaps we don't understand God, maybe we
are misinterpreting, possibly we don't understand the situation. I understand
the need to reconcile our perceptions of God with what we read in the Bible, but
tossing out the parts that we can't comprehend will not lead us into a further
understanding of God. Whenever I come to a difficult part of the Bible that I
can't reconcile I put it on the back burner so to speak and tell God "Lord, I've
no idea how this fits into your grand scheme but You'd better open it up to me
or I have no way to reconcile or deal with it." He always answers this prayer.

regards,
ace

>You've gotta believe that person (or people) who
>murdered Mr. Rabin would have done it in spite of the Bible, even though they
>try to invoke it as a justification.
    
    From what I have read, I believe that the young man who assasinated
    Rabin was sincere in his belief.  Just as those in here who insist on
    condemning others who believe differently then they are sincere in
    their belief.
    
     > Even the world sees thru the fallacy of their arguements.
    
    I agree.  Most of the world holds a standard even higher than that of
    some of the books of the Bible.  Most people believe in the worth and
    dignity of every person and most people believe in the pursuit of world
    peace.  There is much in the bible that does not support the vision of
    world peace nor the vision of the worth and dignity of every human.
    
    I believe that it is the spirit of Love and Goodness within all of
    creation which pulls people toward these universal ideals, even as we
    all know what a mess of implementing these ideals we have all created.
    

>    Unfortunately, I can clearly see how the Exodus, Joshua, and Judges
>    stories could be used by someone who believed that every word in those
>    books was spoken by Yahweh, as the reason to assasinate a
>    ruler, covenanting with Non Hebrew people in the "Promised Land".
    
    Only if you ignore context, which you often seem to have trouble with.
    
    Mike

>    peace.  There is much in the bible that does not support the vision of
>    world peace nor the vision of the worth and dignity of every human.
    
    God has foreknowledge and knew world peace won't ever happen until the
    Messianic Kingdom in the Millenium.  The Bible warns us of what will
    happen when the nations cry "peace and safety."
    
    I don't know what Bible you're reading, but there's plenty in there on
    the worth and dignity of every human.
    
>    I believe that it is the spirit of Love and Goodness within all of
>    creation which pulls people toward these universal ideals, even as we
>    all know what a mess of implementing these ideals we have all created.
    
    Now you're getting somewhere (in admitting we've made a mess of things), 
    but you still need to test those spirits because we are to worship the 
    Creator alone, not His creation.
    
    Mike

Patricia,

I see a difference between an individual taking matters into their own
hands, and states of war and governmental justice through honest courts.
I think the Bible tends to show that distinction as well, though there 
are some areas we do not understand.

Leslie

    The only difference is that some accept Samuel's act of hacking up the
    king, because the Bible identifies it as the will of God.
    
    Some accept Jael as a hero because she hammered a tent peg through
    sisero's head.
    
    Some know that there is a higher standard, than the sometimes violent
    words that are proclaimed in scripture.
    
    "It matters, what kind of God we worship".
    
    If we worship a God of war,
    then war will be the normal state of humanity.
    
    If we worship a God who divides people up between children of light and
    children of darkness, then we will identify those who are different
    than us as children of darkness.
    
    "It Matters what we believe."

 I worship a God of love and forgiveness, who has also told me that there
 are consequences for rejecting and disobeying him.





 Jim

    The Babylonian exile IS in fact a historical event.  It is believed as
    a part of Israels history.  The prophets Amos and Jeremiah gave
    grueling details in their prophecy regarding the exile.  
    
    Men and women were dragged through the breaches of the walls of
    Jerusalem with meathooks.  Fish hooks were used for children.  They
    were dragged as a nation through the hot arid desert to a land they
    knew nothing about.  Jeremiahs sobering prophecy, "The Judgement of God
    is Upon You!"  Hence it's fulfillment soon after.
    
    Ignoring this aspect of God's person is a lack of the basic understanding 
    of God himself.
    
    -Jack

    fwiw - the Assyrians started that practice of using hooks on prisoners. 
    They also did such wonderful things like using a spear to make
    popsicles out of them (butt to head) and stand the handles in the
    ground; and making pyramids out of victims heads outside their city
    gates.  
    
    this is why King Hezekiah was so concerned with the army of
    Sennacherib.
    
    Mike

    Which raises the question.  How can a truly loving God allow these
    things to happen to the chosen people?   

    Roaring through OT1  We analyzed 1 Samuel 1-15 last night.
    
    Now the book of Samuel sure is convoluted.
    
    The instructor put the book in sequence according to the writing of the
    material.
    
    first was the Ark story  Samuel 4-6
    Then the Saul Story  Samuel 7-?
    
    Both of these were identified as independent stories from oral
    tradition.
    
    Next the Davidic writers come along and right into this story the David
    Story, retelling much of the Saul story as they go in order to cast
    Saul in a negative light.
    
    Then a couple of chapters by the deuteronomic historian.
    
    The Ark story was identified as one of the oldest stories in the Old
    Testament.  Clearly shown in the Ark story is the Ark is used as an
    Idol in the story.  The author obviosly did not know of the Exodus'
    prohition against graven images.  The Ark is captured in warfare with
    the Philistines, and then the Ark being in the Philistine cities is
    the same as Yahweh being in the Philistine city, doing quite a bit of
    damage before it is returned to the Israeli.
    
    At one point the Ark is set in the Philistine temple with Dagon.
    After day one Dagon is found knocked over prone in front of the Ark.
    
    After being set back on its feet, Dagon is found on day two prone with
    head and arms disconnected.  Yahweh is definately a more powerful God
    in this story than Dagon.
    
    The other really incredible thing discussed is the birth narrative in
    Samuel 1.  In Biblical tradition, all important people are given
    extraordinary birth narratives.  Well the instructor showed us how we
    can know that the story in 1Samuel 1 was from oral tradition, Saul's
    birth narrative, but was changed by the Davidic author to be Samuel's
    birth narrative.  The  book was shown as political literature to
    justify the shady character "David" taking over the kingship.
    
    Of course at that point a rabblerouser raised the question, what
    theological significance does this knowledge have.
    
    The class made me want to go back home and reread 1 Samuel 1-15 with a
    better understanding of the duplicate stories and  different
    sources of the material. 
    
    

    It also helps to check the overlapping/parallel passages in Chronicles,
    Kings, Samuel, and Isaiah.
    
>    At one point the Ark is set in the Philistine temple with Dagon.
>    After day one Dagon is found knocked over prone in front of the Ark.
    
    did you get to see a picture of Dagon?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

Patricia,

	A very good explanation of this section of the Bible is provided in a
book called "The Testimony of God". By Watchman Nee. It is available in most
christian book stores for a few dollars. 

Let me know if you are interesed but have a difficult time obtaining one. I may
have a spare 


ace

.144

>book called "The Testimony of God". By Watchman Nee. It is available in most

Ace,

I have heard of the knights who say "Nee!"  No relation, I suppose.

;-}

Richard

PS  Good to see you in these haunts again.

Thanks Richard.

I am able to come up for air once in a while.  8*)

ace

    The wonderful thing about the book of samuel is that once one sees the
    purpose of the book, i.e. political literature written to support the
    Davidic rule, one can then read between the lines and gleam historic
    truth.
    
    Between the lines in Samuel one can get vivid description of the
    emerging Yahweh cult.  From worship on mount Shilloh, to ritualistic
    dancing to a frenzy, to the cult prostitutes at the entrance of the
    tent of meeting even to Saul's arousing the spirit of the dead Samuel,
     the Yahweh cult was similiar to the other Pagan cults
    of the day but was emerging as something unique and different.  Between
    the lines, Samuel is a true historic book.

 ZZ   From worship on mount Shilloh, to ritualistic
 ZZ   dancing to a frenzy, to the cult prostitutes at the entrance of the
 ZZ   tent of meeting even to Saul's arousing the spirit of the dead
 ZZ   Samuel,
    
    I don't recall the dancing to a frenzy part.  Did this occur during the
    reign of King David?
    
    Regarding cult prostitutes and Sauls experience.  As you read into
    scripture will will have to come to the conclusion that these practices
    happened EXCLUSIVE from the tenets of what the YHWH cult was supposed
    to adhere to.  Israel was at the very tail end of the period of the
    Judges...and during most of that period, God had Israel in what seemed
    like perpetual punishment and chastisement because of their sinful
    practices...conferring with mediums and temple prostitution just being
    a few of the wicked practices.  
    
    So in fact these practices were actually contradictory to what YHWH
    required from those who were supposed to be following him.
    
    -Jack

    I finally finished my term paper on Miriam. It was hard but I am glad
    it is done.  I learned a lot.
    
    I  concluded quoting Phylis Trible's which I believe is a great
    summary.  (A bit emotional and non rational as well)
    
    I include her summary her to give a little taste of feminist biblical
    commentary!
    
    
    
     
"Buried within Scripture are bits and pieces of a story awaiting 
discovery.  Unearthing the fragments and assembling them, we have 
crafted a mosaic for Miriam.  Stepping back to view the whole, we see 
a story beginning at the bank of the river, moving to the shore of the 
sea, continuing in the wilds of the wilderness, disappearing in the new 
land and recovering there through prophecy and song.  From overlays 
of patriarchy, Miriam's true portrait begins to emerge.  Lo, the 
fragments that the builders have rejected have become tesserae in a 
mosaic of salvation.  Let all women and men who have eyes to behold 
this mosaic join Miriam in singing an updated version of her song of 
deliverance:
	"
    	Sing to the Lord, most glorious deity!
	Patriarchy and its horsemen God has 
	hurled into the sea".

 Trible, op. cit., p. 34.

    
    Hi Patricia,
    
    That little diddy reads as well as most nonsensical writing.
    
    jeff

    The little diddy may be somewhat enigmatic, but after spending lots of
    time researching the seven citations in the Hebrew Scripture about
    Miriam, it made lots of sense to me.
    
    It also gave me a great feel for doing biblical research.  How much you
    can learn from just a handful of words when that is all the information
    you have.