The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined property: MyLanguage::$thread_modes - Line: 46 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 46 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Book Study-Prager's Rational Bible
#31
(06-03-2019, 02:39 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: Okay, I'll start!

I am impressed the way he broke out different questions such as why and who. I did notice though when he said who it was for he had several categories - Jewish readers, Christian readers and non-religious leaders. Am wondering why he left out Muslim readers? Maybe he thought they wouldn't read his book?

I like that he says that he doesn't want the reader to accept anything on faith alone. And that he goes on to say that if something doesn't make rational sense, then he hasn't done his job. Then adding "On those few-thankfully, very few-occasions I do not have a rational explanation for a Torah verse, I say so."

He isn't saying take everything at his word, just that he offers a rational explanation based on his many years of study and understanding of the Hebrew language. And that he learned from people from all faiths.

One other thing I noticed is that when he thanks those who have helped him along the way, he doesn't mention G-d. Many religious writers thank G-d for all they have been given in life. He seemed to leave that out!
I have read the first 20 pages of the intro, I'll finish the rest this afternoon. I think he left out Muslims because they have their own scriptures, they do not believe the Torah is the uncorrupted word of G-d. So I would think that the book would be primarily of interest to Christians and Jews.

One thing I notice is he puts a heavy emphasis on "wisdom". Yet he does not define what it is. He also states it is impossible to do good without wisdom (top of page 19). So what is wisdom, and does one need it to do good?

One definition is that it comes from having experience, knowledge and good judgment. So this would indicate wisdom can only come from experience; it cannot be innate. However Proverbs 2:6 states :  "For the Lord gives wisdom; from His mouth [come] knowledge and discernment." meaning it is innate and not learned.

Another definition is ability to discern or judge what is true, right, or lasting. But what is true or right isn't necessary lasting....things change over time.

So I'm confused what he means by wisdom, and how he thinks we obtain it. I wish he would have defined it.
Reply
#32
I didn't understand what he meant by  the atheist's "leap of faith" for looking towards science/physics on explaining the origins of the universe, or how life arose from non-life.

I can appreciate his honesty and efforts to study diligently the difficult passages in the Torah, due to his belief it is a divine book and therefore, always right. He gave the example of the wayward son, and there being no record of a Jewish court actually carrying out an execution. I was not aware this practice was commonplace in the ancient world, so I would agree that would be a great moral leap forward.   Contrasting that stance with Professor Dershowitz, a secular Jewish scholar,  who would say the Torah is wrong in some places.

On his radio program the dysfunctional family is brought up often, so I thought it was a good point writing how Genesis is filled with human drama and issues, and, there is solace to be drawn from the following books that offer wisdom and moral instruction.
Reply
#33
I've started the 1st Chapter.

It's only 28 pages but I'm not sure if you want to break it down into smaller sections, or just comment on what we think we should comment on.
Reply
#34
I think just comment on what we think we should comment on.
Reply
#35
(06-03-2019, 06:02 PM)Dana Wrote: ... I can appreciate his honesty and efforts to study diligently the difficult passages in the Torah, due to his belief it is a divine book and therefore, always right. He gave the example of the wayward son, and there being no record of a Jewish court actually carrying out an execution. ...

The presumption taints everything.

As for his example, it should first be noted that, especially here, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There is "no record of a Jewish court actually carrying out an execution" in large part because, for the bulk of Israelite history, there is no record, period. Put differently, most of what can be known with any degree of certainty deals with rabbinic jurisprudence and almost certainly reflects Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and even Roman influences.

Prager simply offers an example of making lemonade from the absence of lemons. No doubt others will follow.

========

For those interested, "Torah Is From Heaven!" What Do We Really Mean? is, in my opinion, worth reading.
To be is to stand for. - Abraham Joshua Heschel
Reply
#36
That's true Nili, you can't really make a case by saying something didn't happen just because there is no record of it.

I think though the Sages of the time were very careful on how they executed (no pun intended) the commandments. I think they did the same when it came to stoning or strangling people who broke them.

The Talmud does record many instances of events and we don't see much or any evidence (from what I know, but could be wrong) of them carrying out death sentences. I think that is why, if I'm correct, it says if all are in agreement, the sentence is not to be carried out.

Thanks for the book recommendation!!
Reply
#37
(06-06-2019, 12:51 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: That's true Nili, you can't really make a case by saying something didn't happen just because there is no record of it.

I think though the Sages of the time were very careful on how they executed (no pun intended) the commandments. I think they did the same when it came to stoning or strangling people who broke them.

Which sages? What time? Upon what do you base your thinking? And, parenthetically, would you characterize Pinchas as a careful sage or, at the very least, a reasonably good role-model for one?
To be is to stand for. - Abraham Joshua Heschel
Reply
#38
(06-06-2019, 01:55 PM)nili Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 12:51 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: That's true Nili, you can't really make a case by saying something didn't happen just because there is no record of it.

I think though the Sages of the time were very careful on how they executed (no pun intended) the commandments. I think they did the same when it came to stoning or strangling people who broke them.

Which sages? What time? Upon what do you base your thinking? And, parenthetically, would you characterize Pinchas as a careful sage or, at the very least, a reasonably good role-model for one?

Thanks for the questions.

I'm referring to the Sages of the Talmud, so I guess that includes many different ones over a long period of time.

Pinchas - Ah, the one who took matters into his own hands!! Yes, there was obviously a need and lesson to be learned there. But if I remember correctly, wasn't that about a sort of revolt and not specifically for breaking the commandments?
Reply
#39
(06-06-2019, 02:43 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 01:55 PM)nili Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 12:51 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: That's true Nili, you can't really make a case by saying something didn't happen just because there is no record of it.

I think though the Sages of the time were very careful on how they executed (no pun intended) the commandments. I think they did the same when it came to stoning or strangling people who broke them.

Which sages? What time? Upon what do you base your thinking? And, parenthetically, would you characterize Pinchas as a careful sage or, at the very least, a reasonably good role-model for one?

Thanks for the questions.

I'm referring to the Sages of the Talmud, so I guess that includes many different ones over a long period of time.

One typical "Biblical timeline" dates the Exodus to 1446 B.C.E., while the Mishnah dates to 200 C.E. and the schools of Hillel and Shammai to, perhaps, two to three centuries earlier. So you seem to be predicating assumptions about early Israelite society on (what I assume to be) a cursory impression of sages operating over a millennium later.
To be is to stand for. - Abraham Joshua Heschel
Reply
#40
(06-06-2019, 03:47 PM)nili Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 02:43 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 01:55 PM)nili Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 12:51 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: That's true Nili, you can't really make a case by saying something didn't happen just because there is no record of it.

I think though the Sages of the time were very careful on how they executed (no pun intended) the commandments. I think they did the same when it came to stoning or strangling people who broke them.

Which sages? What time? Upon what do you base your thinking? And, parenthetically, would you characterize Pinchas as a careful sage or, at the very least, a reasonably good role-model for one?

Thanks for the questions.

I'm referring to the Sages of the Talmud, so I guess that includes many different ones over a long period of time.

One typical "Biblical timeline" dates the Exodus to 1446 B.C.E., while the Mishnah dates to 200 C.E. and the schools of Hillel and Shammai to, perhaps, two to three centuries earlier. So you seem to be predicating assumptions about early Israelite society on (what I assume to be) a cursory impression of sages operating over a millennium later.

Well we know there were judges who are in the Torah. So the Torah does mention a stoning incident, but if I'm not mistaken, it doesn't say anything about a wayward son being executed. I think that was left up to the judges and if it was something that was deemed important, it would have been mentioned.

But that's just my opinion!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)