HEY JEWS

you're not actually willing to debate the issues and the content of these books

As a society we have already debated the issues you are bringing up. It is illegal to murder, retributive violence is not tolerated, and women now have autonomy. It sounds like you want to debate the person who wrote Deuteronomy, which is going to be difficult to do.

good point. a brief summary of your ILX posts tells me yr a piss poor troll with shit tastes in hip-hop.

― Hammer Smashed Bagels

ok so you've come in for a flame war because you don't like what's being said about the torah, yet im a piss poor troll. Either way I think you're wasting my time. bye!

As a society we have already debated the issues you are bringing up. It is illegal to murder, retributive violence is not tolerated, and women now have autonomy. It sounds like you want to debate the person who wrote Deuteronomy, which is going to be difficult to do.

― ©Oz Quiz© (Adam Bruneau),

I would argue this as a clearly disingenous point as it's already been stated that millions of people are still following the words of the torah, as Mordy has already mentioned. So let's talk about it.

okay now i know who's trolling who

"Women now have autonomy"

― ©Oz Quiz© (Adam Bruneau),

Have you been to a xtian wedding recently? Most xtian women still consider themselves property of the husband, if you push them on it. And the vows and attitudes reflect that. How many female rabbis are in Israel?

When Israel was formed in '48, the Orthodox Rabbinate were handed control over many society and family issues. Of course Orthodox Rabbis went on to be the dominate power in Israel (you can't get married in Israel under a non-Orthodox rabbi).

I'm not sure who you're arguing with or about what but I think that's ok bc I'm not sure you know either

The other poster was intimating the horrors of the Torah are looked over, which in a way was my original point - but in another way, wasn't to the post of they qouted.

Sorry I'm still not grokking. Can you the exact words that you are arguing with atm and tell me what the argument is?

Who let this guy back in?

Sorry I'm still not grokking. Can you the exact words that you are arguing with atm and tell me what the argument is?

― Mordy,

Ok man look, I thought you were interested in a debate about the Talmud, but when it comes down to it, you just want to avoid the actual contents part, or the bad parts. Which is exactly what I was saying people do in the first place. I know this is not an easy thing to talk about when it comes to your culture so w/e.

The Talmud is a different book to the Torah. I was interested in explaining what the Talmud actually is. You are arguing that there are horrible quotes in the Torah. So who is dodging the topic here me or you?

I think he wants you to admit that murder is bad.

The Talmud is a different book to the Torah. I was interested in explaining what the Talmud actually is. You are arguing that there are horrible quotes in the Torah. So who is dodging the topic here me or you?

― Mordy

No offence, but you're still doing it. This is the same avoidance tactic I've seen millions of times. Your twisting your own words now. Earlier you were saying the Talmud and Torah are intimately linked and cannot be separated, but now, you are saying the horrible qoutes are only part of the Torah.

(xp) as bad as Charli XCX

Not only do I not feel obligated to defend the morality of anything written in the Torah I also don't feel obligated to debate the morality of the Talmud. Here are the full parameters of my pov here: you mischaracterized what kind of book the Talmud is.

If you think I'm defending anything either of those texts say as morally correct you are having a conversation with yourself

I think he wants you to admit that murder is bad.

― ©Oz Quiz© (Adam Bruneau),

Not exactly, but that murder committed by or in the name of God is bad, because if he does he is going against the teachings of the Torah. My question would be how anyone can base any sort of moral teachings from a book as shocking and murderous page after page like the Torah. It's the central problem.

had no idea that pages of a book could murder. is it the Necronomicon?

Good point. Nothing to do with whether the Talmud is a book of advice however. Xp

Dear Talmud....

So is the Talmud a book of advice?

I took a semester on Hindu Traditions and after covering the foundational texts we spent a lot of time covering the various philosophical schools and commentaries, which tended to really open up the possibilities for interpretation and debate on everything from practical/moral application to abstract/theoretical philosophy. Is that kind of what the Gemara is?

Not exactly, but that murder committed by or in the name of God is bad, because if he does he is going against the teachings of the Torah.

I can only say that no rabbi or religious teacher I've ever had has told me I'm supposed to go around stoning adulterers or destroying the cities of the Gentiles. You are welcome to go around thinking that all of modern Judaism is a big lie and we're all "going against the teachings of the Torah" if you want; but just know that by doing so you're on the same team as the clowns who insist that the 99.999% of Muslims who are uninterested in terrorism are "going against the teachings of Koran" because they're not out there killing unbelievers.

Yes of course, you pick and choose which parts of the word of God you like. Same as xtians.

Why are u guys arguing w this anti-semite moron troll

I had a long commute to Long Island this morning

Good thing picking and choosing which laws to follow isn't a thing in secular modern society OH WAIT YOU ARE RICH YOU DON'T GO TO JAIL HERE IS YOUR FEE BTW THANK YOU FOR BEING A LEADER AND EXAMPLE FOR ALL SOCIETY

and it goes on and on and onandonandonandgiggitygiggityGIGGITYGIGGITY!

I'm eating at a kosher Mexican restaurant now w my chassidic father but I'm thinking since the OT says we should stone adulterers maybe I should just go next door and eat some trief.

^yes, this is how i live my life actually.

The details of any book, including the Torah, the Bible, the Talmud, and the Grimms's Fairy Tales, can be analysed through deductive reasoning.

1. God created everything

2. Evil is something

∴ God created evil

Every book about God tries to reason with the external world about how and why evil exists, which comes down to essentially meaningless, mental gymnastics. Thus, religion created a priori knowledge. Theists, therefore, retreat to 'knowing' God a priori--another meaningless thought. What theists do not admit is how or why two opposite 'evils' exist. That is to say, how can, for example, one act be considered rape, and therefore evil, to some, while the same act is considered non-rape to others. More importantly, this gets at a nagging issue in the entire premise of theistic belief: things are neither intrinsically evil nor intrinsically good. What the theist says, therefore, is those whose standards of evil and good do not match up with his must be wrong, based on absolutely nothing.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1rgvwrU1yFE/maxresdefault.jpg

Omg is this for real can't we move this nonsense conversation to one of the many worthless atheist threads

Like it was sorta relevant when we were talking about the Talmud but once it became clear that we were just talking about raccoons hang ups on religion (btw Adam when I get off the road I'll write a better summary of what the Talmud is)

"HEY JEWS, why do bad things happen to good people?"

Thanks! Sorry to adding to the confusion, I agree let's take it to the atheist thread. I am genuinely interested in a Jewish take on the Bible partly because Protestant doctrine has long been very dogmatic and church-controlled and there are not many Protestant commentaries on the Bible that are not subsumed in that viewpoint.

The issue is not with evil, in fact evil is easily argued for theologically, I see it's place in the OT as not confusing at all. Again though, you are simply avoiding the issue.

The issue is not with "evil in the world", no one said it was, the issue presented was God of the Torah doing and encouraging the evil.

L-R: Raccoon, Mordy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DORN50y8Cbw

You've convinced me, raccoon. Congratulations on yr victory.

Just please at least engage with the debate on how you square your modern personal morality with the horrific teachings in the Torah? If you don't want to do that, I'll drop it.

how do you square your horrible posts with your continuing to make posts

Yeah I'm just not interested in having that conversation with you. If you're interested in learning about it, I developed many of my theological beliefs, particularly re the infallibility/divinity of the Torah, from Abraham Joshua Heschel's masterwork Torah Min Shamayim. It is available in translation and will also teach you about the Talmud. If you are motivated enough to read it, I will be motivated enough to discuss it with you. xp

I respect another man's beliefs, and have no interest in convincing you. It is a shame we could not have this debate. I am not an atheist, incidentally.

Arctic you must realize personal morality is not dictated by text referral it is through actions.

Hm, strange comment as of course most religious people do profess to derive their morality from holy scripture, hence their common refrains towards atheists on the subject of morality.

guys I'm a Jew and an ethical anti-realist, what does the old testament say about me

yer going in a whale

Yeah I'm just not interested in having that conversation with you. If you're interested in learning about it, I developed many of my theological beliefs, particularly re the infallibility/divinity of the Torah, from Abraham Joshua Heschel's masterwork Torah Min Shamayim. It is available in translation and will also teach you about the Talmud. If you are motivated enough to read it, I will be motivated enough to discuss it with you. xp

― Mordy

veering dangerously close to #notyourgoogle here but obv its understandable

Ok, so here's the deal with the Talmud. While the Torah (by which I mean the Chumash - the 5 books of Moses, the Old Testament, etc) was being developed in Ancient Judea there was an Oral tradition that was in development alongside it. The oral tradition had a similar kind of authority to the written, it was also considered to be "handed down at Sinai." This is understandable bc a lot of the Old Testament is literally incomprehensible w/out an oral tradition of interpretation to accompany it. For example, in the Torah it says that you should wear tefillin every day. It doesn't say anything about how the tefillin should be constructed, designed, what should be in them, how many bayitim, etc. For that you need the accompanying oral tradition. The oral tradition was also a legal coda - very frequently involving complex interpretative rules to divine particular traditional laws from texts that were often very hard to translate. To give you a sense of how this oral tradition relates to the Torah, the Torah is called the Torah sh'bichsav (the written Torah) and the oral tradition is called the Torah sh'ba'al peh (the oral Torah).

Anyway, this eventually turned into the MIshnah. Reb Yehudah HaNasi redacted a bunch of mostly legal opinions that ran the gamut from how to celebrate Rosh Hashana to how to bring an olah offering in the Temple to tort + contract law. Acc to the Talmud this was bc there was persecution of the Jews and there was a concern that the oral tradition would be broken so it needed to be written down in order to preserve it. This is like around 200 CE. These are essentially the legal perspectives and opinions of the Pharisees of the Second Temple w/ the weight of a traditional system that could supposedly be traced back to Sinai.

Around 500 CE after basically 3 centuries of trading legal opinions between the diaspora and Israel and collating this extreme repository of legal sources, the Talmudic Academies in the diaspora developed the Talmud Bavli - the Babylonian Talmud - which is a compendium of mostly legal thought about a huge range of topics - the ones mentioned above plus esoteric ones like nazirite vows, laws of marriage, divorce, kesubah, laws for damages, laws of festivals, etc, etc. (As the name suggests, there is another Talmud besides the Talmud Bavil and that's the Talmud Yerushalmi which was created a little earlier in Israel.) The authors of the Talmud (known as Amoraim, to be contrasted w/ the authors of Mishnah era texts known as Tannaim) basically spend all their time trying to reconcile differing Tannaic passages. One Rabbi says X, another Rabbi says Y, what are the ramifications for A, B, C, who argues w/ who, which texts are legitimate, whose opinions can withstand scrutiny, etc. Also exegetic work demonstrating how various laws are derived from the written Torah. The exegetic laws are sometimes logical (for example there's something called a hekesh which means that if two concepts are mentioned together then we're supposed to learn similar laws from one to the other) and sometimes unique (a gezarah shava finds two words that are the same in two totally different parts of the Old Testament and uses that to learn a principle from one to the other).

For a vast amount of this corpus these are purely theoretical questions. This year I'm learning the tractate dealing with Yoma offerings (aka Yom Kippur Temple offerings) with my father -- these very difficult, elaborate arguments about how the blood must be sprinkled, how the sacrifice must be brought. One sugya (that's the name for a particular thematic passage) that we just completed deals with the question of whether the Kohan Gadol (the high priest) must be tahor (pure), or only should be when he brings the sacrifices on Yom Kippur. If he must be pure then if he becomes impure (like touching a dead thing), we absolutely must locate a replacement. If it's only should be, then we would ideally prefer that we use someone pure but if the impure kohan brings the sacrifice it still counts. this in turn has ramifications for whether he needs to dip in the mikvah every day that he's in seclusion before yom kippur or only twice.

Also there are a number of other pieces of Jewish folklore, stories, historical anecdotes and just weird stories that make no sense unless you understand them as elaborate metaphors for esoteric concepts. These are called aggadah. Legal discussions make up about 90% of the Talmud, the aggadah are the last 10%. All these aggadah passages were all collected in a book called Ein Yaakov which has a few different translations.

tldr it's mostly legal arguments in Aramaic about a few centuries of oral law that needed to be codified. also i should mention no one derives Jewish law from the Talmud at this time. Maimonidies, or the Shulchan Aruch (r yosef karo), or a variety of other compendiums are more recent and much easier to read since it isn't a bunch of rabbis arguing with each other but just a list of canonical laws.