• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why do Gentiles assume they should follow the ten commandments?

roberto

Active Member
26. Adultery - Sotah

If a woman is deliberately unfaithful to her husband she becomes forbidden to him and he must divorce her, as it says "Her first husband... cannot take her again to be his wife after she has been defiled "1"
Sources:
1. Deut. 24:4
Halacha-Overview 26. Adultery - Torah.org

Huh, what now ?
 

Levite

Higher and Higher

This tells me nothing about your qualifications. Thus, I presume you have none to disclose.

Nope, it specifically states "my name," not power.

Do you not understand that idioms-- which every language has-- may be different in different languages?

Most English translations-- Jewish and non-Jewish alike-- are notorious for steamrolling over idiom, metaphor, colloquialism, irony, wordplay, internal allusion, and other common literary devices that the text employs. And that is true for the prose portions of the text, so all the more relevant for the poetic portions of the text-- which is a majority of the Tanach. This is one of the chiefest reasons why serious in-depth study should be done in Hebrew, with sufficient mastery of the language and the literary and homiletical arts to both understand how the text employs language and to contextualize the meaning of words not only within the traditional understandings, but just within the sense of the plain meaning of the text as well.

The habit of non-Jewish fundamentalists and the untrained (both Jewish and non-Jewish, unfortunately) of reading the text with ponderous word-for-word literalism, without adequate contextualization and, often as not, without any mastery of, or even facility with, the Hebrew language and its common use in Biblical literature.

Yes, the verse in Exodus literally says "my name." However, that is being employed idiomatically. I would hope that anyone could recognize that this is not a radical interpretation of the text, it is basic literacy. Excessive literalism doesn't lend a reader authenticity, it actually displays a lack of knowledge.

Yeshayahu- Isaiah - Chapter 2:1-5....

The House of Judah still does not believe that the end of days have arrived ...

Because they haven't. The Temple hasn't been rebuilt. The messiah hasn't come. The ten lost tribes have not been found and rejoined to the Jewish People. Elijah the prophet has not returned to resolve our disputes of Jewish law and custom. The world is not at peace, nor has war been eliminated. Poverty and oppression have not been eliminated. The Jewish People has not returned to dwell in peace in its ancestral borders. Pluralism and tolerance are not the dominant paradigm of world relations.

The end of days-- if indeed there is to be a literal end of days, which the Rabbis are not at all in agreement about-- would be the messianic era. Not a single thing prophesized to exemplify the messianic era has come to pass.

Then please explain from your point of view how the Northern tribes were "redeemed"[bought back] , seeing that you believe they have returned. Yirmiyahu - Jeremiah - Chapter 3:8...

Have YHVH married them again, and when did this happen "Levite" ?
Please note that the house of Judah was never divorced by YHVH.
So are you suggesting that the Northern tribes were married again to YHVH and that this happened when 10 Israel converted to Judaism , "Levite"?
So then if this is true it means that Judah was their[10 israel]'s redeemer

Again, this is poetic idiom. The books of the major prophets are composed in poetry. Reading them with excessive literalism renders them virtually unintelligible. This is passionate poetry about the covenantal relationship between God and the Jewish People. Obviously, we don't literally believe that God literally married Israel or Judah, or anyone else for that matter. Nor do we believe that God ever gave anyone a literal writ of divorce. These are metaphors.

Jeremiah is speaking to the Jews of his time. He is remonstrating with them, saying that after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BCE, the Southern Kingdom did not adequately conform to the strictest rules of YHVHistic monotheism, and thus deserved the punishment of the Babylonian conquest and the loss of the Temple in 586 BCE.

We understand that when the Northern Kingdom was destroyed, and the overwhelming majority of the 10 tribes were lost and scattered in exile, the remnants joined themselves to the tribes of the Southern Kingdom. Thus, the Southern Kingdom contained inheritors of all 12 tribes, which is one reason we employ both the names "Yehudah" and "Yisrael" for the Jewish People.

We also understand that God ultimately forgives. The Babylonian Exile and the loss of the First Temple earned God's forgiveness for the sins of the First Temple Era. And the Exile and Loss of the 10 Tribes earns His forgiveness for their descendants; so at such time as the messiah comes and the last exiles are gathered in to return to the fold, they will also be held fully forgiven for the great sins of their ancestors.

26. Adultery - Sotah:
"If a woman is deliberately unfaithful to her husband she becomes forbidden to him and he must divorce her...."

Huh, what now?

I assume that you are randomly quoting the laws of Sotah because you think it has some bearing on the imagery used in the verse from Jeremiah you quoted above.

It would be an interesting point if we were all relentlessly and obtusely literal in our reading of every Tanach text. Fortunately, we are not.
 

roberto

Active Member
This tells me nothing about your qualifications. Thus, I presume you have none to disclose.



Do you not understand that idioms-- which every language has-- may be different in different languages?

Most English translations-- Jewish and non-Jewish alike-- are notorious for steamrolling over idiom, metaphor, colloquialism, irony, wordplay, internal allusion, and other common literary devices that the text employs. And that is true for the prose portions of the text, so all the more relevant for the poetic portions of the text-- which is a majority of the Tanach. This is one of the chiefest reasons why serious in-depth study should be done in Hebrew, with sufficient mastery of the language and the literary and homiletical arts to both understand how the text employs language and to contextualize the meaning of words not only within the traditional understandings, but just within the sense of the plain meaning of the text as well.

The habit of non-Jewish fundamentalists and the untrained (both Jewish and non-Jewish, unfortunately) of reading the text with ponderous word-for-word literalism, without adequate contextualization and, often as not, without any mastery of, or even facility with, the Hebrew language and its common use in Biblical literature.

Yes, the verse in Exodus literally says "my name." However, that is being employed idiomatically. I would hope that anyone could recognize that this is not a radical interpretation of the text, it is basic literacy. Excessive literalism doesn't lend a reader authenticity, it actually displays a lack of knowledge.



Because they haven't. The Temple hasn't been rebuilt. The messiah hasn't come. The ten lost tribes have not been found and rejoined to the Jewish People. Elijah the prophet has not returned to resolve our disputes of Jewish law and custom. The world is not at peace, nor has war been eliminated. Poverty and oppression have not been eliminated. The Jewish People has not returned to dwell in peace in its ancestral borders. Pluralism and tolerance are not the dominant paradigm of world relations.

The end of days-- if indeed there is to be a literal end of days, which the Rabbis are not at all in agreement about-- would be the messianic era. Not a single thing prophesized to exemplify the messianic era has come to pass.



Again, this is poetic idiom. The books of the major prophets are composed in poetry. Reading them with excessive literalism renders them virtually unintelligible. This is passionate poetry about the covenantal relationship between God and the Jewish People. Obviously, we don't literally believe that God literally married Israel or Judah, or anyone else for that matter. Nor do we believe that God ever gave anyone a literal writ of divorce. These are metaphors.

Jeremiah is speaking to the Jews of his time. He is remonstrating with them, saying that after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BCE, the Southern Kingdom did not adequately conform to the strictest rules of YHVHistic monotheism, and thus deserved the punishment of the Babylonian conquest and the loss of the Temple in 586 BCE.

We understand that when the Northern Kingdom was destroyed, and the overwhelming majority of the 10 tribes were lost and scattered in exile, the remnants joined themselves to the tribes of the Southern Kingdom. Thus, the Southern Kingdom contained inheritors of all 12 tribes, which is one reason we employ both the names "Yehudah" and "Yisrael" for the Jewish People.

We also understand that God ultimately forgives. The Babylonian Exile and the loss of the First Temple earned God's forgiveness for the sins of the First Temple Era. And the Exile and Loss of the 10 Tribes earns His forgiveness for their descendants; so at such time as the messiah comes and the last exiles are gathered in to return to the fold, they will also be held fully forgiven for the great sins of their ancestors.



I assume that you are randomly quoting the laws of Sotah because you think it has some bearing on the imagery used in the verse from Jeremiah you quoted above.

It would be an interesting point if we were all relentlessly and obtusely literal in our reading of every Tanach text. Fortunately, we are not.

You remind me of my christian period : whenever priests/pastors are in a corner they want to know where one studied and when absolutely cornered they tend to "spiritulize" and tell you that you should not take the Scriptures literally.

I then usually tell them that jesus did not literally come. , so I am telling you now "Levite", that you are awaiting a poetic non-literal Messiah, like the Christians.

I realize that conversing with you is as if I am back in "those days".

It is useless , but thank you kindly for your time.
Shalom

".......The Temple hasn't been rebuilt. The messiah hasn't come. The ten lost tribes have not been found and rejoined to the Jewish People. Elijah the prophet has not returned to resolve our disputes of Jewish law and custom......:
OOOOPS ! That mustve been a literal typing slip.
.
 
Last edited:

Levite

Higher and Higher
You remind me of my christian period : whenever priests/pastors are in a corner they want to know where one studied and when absolutely cornered they tend to "spiritulize" and tell you that you should not take the Scriptures literally.

First of all, there is nothing "spiritualizing" about basic literary comprehension skills. This has nothing to do with radical reinterpretations of text or complicated homiletical exegeses. This is just simple reading and language ability.

Second of all, if you have a problem with people who have taken the time to train, educate themselves, and acquire skills in an area asking after your qualifications to do the same things they do, perhaps the answer is to train, educate yourself, and acquire the same skills.

...so I am telling you now "Levite", that you are awaiting a poetic non-literal Messiah, like the Christians.

First of all, you don't know anything about my personal beliefs. Second of all, you don't appear to even know enough about Jewish thought to judge what my beliefs are if I did disclose them. Third of all, as it happens, I actually do believe that a literal messiah will come, once the conditions for a messianic era to begin have been achieved: which none of them have been.

In any case, if you are going to attempt to seriously engage in Biblical scholarship and intelligent textual debate, it would really behoove you to take a class or two in basic Biblical literacy; and if you plan to continue trying to engage at all with Jewish text, probably an introduction to Jewish thought and Jewish history would be of help also.
 

roberto

Active Member
..In any case, if you are going to attempt to seriously engage in Biblical scholarship and intelligent textual debate, it would really behoove you to take a class or two in basic Biblical literacy; and if you plan to continue trying to engage at all with Jewish text, probably an introduction to Jewish thought and Jewish history would be of help also.

At least I do not make mistakes like this :

.....The House of Israel and the House of Judah are one. They have been one since the fall of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BCE; and they were one before the split of the kingdoms two hundred years prior to that. There is one People Israel, one Jewish nation, who are together the remnants of the twelve tribes.

The Temple hasn't been rebuilt. The messiah hasn't come. The ten lost tribes have not been found and rejoined to the Jewish People. Elijah the prophet has not returned to resolve our disputes of Jewish law and custom. The world is not at peace, nor has war been eliminated. Poverty and oppression have not been eliminated. The Jewish People has not returned to dwell in peace in its ancestral borders. Pluralism and tolerance are not the dominant paradigm of world relations.
The end of days-- if indeed there is to be a literal end of days, which the Rabbis are not at all in agreement about-- would be the messianic era. Not a single thing prophesized to exemplify the messianic era has come to pass..
.
 
Last edited:

Levite

Higher and Higher
At least I do not make mistakes like this

That is not a mistake. What I said in the two places I mentioned the ten tribes is that the majority of their populace was lost to us, and we hope for their descendants one day to return. But a small minority of their survivors joined the Southern Kingdom, and became absorbed into their populace, hence the Jewish People as we know it being considered representative of all twelve tribes-- despite the fact that we still officially have ten lost tribes.

Please read more carefully.
 
Last edited:

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
I'll never understand why so many Jews ignore the fact that God, even in the Old Testament, shows that he has a global agenda and not just a tribal one



Isaiah 49:6

"It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

Isaiah 42:6

"I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles,

Zechariah 6:13

" And many peoples and powerful nations will come to Jerusalem to seek the LORD Almighty and to entreat him."

Genesis 49:10

The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Doesn't the Torah say that it was given to the Jewish people? I'm not saying that they shouldnt follow them, but to say Gentiles were given the ten commandments as well - is absolutely false. Seemingly, this is something strongly disagreed on. Simple question, where in the Torah does it say that gentiles should keep shabbat? Does it say somewhere in the new testament that they should? Because if it brings it down upon them as obligatory. From a stringent point of view I'm asking an explanation - leniancy has a very moot standing in order to form proper exegetical analysis in the case of determining law. I.e. To say "this verse doesn't apply because it's outdated or was based off other religions at the time."*

Christians use Galatians 3

26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

So they are the spiritual Children of Abraham. The covenant that God held with physical Israel is no longer in force.

Jesus Actually provided a set of his own commandments and a new covenant according to Christians.

I've seen different lists of commandments from the gospels. Numbering as many as 38? I think the "ten" are covered in them. Like do not comment murder, do not steal, honor your father and mother, put God first etc...

The OT is used to support the Messiah-ship of Jesus. Otherwise none of its commandments are in effect with the exception of those reiterated by Jesus.

So why don't Christian refer to the 38 or so commandments? Some do. For others it is probably just easier to remember the 10 because it's been culturally promoted.
 

Shermana

Heretic
I'll never understand why so many Jews ignore the fact that God, even in the Old Testament, shows that he has a global agenda and not just a tribal one



Isaiah 49:6

"It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

Isaiah 42:6

"I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles,

Zechariah 6:13

" And many peoples and powerful nations will come to Jerusalem to seek the LORD Almighty and to entreat him."

Genesis 49:10

The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his

What I don't understand is why so many "Chrisians" ignore Zechariah 14 where it says that all the Egyptians and gentiles will have to go up to Jerusalem to practice Succoth or they'll face drought and plagues (and this takes place in the end times). And sacrifices are made too apparently. So much for not having to obey the Law.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
I'll never understand why so many Jews ignore the fact that God, even in the Old Testament, shows that he has a global agenda and not just a tribal one

Isaiah 49:6
Isaiah 42:6
Zechariah 6:13

Genesis 49:10

The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his

The two quotes from Isaiah refer to the ideal (still, alas, unfulfilled more often than the reverse) of the Jewish People holding themselves to such a high standard of moral behavior that they will inspire the non-Jews around them to similar standards of interpersonal ethics.

The quote from Zechariah refers to the messianic period, when there will be opportunities for Jews and non-Jews alike to worship God in their own ways in and around the Temple, when it is rebuilt.

The nations referred to in Genesis 49:10, depending on which of the traditional interpretations one chooses to embrace, either are the twelve tribes (who were small nations unto themselves), or the seven nations of Canaan, who were to be subjugated by the kings descended from Judah.

As for God having a global agenda, yes, we presume that He sends messages or forms relationships or otherwise responds to those who seek Him out, in many, if not every, nation.

But in different ways.

The ways of the non-Jews to relate to God and serve Him are for non-Jews, and not for the Jewish People. Torah (all of Tanakh, I mean, and all the Oral Torah as well) is for the Jewish People, and not for non-Jews.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Doesn't the Torah say that it was given to the Jewish people? I'm not saying that they shouldnt follow them, but to say Gentiles were given the ten commandments as well - is absolutely false.
I agree. The problem arises when some raise the age-old argument that was settled long ago -- that Gentiles had to become Jewish in order to be Christian. It was decided that they didn't.
 

Shermana

Heretic
It was decided that they didn't.
According to the Book of Acts written by Paulinists.

And the historicity of the Council of Jerusalem, as I've explained many times, is heavily disputed among many scholars. And it seems to clash with Paul's account of it in Galatians.

Otherwise, what's the point of the "Wild Olive" grafting to the tree?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
According to the Book of Acts written by Paulinists.

And the historicity of the Council of Jerusalem, as I've explained many times, is heavily disputed among many scholars. And it seems to clash with Paul's account of it in Galatians.

Otherwise, what's the point of the "Wild Olive" grafting to the tree?
Acts was written by the author of Luke. It was, originally, a single text.
 

Shermana

Heretic
Acts was written by the author of Luke. It was, originally, a single text.

This is becoming increasingly disputed, many put Acts' dating between 80-100 and hold that it was not by Luke.

Parallels between Acts and Josephus' The Wars of the Jews (written in 75-80) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94) have long been argued.[23] Several scholars have argued that Acts used material from both of Josephus' works, rather than the other way around, which would indicate that Acts was written around the year 100 or later.[24][25] Three points of contact with Josephus in particular are cited: (1) The circumstances attending the death of Agrippa I in 44. Here Acts 12:21-23 is largely parallel to Antiquities 19.8.2; (2) the cause of the Egyptian pseudo-prophet in Acts 21:37f and in Josephus (War 2.13.5; Antiquities 20.8.6); (3) the curious resemblance as to the order in which Theudas and Judas of Galilee are referred to in both (Acts 5:36f; Antiquities 20.5.1).[citation needed]
According to John T. Townsend, "it is not before the last decades of the second century that one finds undisputed traces of the work."[26] Townsend, turning to the sources behind the pseudo-Clementine writings, argues that the middle of the 2nd century is the terminus ad quem for the final composition. According to Richard I. Pervo, "Townsend's methodologically adventurous but ultimately cautious essay is another valuable lesson in the danger of establishing the date of Acts–or any work–by arguing for the earliest possible time of origin."[27]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_the_Apostles#Date
 

roberto

Active Member
Otherwise, what's the point of the "Wild Olive" grafting to the tree?

They[people like "levite"] feel we might infect the tree or start flooding the place now called Israel.

I think they look upon us as Parasites and call those of "us" who have already returned to Shomron "the Settlers"

Interesting to note that Josephs brothers[including Judah] did not recognise him till Joseph told them who he was.
 

roberto

Active Member
I agree. The problem arises when some raise the age-old argument that was settled long ago -- that Gentiles had to become Jewish in order to be Christian. It was decided that they didn't.

And neither does a "Jew" need to become Christian to be "saved".
 

roberto

Active Member
.... Torah (all of Tanakh, I mean, and all the Oral Torah as well) is for the Jewish People, and not for non-Jews.

What sect of Judaism do you belong to "Levite" and if I may ask ; do you feel that you belong to the tribe of Levi. ?
 
Top