NO. I do not wish that you agree though, of course, that would be welcome. I would like you to put forth your disagreement instead of merely saying you go with the commentaries. Which commentaries? What verse? How is that opposed to moral Zera? I am looking for knowledge that comes from dialogue between different views.
I would also like to know if Christ supported the bequeathal of land to the Jews? I have not studied NT in detail. But my sense is that Jesus spoke without biological inheritances.
B13: Some examples.
Deuteronomy 30:1-5
Isaiah 10:20-21, 11:11, 11:16
Jeremiah 16:14-15, 30:8-9
Ezekiel 37:21-22, 24, 26-27
J13 I responded to Dale with Romans 11:1-4. Would that be sufficient?
xxx
B18: I don’t think anything you have said so far addresses the cause or the history of the conflict between the three religions. And for Jews and Christians God doesn’t want His believers to fight.
As to the solution there is only one, Christ’s return.
J18: This is the key. Now I understand your views a bit better. I accept Christ as a Great Divine person. I am in full sync with his message of Love. But his teachings also espoused the Inquisitions and Harvesting of Souls. I think nothing is lost if we reconsider the “only one” solution. This “only” is the common heritage of the Jews, Christians and Muslims—hence the violence between them.
Xxx
B19: The use of family generally cannot be superimposed on bequeathal. In the OT land was passed down by inheritance through the family. Kind of like today. So family and bequeathal go together. You may be using the word in a idiosyncratic manner. bequeathal: To pass (something) on to another; hand down:
J19: Bequeathal is OK. This does not answer whether Zera was biological or moral?
That is exactly backwards, unless you misunderstand the meaning of espouse. His teachings espoused nothing of the kind – those espousing the Inquisition may have claimed or mistakenly thought his teachings supported them. They were the the Pharisees of their day. Did the Pharisees espouse Jesus or he them?
When you make irresponsible comments like this you have lost all credibility.
1 Like
No. You completely misunderstand what Paul is saying.
The remnant is Hebrews that have not worshiped idols. Non-Hebrews wouldn’t be included.
Then you don’t really understand Christ. Which doesn’t surprise me.
Other than repeating your mantra, you have done nothing to actually explain the violence. It can’t be the Promised Land. The Jews weren’t in possession of the land from 70 CE to 1948 CE. Please explain the violence done to the Jews in this time period.
When viewed in context it is obviously biological. It is the way the Hebrews and then in the NT the Apostles viewed it.
And I have mentioned it before, with no reply by you, that Abraham does have spiritual descendants but those descendants have no claim to the Promised Land. So your idea isn’t really new.
1 Like
Peace. Peace. Thx.
B20 Other than repeating your mantra, you have done nothing to actually explain the violence. It can’t be the Promised Land. The Jews weren’t in possession of the land from 70 CE to 1948 CE. Please explain the violence done to the Jews in this time period.
J20: The claim to land is only one dimension of exclusivity which is the main problem. When Jews claim to be the “chosen people;” it denies the others. That brings forth violence. Land is only one part of the “chosen people.” When Christians claim Jesus is the “only” saviour; and Muslims claim Mohammad is the last and only Prophet whose teaching are 100 percent correct; that brings forth similar reaction. Thus we have the strange spectacle before us that each Abrahamic religion claims that its perception of God is the only correct perception and they are fighting amongst themselves.
Bill. I am not responding to you on B13, B18 and B19 because your comments are not specific. I think it is time to rest. This conversation has been a learning experience for me, especially regarding Zera and Isaiah. Thank you.
I believe (and many Christians believe) we have a spiritual adversary (see The Great Divorce and Matthew 6:13, NIV et al.) and that there are counterfeit ‘holy books’, e.g., The Book of Mormon, which contain some truth but also deception, just like counterfeit currency.
You said it was the fault of the commentaries.
It is more than just the Abrahamic religions that fight so there is more to it than their belief systems. Muslims and Hindus have historically been at war with each other. Intertribal warfare in Africa is a continuing problem. So you really need to widen your scope to identify the underlying causes.
That’s like somebody claiming that the Hindu faith makes Indians work at call centers to scam elderly Americans out of their life savings.
I agree with this. The question, however, is what is the criterion we would use to determine what is true and what is counterfeit?
Please beaglelady, I appreciate your willingness to engage. Please allow me to try to expalin once again. “Commentaries” help us decipher and understand the Word of God. The Word is inspired, the commentaries not necessarily so. Let us consider a situation where I write a “false” commentary. It has to be assessed in the light of the Word.
My understanding is that the Word in OT, Torah, Quran and Hindu is mutually consistent and non-contradictory. But the commentaries interpret certain verses in a way that they become contradictory. In particular, I do not find support in the scriptures for the idea that the Jews, Christians and Muslims have any exclusive right to anything. So I engaged, and am thankful for the opportunity, with the idea whether the Torah tells of exclusivity. To make clear, the interpretations of the Word by the commentaries appears to me to be the problem. I am open to myself being wrong too. NO affront. No accusations. Only trying to figure outthe way forward.
The Christian-Hindu and Muslim-Hindu conflicts are rooted in Abrahamic religions’ claim of exclusivity. About Africa, I am open to study if there is a specific point. Thanks.
How about some examples?
Read more carefully
Again, which commentaries are the problem? Be specific.
The idea that religious strife is caused by commentaries is just bonkers.
So when it is the Hindu that are the aggressors it is because of the other parties religion? Don’t think so. What is it about the Hindu religion that would cause them to be the aggressor(since this seems to be your thesis)?
The point is simply that they fight just like the conflicts you blame on the Abrahamic religions. So there must be another reason for the fighting.
You need to study a little harder then. The Bible and Quran are certainly contradictory.
J1 My understanding is that the Word in OT, Torah, Quran and Hindu is mutually consistent and non-contradictory. But the commentaries interpret certain verses in a way that they become contradictory
B1 How about some examples?
J1: Elohim=Allah=Brahman. Yahweh=Allah=Devta.
xxx
J2 In particular, I do not find support in the scriptures for the idea that the Jews, Christians and Muslims have any exclusive right to anything.
B2:Read more carefully
J2: Maybe you, too.
xxx
J3: To make clear, the interpretations of the Word by the commentaries appears to me to be the problem.
B3:Again, which commentaries are the problem? Be specific.
J3: Let us see what the commentaries say about the word Zera in Isaiah 6:13. All are either non-committal or they tell of biological seed. This leads to exclusive biological inheritance and arrogance and negativity towards other.
New International Version
And though a tenth remains in the land, it will again be laid waste. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut down, so the holy seed will be the stump in the land.”
New Living Translation
If even a tenth—a remnant—survive, it will be invaded again and burned. But as a terebinth or oak tree leaves a stump when it is cut down, so Israel’s stump will be a holy seed.”
English Standard Version
And though a tenth remain in it, it will be burned again, like a terebinth or an oak, whose stump remains when it is felled.” The holy seed is its stump.
Berean Standard Bible
And though a tenth remains in the land, it will be burned again. As the terebinth and oak leave stumps when felled, so the holy seed will be a stump in the land.”
King James Bible
But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.
New King James Version
But yet a tenth will be in it, And will return and be for consuming, As a terebinth tree or as an oak, Whose stump remains when it is cut down. So the holy seed shall be its stump.”
New American Standard Bible
“Yet there will still be a tenth portion in it, And it will again be subject to burning, Like a terebinth or an oak Whose stump remains when it is cut down. The holy seed is its stump.”
NASB 1995
“Yet there will be a tenth portion in it, And it will again be subject to burning, Like a terebinth or an oak Whose stump remains when it is felled. The holy seed is its stump.”
NASB 1977
“Yet there will be a tenth portion in it, And it will again be subject to burning, Like a terebinth or an oak Whose stump remains when it is felled. The holy seed is its stump.”
Amplified Bible
“And though a tenth [of the people] remain in the land, It will again be subject to destruction [consumed and burned], Like a massive terebinth tree or like an oak Whose stump remains when it is chopped down. The holy seed [the elect remnant] is its stump [the substance of Israel].”
Christian Standard Bible
Though a tenth will remain in the land, it will be burned again. Like the terebinth or the oak that leaves a stump when felled, the holy seed is the stump.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Though a tenth will remain in the land, it will be burned again. Like the terebinth or the oak that leaves a stump when felled, the holy seed is the stump.
American Standard Version
And if there be yet a tenth in it, it also shall in turn be eaten up: as a terebinth, and as an oak, whose stock remaineth, when they are felled; so the holy seed is the stock thereof.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And those who remain in it will be one out of ten, and you shall return and you shall be for burning like the oak and like the oak that fell from its stump; the seed that is selected is its planting”
Brenton Septuagint Translation
And yet there shall be a tenth upon it, and again it shall be for a spoil, as a turpentine tree, and as an acorn when it falls out of its husk.
Contemporary English Version
If only a tenth of the people are left, even they will be destroyed. But just as stumps remain after trees have been cut down, some of my chosen ones will be left.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And there shall be still a tithing therein, and she shall turn, and shall be made a show as a turpentine tree, and as an oak that spreadeth its branches: that which shall stand therein, shall be a holy seed.
Good News Translation
Even if one person out of ten remains in the land, he too will be destroyed; he will be like the stump of an oak tree that has been cut down." (The stump represents a new beginning for God’s people.)
International Standard Version
Even though a tenth of its people remain in it, it will once again be burned, like a terebinth or an oak tree, the stump of which, though the tree has been felled, still contains holy seed."
JPS Tanakh 1917
And if there be yet a tenth in it, it shall again be eaten up; as a terebinth, and as an oak, whose stock remaineth, when they cast their leaves, so the holy seed shall be the stock thereof.’
Literal Standard Version
And yet a tenth in it, and it has turned, And has been for a burning, As a teil-tree, and as an oak, that in falling, Has substance in them, The holy seed [is] its substance!”
New American Bible
If there remain a tenth part in it, then this in turn shall be laid waste; As with a terebinth or an oak whose trunk remains when its leaves have fallen. Holy offspring is the trunk.
NET Bible
Even if only a tenth of the people remain in the land, it will again be destroyed, like one of the large sacred trees or an Asherah pole, when a sacred pillar on a high place is thrown down. That sacred pillar symbolizes the special chosen family."
New Revised Standard Version
Even if a tenth part remain in it, it will be burned again, like a terebinth or an oak whose stump remains standing when it is felled.” The holy seed is its stump.
New Heart English Bible
If there is a tenth left in it, that also will in turn be consumed: as a terebinth, and as an oak, whose stock remains when they are felled. The holy seed is its stock."
World English Bible
If there is a tenth left in it, that also will in turn be consumed: as a terebinth, and as an oak, whose stock remains when they are felled; so the holy seed is its stock."
Young’s Literal Translation
And yet in it a tenth, and it hath turned, And hath been for a burning, As a teil-tree, and as an oak, that in falling, Have substance in them, The holy seed is its substance!
That is circular. What is reality? [The Pilate asked "What is truth?]. And whose perception of the reality?
J21: The Christian-Hindu and Muslim-Hindu conflicts are rooted in Abrahamic religions’ claim of exclusivity.
B21:So when it is the Hindu that are the aggressors it is because of the other parties religion? Don’t think so. What is it about the Hindu religion that would cause them to be the aggressor(since this seems to be your thesis)?
J21: Hindus have not been agressors precisely because they see God in everyone and do not claim any exclusivity.
xxx
J22: About Africa, I am open to study if there is a specific point.
B22: The point is simply that they fight just like the conflicts you blame on the Abrahamic religions. So there must be another reason for the fighting.
J22: Tribal warfare is at the material level as the political conflict between two countries. That is different than the same conflict for theological purposes. It is not my case that conflicts ONLY take place due to theology of exclusiveness. I see around me that most conflicts today are rooted in this. Let us not ignore the mountain by pointing to a mole hill.
xxx
J23: My understanding is that the Word in OT, Torah, Quran and Hindu is mutually consistent and non-contradictory.
B23: You need to study a little harder then. The Bible and Quran are certainly contradictory.
J23: Maybe you need to point out the alleged contradictions.