(K C) wrote:
:|In a court room, a witness testimony carries enough weight to convict
:|unless the other side can prove the testimony was a lie.
:|
:|We have witnesses of the life of Jesus in the books of Matthew, Mark,
:|Luke, and John. They are either A> eyewitness accounts or B> a
:|collection of eyewitness reports, depending on which book you are
:|talking about.
:|
:|Now, some people have made up charges that these books are distortions
:|of the truth or that the books were modified over time. However, no
:|proof of this charge has been offered. The other side doesn't have
:|any original document of the gospels to back up charges of
:|modifications of the documents.
:|
:|In regards to history, this is not enough to keep the gospels from
:|being history. Without proof, it is the practice of historians to
:|believe the original reports that they do have at the time.
:|
:|Now, not too long ago, a charge was made up that mankind never set
:|foot on the moon, suggesting it was all made up in a film lab. No
:|proof of the charges was produced, and the history books still say we
:|went to the moon. What if we treated the moon landing like the
:|gospels? What if we said, "Oh, well, some suggest the original
:|documents and tapes of the event were staged, so we can't say it
:|definitely happened." How do you think that would go over?
:|
:|However, many "historians" have no problem leaving the eyewitness
:|accounts of the gospels, and the indirect reports of the church that
:|maintained those documents, as being facts simply because some people
:|don't want it to be true. That is not history but historical
:|doctoring for a personal cause, and no historian should be among those
:|doing it.
:|
The Bible is not an established proven authority While it is historically
accurate about sOME things it is historically inaccurate about other
things.
I believe that while Thomas Paine's Age of Reason was very upsetting to
many of that era, I am not sure anyone has ever accurately and effectively
replied to the many questions he raised to the flaws he pointed out found
in the Bible with those two parts of Age of Reason.
AGE OF REASON PART 1
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/part1.html
AGE OF REASON PART 2
http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/Paine/Age-Of-Reason-Part-2.html
Both parts point out many of the flaws with the Bible, including the fact
that the author or authors of many of the first books of the Bible is/are
unknown.
What credentials did he or they have?
Very few Christian denominations, sects, etc claim infallibility for the
Bible anymore. Thus they recognize the fact that at best the Bible can be
a guide in some areas, in some things, but few claim it is to be accepted,
followed, etc word for word.
You don't get to claim the Bible as the authority on this matter since you
pick and choose that which you want to follow, or accept or cite or quote
and ignore the other items that would put a real crimp in your style of
living etc.
AND FINALLY:
From: (Up in NH)
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.usa.constitution,misc.education,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.usa.republicans,alt.politics.republican
Subject: For CB, DPR, KRP, Dana, Strickland & Fundy Jihad
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:18:46 -0500 (EST)
AS RABBIS FACE FACTS, BIBLE TALES ARE WILTING
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/arts/09BIBL.html?ex=1076821200&en=8af184d621d3d7cd&ei=5070
March 9, 2002
By MICHAEL MASSING
Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses.
The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never
occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And
David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a
mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was
later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.
Such startling propositions — the product of findings by
archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years
— have gained wide acceptance among non- Orthodox rabbis. But there
has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with
the laity — until now.
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5
million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new
Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years.
Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an
interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology,
philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the
editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts
ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a
human rather than divine document.
"When I grew up in Brooklyn, congregants were not sophisticated about
anything," said Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of "When Bad Things
Happen to Good People" and a co-editor of the new book.
"Today, they are very sophisticated and well read about psychology,
literature and history, but they are locked in a childish version of the
Bible."
"Etz Hayim," compiled by David Lieber of the University of Judaism in
Los Angeles, seeks to change that. It offers the standard Hebrew text, a
parallel English translation (edited by Chaim Potok, best known as the
author of "The Chosen"), a page-by-page exegesis, periodic commentaries
on Jewish practice and, at the end, 41 essays by prominent rabbis and
scholars on topics ranging from the Torah scroll and dietary laws to
ecology and eschatology.
These essays, perused during uninspired sermons or Torah readings at
Sabbath services, will no doubt surprise many congregants. For instance,
an essay on Ancient Near Eastern Mythology," by Robert Wexler, president
of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, states that on the basis of
modern scholarship, it seems unlikely that the story of Genesis
originated in Palestine. More likely, Mr. Wexler says, it arose in
Mesopotamia, the influence of which is most apparent in the story of the
Flood, which probably grew out of the periodic overflowing of the Tigris
and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah, Mr. Wexler adds, was probably
borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic Gilgamesh.
Equally striking for many readers will be the essay "Biblical
Archaeology," by Lee I. Levine, a professor at the Hebrew University in
Jerusalem. "There is no reference in Egyptian sources to Israel's
sojourn in that country," he writes, "and the evidence that does exist
is negligible and indirect." The few indirect pieces of evidence, like
the use of Egyptian names, he adds, "are far from adequate to
corroborate the historicity of the biblical account."
Similarly ambiguous, Mr. Levine writes, is the evidence of the conquest
and settlement of Canaan, the ancient name for the area including
Israel. Excavations showing that Jericho was unwalled and uninhabited,
he says, "clearly seem to contradict the violent and complete conquest
portrayed in the Book of Joshua." What's more, he says, there is an
"almost total absence of archaeological evidence" backing up the Bible's
grand descriptions of the Jerusalem of David and Solomon.
The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled
and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a
rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim."
But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it."
Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi
Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees
"that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it
happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi offered what he called a
"litany of disillusion" about the narrative, including contradictions,
improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating
evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have
"found no trace of the tribes of Israel — not one shard of pottery."
The reaction to the rabbi's talk ranged from admiration at his courage
to dismay at his timing to anger at his audacity. Reported in Jewish
publications around the world, the sermon brought him a flood of letters
accusing him of undermining the most fundamental teachings of Judaism.
But he also received many messages of support. "I can't tell you how
many rabbis called me, e- mailed me and wrote me, saying, `God bless you
for saying what we all believe,´ " Rabbi Wolpe said. He attributes the
"explosion" set off by his sermon to "the reluctance of rabbis to say
what they really believe."
Before the introduction of "Etz Hayim," the Conservative movement relied
on the Torah commentary of Joseph Hertz, the chief rabbi of the British
Commonwealth. By 1936, when it was issued, the Hebrew Bible had come
under intense scrutiny from scholars like Julius Wellhausen of Germany,
who raised many questions about the text's authorship and accuracy.
Hertz, working in an era of rampant anti-Semitism and of Christian
efforts to demonstrate the inferiority of the "Old" Testament to the
"New," dismissed all doubts about the integrity of the text.
Maintaining that no people would have invented for themselves so
"disgraceful" a past as that of being slaves in a foreign land, he wrote
that "of all Oriental chronicles, it is only the Biblical annals that
deserve the name of history."
The Hertz approach had little competition until 1981, when the Union of
American Hebrew Congregations, the official arm of Reform Judaism,
published its own Torah commentary. Edited by Rabbi Gunther Plaut, it
took note of the growing body of archaeological and textual evidence
that called the accuracy of the biblical account into question. The
"tales" of Genesis, it flatly stated, were a mix of "myth, legend,
distant memory and search for origins, bound together by the strands of
a central theological concept." But Exodus, it insisted, belonged in
"the realm of history." While there are scholars who consider the Exodus
story to be "folk tales," the commentary observed, "this is a minority
view."
Twenty years later, the weight of scholarly evidence questioning the
Exodus narrative had become so great that the minority view had become
the majority one.
Not among Orthodox Jews, however. They continue to regard the Torah as
the divine and immutable word of God. Their most widely used Torah
commentary, known as the Stone Edition (1993), declares in its
introduction "that every letter and word of the Torah was given to Moses
by God."
Lawrence Schiffman, a professor at New York University and an Orthodox
Jew, said that "Etz Hayim" goes so far in accepting modern scholarship
that, without realizing it, it ends up being in "nihilistic opposition"
to what Conservative Jews stand for. He noted, however, that most of the
questions about the Bible's accuracy had been tucked away discreetly in
the back. "The average synagogue-goer is never going to look there," he
said.
Even some Conservative rabbis feel uncomfortable with the depth of the
doubting. "I think the basic historicity of the text is valid and
verifiable," said Susan Grossman, the rabbi of Beth Shalom Congregation
in Columbia, Md., and a co-editor of "Etz Hayim." As for the mounting
archaeological evidence suggesting the contrary, Rabbi Grossman said:
"There's no evidence that it didn't happen. Most of the `evidence´ is
evidence from silence."
"The real issue for me is the eternal truths that are in the text," she
added. "How do we apply this hallowed text to the 21st century?" One
way, she said, is to make it more relevant to women. Rabbi Grossman is
one of many women who worked on "Etz Hayim," in an effort to temper the
Bible's heavily patriarchal orientation and make the text more palatable
to modern readers. For example, the passage in Genesis that describes
how the aged Sarah laughed upon hearing God say that she would bear a
son is traditionally interpreted as a laugh of incredulity. In its
commentary, however, "Etz Hayim" suggests that her laughter "may not be
a response to the far- fetched notion of pregnancy at an advanced age,
but the laughter of delight at the prospect of two elderly people
resuming marital intimacy."
In a project of such complexity, there were inevitably many points of
disagreement. But Rabbi Kushner says the only one that eluded resolution
concerned Leviticus 18:22: "Do not lie with a male as one lies with a
woman; it is an abhorrence." "We couldn't come to a formulation that we
could all be comfortable with," the rabbi said. "Some people felt that
homosexuality is wrong. We weren't prepared to embrace that as the
Conservative position. But at the same time we couldn't say this is a
mentality that has been disproved by contemporary biology, for not
everyone was prepared to go along with that." Ultimately, the editors
settled on an anodyne compromise, noting that the Torah's prohibitions
on homosexual relations "have engendered considerable debate" and that
Conservative synagogues should "welcome gay and lesbian congregants in
all congregational activities."
Since the fall, when "Etz Hayim" was issued, more than 100,000 copies
have been sold. Eventually, it is expected to become the standard Bible
in the nation's 760 Conservative synagogues.
Mark S. Smith, a professor of Bible and Near Eastern Studies at New York
University, noted that the Hertz commentary had lasted 65 years. "That's
incredible," he said. "If `Etz Hayim´ isn´t around for 50 years or
more, I´d be surprised."
Its longevity, however, may depend on the pace of archaeological
discovery.
.
|
