Jesus versus the Sadducees on the after life (day of judgement)
-
One of the discussions that happened in this forum is about the Old Testament and the fact that it did not explicitly mention an after life or day of judgement (Resurrection). However I have come across this piece from the Gospel. This section of the Gospel shows Jesus was aware that there are those who questioned the after life in the scriptures of the Old Testament. However Jesus quoted from the Old Testament to prove his point that indeed there is an after life and its supported by the scriptures. Jesus did not say that the after life was "ommitted" from the scriptures by later Jewish authorities as some have said. He quoted the same verses we have today in the OT. I say this as some have suggested that the OT we have today is not the one mentioned in the Koran. This is because the Koran repeatedly refered to itself as a "confirmation" or "athentication" of the previous scriptures. Some have said that this can not be the same OT as the Koran is mentioning since many things (like resurrection) is not mentioned in the current OT we have today.The term the Koran used is "mussadiq", meaning authneticating the truth of or certifying the validity of or confirming the authority of etc. Jesus did not quote verses that we do not have today. But Jesus implied that they were not reading the scriptures carefully. I see these passages as confirming that Jesus understood the OT as the same we have today. But maybe I am mistaken. The Saducces was a Jewish sect that did not believe in an after life. They rejcted the Talmud however which is why they did not clash with Jesus as hard as the Pharisees who, like Sunnis and Shias, believed the oral traditions are binding and can abrogate the OT.
Today, 98% of Jews follow the Pharisaic tradition. They were, and still are, Jesus's biggest enemies. The Koran attacked many aspect of the Talmudic tradition. But it says it came to "confirm" the Old Testament.
Very depressing. brickwall
Mark 12 18-27
18 Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19 ?Teacher,? they said, ?Moses wrote for us that if a man?s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 20 Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21 The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22 In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23 At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her??
24 Jesus replied, ?Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25 When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26 Now about the dead rising?have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ?I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!?
http//www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12&version=NIV
Food for thought.
For more on the different Jewish sects and how they dealt with the Oral Traditions you can go here
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Torah
As far as the Koran and the Talmud
http//able2know.org/topic/157270-1
Peace!
-
Yes it is very depressing, the Quran not only affirms that it confirms the previous scriptures, it also blatantly quotes them!
9111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise) they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur'an and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded that is the achievement supreme.
4829 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Torah; and their similitude in the Gospel is like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.
Anyone claiming that the Bible is intact must at least point out where these teachings in the Bible are? And if the Bible is intact, how is the Quran true?
hypno
-
Yes it is very depressing, the Quran not only affirms that it confirms the previous scriptures, it also blatantly quotes them!
9111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise) they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur'an and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded that is the achievement supreme.
4829 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Torah; and their similitude in the Gospel is like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.
Anyone claiming that the Bible is intact must at least point out where these teachings in the Bible are? And if the Bible is intact, how is the Quran true?
hypno
I have actually posted about the second Koranic verse you quoted and where this can be found in the previous scriptures. There is actually many examples of this in the OT.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597992.0
As far as the fighting to defend the faith, I am sure there are many of this also. But i have not looked into it. Maybe I should.
Peace!
-
I have actually posted about the second Koranic verse you quoted and where this can be found in the previous scriptures. There is actually many examples of this in the OT.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597992.0
As far as the fighting to defend the faith, I am sure there are many of this also. But i have not looked into it. Maybe I should.
Peace!
I agree, but the promise of the garden of Eden is no where to be found. Word search of garden or Eden in the Bible only points to Adam's story. And Hell is also a radical concept found in the later prophets like Daniel in a vague verse and in the NT. What happened?
Peace.
-
I agree, but the promise of the garden of Eden is no where to be found. Word search of garden or Eden in the Bible only points to Adam's story. And Hell is also a radical concept found in the later prophets like Daniel in a vague verse and in the NT. What happened?
Peace.
Good point. But the point here was that Jesus was aware that some might question the after life. But his answer was about an after life. Jesus talked about hell many times. Anyways the Dead Sea Scroll did talk about hell fire and even the devil and angels in the day of resurrection. But it is a good point you raised.
-
Salam,
I do not believe that the O.T and N.T are fully preserved as they were given. The number one reason being, the words of the historians,poets,prophets,god, all are mixed up. Instead of being a scripture, its more like a "wikipedia" of Christianity.
About the confirmation of previous scriptures, i found a different point of view. From what I have learnt, we are not supposed to import all the words from the modern Bible, instead, using the Qur'an as a criterion, we are supposed to judge. Not the desire of the people, but Allah's criterion, specially that the Bible is filled with completely unauthorized texts. The following are some readings that may help justify my opinion
544 We have sent down the Torah, in it is a guidance and a light; the prophets who have submitted judged with it for those who are Jewish, and the Devotees, and the Priests, for what they were entrusted of the Book of God, and they were witness over. So do not be concerned with the people but be concerned with Me; and do not purchase with My revelations a cheap price. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the rejecters.
545 And We have decreed for them in it that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and wounds to be similar; and whoever remits anything of it, then it will cancel sins for him. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
546 And We sent in their footsteps Jesus, son of Mary, authenticating what was present with him of the Torah. And We gave him the Gospel, in it is a guidance and a light, and authenticating what was present with him of the Torah, and a guidance and a lesson for the righteous.
547 And let the people of the Gospel judge with what God has sent down in it. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
548 And We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, authenticating what is between your hands of the Book and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and if God had willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so strive to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute.
549 And judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires, and beware lest they divert you away from some of what God has sent down to you. If they turn away, then know that God wants to inflict them with some of their sins; and many of the people are wicked.
550 Is it the judgment of the days of ignorance that they seek? Who is better than God as a judge for a people who comprehend?
Oh, by the way, these verse speak out against the idea that prophet muhammad used to judge between his sahabas using a secondary revelation from Allah.
Allah knows best
PEACE-------------------- Student of Allah
-
Salam,
I do not believe that the O.T and N.T are fully preserved as they were given. The number one reason being, the words of the historians,poets,prophets,god, all are mixed up. Instead of being a scripture, its more like a "wikipedia" of Christianity.
About the confirmation of previous scriptures, i found a different point of view. From what I have learnt, we are not supposed to import all the words from the modern Bible, instead, using the Qur'an as a criterion, we are supposed to judge. Not the desire of the people, but Allah's criterion, specially that the Bible is filled with completely unauthorized texts. The following are some readings that may help justify my opinion
544 We have sent down the Torah, in it is a guidance and a light; the prophets who have submitted judged with it for those who are Jewish, and the Devotees, and the Priests, for what they were entrusted of the Book of God, and they were witness over. So do not be concerned with the people but be concerned with Me; and do not purchase with My revelations a cheap price. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the rejecters.
545 And We have decreed for them in it that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and wounds to be similar; and whoever remits anything of it, then it will cancel sins for him. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
546 And We sent in their footsteps Jesus, son of Mary, authenticating what was present with him of the Torah. And We gave him the Gospel, in it is a guidance and a light, and authenticating what was present with him of the Torah, and a guidance and a lesson for the righteous.
547 And let the people of the Gospel judge with what God has sent down in it. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
548 And We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, authenticating what is between your hands of the Book and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and if God had willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so strive to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute.
549 And judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires, and beware lest they divert you away from some of what God has sent down to you. If they turn away, then know that God wants to inflict them with some of their sins; and many of the people are wicked.
550 Is it the judgment of the days of ignorance that they seek? Who is better than God as a judge for a people who comprehend?
Oh, by the way, these verse speak out against the idea that prophet muhammad used to judge between his sahabas using a secondary revelation from Allah.
Allah knows best
PEACE-------------------- Student of Allah
I am not sure what you mean by "fully preserve as they were given". Given by whom? I think the issue here is that people think a Quran like scripture came to the previous prophets. That is not the case as no prophet was given a Quran (words of God) except Muhammad. Jesus was the word of God. His hadith is considered God's word as he was given the holy spirit. Moses talked to God from the bush. Other than that most prophets had revelations but not like the Koran. Thats why the Koran refers to the Gospel and Torah as the Book of God but not word. Jesus was the word of God in the Gospel and God talked to the prophets in the OT.
Of course if you mean not all the events in the OT are accurate thats true. But it was always like that. This is because the OT has history, eyewitness accounts, theology, biography and even myths. There is no Koran like scriptures given to any of the prophets there. At the same time God never talked to any prophets like he did with Moses and He gave David priveleges He did no give others and so is the case with Solomon.
The verses you quoted seems to contradict what you are saying.
Why would God command people to follow the scriptures then?
Maybe its a case of language as the Koran uses "We gave" or We brought down" or "We revealed" and this may make some see it as a Quran like scripture. There is no evidence of that. If you look at the conversation between Moses and God, there is a back and forth where God asks Moses and Moses answers. There is no such thing in the Koran where its a one sided conversation.
This may explain why Muhammad was not given the same miracles and signs that Jesus or Moses were given. The Gospel is basically the accounts of his disciples. There are times when God communicated with the prophets, but no such scriptures like the Koran has ever been known.
Every prophet is given something the others not given.
We have revealed to you, just as We revealed to Noah and the Prophets who came after him. And We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Tribes, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon. And We gave David the Psalms. (Qur'an, 4163)
It appears that the Psalms is a Koran like scriptures but the Psalms is actually poetry spoken by David. Here "given" may mean in his memory or his honor. Meaning that it ended up in the scripture for future generations to read and be inspired from. This is because the OT spans almost a thousands years.
Thats why Vhristians say the Bible was "inspired" by God. man wrote it in actuality but by God's guidance. I think this makes sense.
But I could be wrong as the Koran uses language variantly.
The Koran hwoever never criticized anything in the OT or Gospel as far as I know. But it did attack aspects of the Talmud, as did Jesus in the Gospel.
-
Today, 98% of Jews follow the Pharisaic tradition. They were, and still are, Jesus's biggest enemies. The Koran attacked many aspect of the Talmudic tradition. But it says it came to "confirm" the Old Testament.
Not true, I think most of the jews now have long abandoned sectarians.. they're very secular...
There are those of course who are still sectarians, and majority of those sectarian jews are following pharisaic tradition.
I might add that the Quran never mentioned "Old Testament" or "Tanakh".
Old Testament / Tanakh (Abbreviation of Torah, Nevim and Ketuvim) is a 'collection of multiple books'. and should not be judged as 'one book'.
I've read those.. and I can say the quality varies between books, I personally like the book of Ezekiel, Isaiah and Daniel.What makes it interesting is that it tell stories about 'how f#d up' the jews were, truly a rarity in 'ancient manuscript' as most manuscripts usually tell stories about 'how glorious they or their ancestors were'...
Again, that's is also what makes the Quran interesting as well, as instead of telling 'how glorius the arabs' were, it told stories that they 'f%#d up'. That's is why the Quran will not make a good reference books for the 'salafs'...A book in hebrew telling negative stories on the Jews and an arabic book telling negative stories on the arabs..
A rarity indeed which indicates that the author is perhaps not a jew or arab... as human loves to brag about themselves..Salam / Peace
-
Not true, I think most of the jews now have long abandoned sectarians.. they're very secular...
There are those of course who are still sectarians, and majority of those sectarian jews are following pharisaic tradition.
I might add that the Quran never mentioned "Old Testament" or "Tanakh".
Old Testament / Tanakh (Abbreviation of Torah, Nevim and Ketuvim) is a 'collection of multiple books'. and should not be judged as 'one book'.
I've read those.. and I can say the quality varies between books, I personally like the book of Ezekiel, Isaiah and Daniel.What makes it interesting is that it tell stories about 'how f#d up' the jews were, truly a rarity in 'ancient manuscript' as most manuscripts usually tell stories about 'how glorious they or their ancestors were'...
Again, that's is also what makes the Quran interesting as well, as instead of telling 'how glorius the arabs' were, it told stories that they 'f%#d up'. That's is why the Quran will not make a good reference books for the 'salafs'...A book in hebrew telling negative stories on the Jews and an arabic book telling negative stories on the arabs..
A rarity indeed which indicates that the author is perhaps not a jew or arab... as human loves to brag about themselves..Salam / Peace
Its not sectarianism that the Pharisees care about but ethnicity. Jews today see their commun ity as purely ethnic. You can be an atheist Jew or religious or communist or liberal etc. But to be Jewish you must be of the Jewish ethnicity. 98% of Jews subscibe to that like the ADL and The Amerian Jewish Congress, AIPAC and even J-Street. The state of Israel is based on ethnicity. Judaism is deeply ethnocentric while Islam is non ethnocentric but deeply sectarian. That is why its very hard to convert o Judaism because you have to be of a certain geneology. You are then autmotically a Jew. The prophets of the OT married many non Israelites. But the Pharisaic Judaism emphasized ethnicity as the only criteria to be a Jew. This was one of the conflicts between Jesus and the Pharisees. Thats why Judaism is not a universalist faith. But all the prophets in the OT were universalist.
-
Its not sectarianism that the Pharisees care about but ethnicity. Jews today see their commun ity as purely ethnic. You can be an atheist Jew or religious or communist or liberal etc. But to be Jewish you must be of the Jewish ethnicity. 98% of Jews subscibe to that like the ADL and The Amerian Jewish Congress, AIPAC and even J-Street. The state of Israel is based on ethnicity. Judaism is deeply ethnocentric while Islam is non ethnocentric but deeply sectarian.
The Pharisees during Jesus time is different with today's Zionism. It's a mistake to view them as 'the one and the same'.
The Pharisee did convert a lot of people to Judaism.. the Edomites is one of the (most famous) example, and they end up having a (converted) Edomite as a king (Herod).One of Jesus strongest remark against 'sectarianism'/'conversion'..
?Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
Matthew 2314-16It's however correct to compare Jewish Zionism with Arab Nationalism, both are "NATIONALISM" movement, although one is based on ethnicity and the other one is based on linguistic/language.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_nationalismThat's why it's called "Arab Israel Conflict" (Although it should be Arab-Zionist conflict).
That is why its very hard to convert o Judaism because you have to be of a certain geneology. You are then autmotically a Jew. The prophets of the OT married many non Israelites. But the Pharisaic Judaism emphasized ethnicity as the only criteria to be a Jew. This was one of the conflicts between Jesus and the Pharisees. Thats why Judaism is not a universalist faith. But all the prophets in the OT were universalist.
It depends on sect or the 'broker', it's very easy to convert to Judaism (now) if you talk to the Liberal Judaists...
Within the Pharisees sect during Jesus time, it was represented by the 'school of Hillel'..
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_the_Elder
He had an adversary, the 'orthodox faction' the school of Shammai
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShammaiThe "Rabbis within Zionist Nationalist camp" is standing on a 'shaky ground', they have a difficulties to define "What Is A Jew"?
They say as long as the babies was born from a jewish c*nt, then it's a jew.. (matrilineal).
While originally in the past the jews just like their cousins the arabs and other semitic tribes is based on Patrilineal culture. as it was clearly shown on their 'Ben somebody' on their name...The other Judaists unlike the Zionists Rabbis still maintain the "Patrilineal" culture...
In short It's a total jumble of mess over there... waiting for the right time to crumble..
It just a matter of time before all sectarians and racist ideology to go down the drain..
Salam / Peace
-
The Pharisees during Jesus time is different with today's Zionism. It's a mistake to view them as 'the one and the same'.
The Pharisee did convert a lot of people to Judaism.. the Edomites is one of the (most famous) example, and they end up having a (converted) Edomite as a king (Herod).One of Jesus strongest remark against 'sectarianism'/'conversion'..
?Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
Matthew 2314-16It's however correct to compare Jewish Zionism with Arab Nationalism, both are "NATIONALISM" movement, although one is based on ethnicity and the other one is based on linguistic/language.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_nationalismThat's why it's called "Arab Israel Conflict" (Although it should be Arab-Zionist conflict).
It depends on sect or the 'broker', it's very easy to convert to Judaism (now) if you talk to the Liberal Judaists...
Within the Pharisees sect during Jesus time, it was represented by the 'school of Hillel'..
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_the_Elder
He had an adversary, the 'orthodox faction' the school of Shammai
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShammaiThe "Rabbis within Zionist Nationalist camp" is standing on a 'shaky ground', they have a difficulties to define "What Is A Jew"?
They say as long as the babies was born from a jewish c*nt, then it's a jew.. (matrilineal).
While originally in the past the jews just like their cousins the arabs and other semitic tribes is based on Patrilineal culture. as it was clearly shown on their 'Ben somebody' on their name...The other Judaists unlike the Zionists Rabbis still maintain the "Patrilineal" culture...
In short It's a total jumble of mess over there... waiting for the right time to crumble..
It just a matter of time before all sectarians and racist ideology to go down the drain..
Salam / Peace
Zionism started as a movement to maintain Jewish identity in the wake of the assimilation threats of enlightenment Europe.
The enlightenment made it hard for Jews to justify their Judaism since European enlightenment focused on the individual while Judaism focused on ethnicity.
Zionists in Western countries were also at the ethnocentric end of the Jewish population. Zionism was seen as a way of combating the assimilatory pressures of Western societies ?Zionist ideologues and publicists argued that in the West assimilation was as much a threat to the survival of the Jewish people as persecution was in the East.?49 Zionism openly accepted a national/ethnic conceptualization of Judaism that was quite independent of religious faith. As Theodore Herzl stated, ?We are a people?one people.?50 The Zionist Arthur Hertzberg stated that ?the Jews in all ages were essentially a nation and?all other factors profoundly important to the life of this people, even religion, were mainly instrumental values.?51 There were a number of Zionist racial scientists in the period from 1890?1940, including Elias Auerbach, Aron Sandler, Felix Theilhaber, and Ignaz Zollschan. Zionist racial scientists were motivated by a perceived need to end Jewish intermarriage and preserve Jewish racial purity.52 Only by creating a Jewish homeland and leaving the assimilatory influences of the Diaspora could Jews preserve their unique racial heritage.
For example, Auerbach advocated Zionism because it would return Jews ?back into the position they enjoyed before the nineteenth century?politically autonomous, culturally whole, and racially pure.?53 Zollschan, whose book on ?the Jewish racial question? went through five editions and was well known to both Jewish and non-Jewish anthropologists,54 praised Houston Stewart Chamberlain and advocated Zionism as the only way to retain Jewish racial purity from the threat of mixed marriages and assimilation.55 Zollschan?s description of the phenotypic, and by implication genetic commonality of Jews around the world is striking. He notes that the same Jewish faces can be seen throughout the Jewish world among Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Oriental Jews. He also remarked on the same mix of body types, head shapes, skin, and hair and eye pigmentation in these widely separated groups.56
For many Zionists, Jewish racialism went beyond merely asserting and shoring up the ethnic basis of Judaism, to embrace the idea of racial superiority. Consistent with the anti-assimilationist thrust of Zionism, very few Zionists intermarried, and those who did, such as Martin Buber, found that their marriages were problematic within the wider Zionist community.57 In 1929 the Zionist leaders of the Berlin Jewish community condemned intermarriage as a threat to the ?racial purity of stock? and asserted its belief that ?consanguinity of the flesh and solidarity of the soul? were essential for developing a Jewish nation, as was the ?will to establish a closed brotherhood over against all other communities on earth.?58
Assertions of Zionist racialism continued into the National Socialist period, where they dovetailed with National Socialist attitudes. Joachim Prinz, a German Jew who later became the head of the American Jewish Congress, celebrated Hitler?s ascent to power because it signaled the end of the Enlightenment values, which had resulted in assimilation and mixed marriage among Jews
We want assimilation to be replaced by a new law the declaration of belonging to the Jewish nation and the Jewish race. A state built upon the principle of the purity of nation and race can only be honoured and respected by a Jew who declares his belonging to his own kind?. For only he who honours his own breed and his own blood can have an attitude of honour towards the national will of other nations.59
The common ground of the racial Zionists and their non-Jewish counterparts included the exclusion of Jews from the German Volksgemeinschaft.60 Indeed, shortly after Hitler came to power, the Zionist Federation of Germany submitted a memorandum to the German government outlining a solution to the Jewish question and containing the following remarkable statement. The Federation declared that the Enlightenment view that Jews should be absorbed into the nation state
discerned only the individual, the single human being freely suspended in space, without regarding the ties of blood and history or spiritual distinctiveness. Accordingly, the liberal state demanded of the Jews assimilation into the non-Jewish environment?. Thus it happened that innumerable persons of Jewish origin had the chance to occupy important positions and to come forward as representatives of German culture and German life, without having their belonging to Jewry become visible. Thus arose a state of affairs which in political discussion today is termed ?debasement of Germandom,? or ?Jewification.? ?Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one?s own tradition.61
http//www.kevinmacdonald.net/UnderstandJI-2.htm
-
Zionism started as a movement to maintain Jewish identity in the wake of the assimilation threats of enlightenment Europe.
The enlightenment made it hard for Jews to justify their Judaism since European enlightenment focused on the individual while Judaism focused on ethnicity.
Correct...
The Zionism's "Ethno centricity'" was the view of "Shaman's school" during Jesus time.. (They never seek convert, and tried very hard to forbid conversion of non-Jews)Yet basically Rabbanical Judaism laid out the foundation of "Organized Religion" as we know today..
The "Hillel school" (who actively converted anyone whether they're Jews or Non-Jews) find their 'reincarnation' in Christianism and Islamism. Somewhere in between it seems there were exchange of ideas/influences between Christians (Jesus follower) and Hillel's follower. And 600 years later, the same ideas were applied by the Islamist, most probably adopted from Christians and (Hillel's) Judaism.Nonetheless it was the "Rabbanical Judaism" (Shammai and Hillel and others) who invented Organized Religion. During the heyday of 'Sanhedrin' (100 years before Jesus was born). they built Synagogues on every villages, standardizing and formalizing the rites, formed up hierarchical structure of priests and rabbis and set up a regular prayer service in those village synagogues and also the same village synagogues is functioned as "Madrasa" (Place of learning, of mostly the Midrash (traditions) and Torah; the same terminology which also being adopted by Islamists until today)... This of course requires also the standardization of 'books to be compiled into canonical / official volume of scrolls' to be put inside the Synagogue.. Those ideas carries on by the future christians and islamists...
In the gospel there are many occasions where Jesus visited those village synagogues and preach/teach/attend the service there..
Evidence Even now on this forum most people still think that there MUST be a standardized and formalized rites for praying! A thought which is totally strange and alien to those who were not exposed to 'organized religion'.
Salam / Peace