NHS to fund fatherless families

[Moretorque]

All this unnatural social engineering is just going to make the coming die off bigger.

[Jester]

If you are serious about reverting to non-Talmudic Judaism, you should get yourself a real Old Testament.

BTW, that's why you've never been able to find the story of Hanukkah.

My understanding is that the cut-off for the Old Testament is chronological, before Greek thought influenced Judaism. To me, this actually makes sense since Talmudic Judaism is the result of a bad combination of biblic Judaism with Greek thought.


There are aspects of Maccabees that I don't really like, like the over-emphasis of dietary law.

If the Talmudist "mainstream" Jews had REALLY been purging Hellenic culture when they censored the Septuagint, then their teachings would NOT seem like a synthesis with Greek thought.

Nothing could be more bitterly obstinate and Jewish than the actions of the Maccabees. And the story of Hanukkah contained in those books is a beautiful spiritual image of how a relationship can be restored after defilement, a story about recovery from the actions of evil men. Not a Greek thing about it. Greeks were the VILLAINS in Maccabees, if you remember.

Fact is, they had other reasons for the censorship. The language issue in the later books was a red herring. My understanding is that the Talmudists (yes I know it wasn't all written down yet, but it was that mainstream Judaic crowd) were purging out inconvenient books that seemed to predict Jesus, and referred to an afterlife.

BTW I don't like the bitter tone of Maccabees myself. But since it is HOLY SCRIPTURE, maybe I should not react to my distaste by taking scissors and cutting it out of the Septuagint (i.e. the Catholic Bible's Old Testament).

Well you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink, can you?

The point of the TWO passages I quoted was that fatherless children, with no link to the past, tend to grow up with no moral compass, no roots.

The second passage is explicit: you should raise the children you make to be good people, not father worthless riff-raff.

Let's try to have a civilized discussion here. What the passage you quoted said was that fatherless children have no value, not that having such children is evil. Here you are guilty of a typical Christian fault, not taking the text literally enough. The point of the text is to raise your own children (which I did), not to not have other children. There is a big difference between worthless and evil. You may argue that sperm donation is worthless based on this text, but I don't see how you can argue that it is evil.

It's like trying to have a civil discussion with a brick.

You are looking at the Scripture but you can't see what it is telling you. The words aren't there like a Cab Calloway nonsense song, they mean something. God has a POINT. The Law and the Wisdom books are supposed to lead us to be righteous people.

I don't see how YOU can argue that setting out to have worthless children is NOT evil.

I am amazed that someone as highly moral, and generous and kind as yourself, is so obtuse when reading these clear passages.

[fschmidt]

If the Talmudist "mainstream" Jews had REALLY been purging Hellenic culture when they censored the Septuagint, then their teachings would NOT seem like a synthesis with Greek thought.

Nothing could be more bitterly obstinate and Jewish than the actions of the Maccabees. And the story of Hanukkah contained in those books is a beautiful spiritual image of how a relationship can be restored after defilement, a story about recovery from the actions of evil men. Not a Greek thing about it. Greeks were the VILLAINS in Maccabees, if you remember.

Fact is, they had other reasons for the censorship. The language issue in the later books was a red herring. My understanding is that the Talmudists (yes I know it wasn't all written down yet, but it was that mainstream Judaic crowd) were purging out inconvenient books that seemed to predict Jesus, and referred to an afterlife.

That's the point, it wasn't the Talmudists who compiled the Jewish Old Testament. It was probably mostly the equivalent of the Sadducees who were committed to protecting the original Judaism from corruption. Talmudists should love Maccabees since it is a great example of early Talmudic thinking, meaning obsession with legalism at the expense of principles. And in fact Talmudists make a big deal of Hanukkah which Karaites refuse to celebrate. Simple obstinance combined with good luck doesn't justify a holiday. I don't remember all these later books, but I can't think of much that Talmudists would object to in them, while there is a fair amount that I object to. I am very happy with the Jewish Old Testament the way it is.

BTW I don't like the bitter tone of Maccabees myself. But since it is HOLY SCRIPTURE, maybe I should not react to my distaste by taking scissors and cutting it out of the Septuagint (i.e. the Catholic Bible's Old Testament).

What is holy scripture depends on your religion, and even the Christians can't agree on what should be in the Old Testament.

It's like trying to have a civil discussion with a brick.

You are looking at the Scripture but you can't see what it is telling you. The words aren't there like a Cab Calloway nonsense song, they mean something. God has a POINT. The Law and the Wisdom books are supposed to lead us to be righteous people.

I don't see how YOU can argue that setting out to have worthless children is NOT evil.

I am amazed that someone as highly moral, and generous and kind as yourself, is so obtuse when reading these clear passages.

I am not going to argue this point anymore, but it reminds me of Mark 9:40 versus Matthew 12:30. Do you see the difference between these quotes?

[Jester]

... mainstream Judaic crowd) were purging out inconvenient books that seemed to predict Jesus, and referred to an afterlife.

... committed to protecting the original Judaism from corruption.

No, as I stated above,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint#Jewish_use

Pre-Christian Jews, Philo and Josephus considered the Septuagint on equal standing with the Hebrew text.[30][31] Manuscripts of the Septuagint have been found among the Qumran Scrolls in the Dead Sea, and were thought to have been in use among Jews at the time.

Starting approximately in the 2nd century CE, several factors led most Jews to abandon use of the LXX. The earliest gentile Christians of necessity used the LXX, as it was at the time the only Greek version of the Bible, and most, if not all, of these early non-Jewish Christians could not read Hebrew. The association of the LXX with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars

So yes, I agree with one point you made, religion DOES influence what you choose as Holy Scripture. In fact, his article makes clear that mainstream Jews dropped the Septuagint, including the books we were discussing, around the time that the Jews were looking for someone to blame for the loss of Jerusalem.

And your behavior now is consistent. You are happy with the shorter Old Testament, and thus don't have to consider a verse that clearly condemns propagating a horde of worthless bastards.

.....I am not going to argue this point anymore, but it reminds me of Mark 9:40 versus Matthew 12:30. Do you see the difference between these quotes?

Nice find, worth a thread if you like, but again, an attempted diversion, a red herring. Stick to the question at hand.