Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-01-2016, 06:28 AM (This post was last modified: 24-01-2016 06:41 AM by Brian37.)
Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
No sorry Jews, this has nothing to do with wanting genocide of human beings in real life. I am sorry it bothers Jews that atheist go after your books of myth too. This is strictly a book review, like a bad movie or bad book. Nobody should want any group wiped out in real life, but you don't get to set up taboos to avoid criticism of bad claims.

The god character Yahweh is a tribal gang leader, no not the way humans want to view him, but a tribal leader because of the REAL life humans lived in BACK THEN, in tribal kingships, back then humans lived in very tribal groups and BACK THEN the tribe followed the king and loyalty was expected, BACK THEN.

On top of that Hebrews simply took a polytheistic lesser god of the Canaanites Yahweh, and took this polytheistic lesser god, under the head god EL who was head TOP GOD of the divine family, and took Yahweh and made him the only god.

This god was a warrior god, reflecting the tribal rivalries between REAL tribes back then. It is not that atheists say this out of hate of human rights, we say this as a criticism of taking ANY god claim literally as fact. ALL religions get upset needlessly in reality when you simply say "That is not the way it happened in reality". Just like when Muslims claim they will get 72 virgins, or when Christians claim a man can survive rigor mortis. We criticize ALL religions, and I find it sick that Jews out of all the religions in the world would forget what lack of questioning does.

Ann Frank would NOT be happy with some Jews considering the silence of criticism that lead German Christians to slaughter 6 million Jews. I do not think she would be happy with some Jews hiding behind the Holocaust to avoid criticism. "That is not true", or "Your character is not as nice as you'd like to paint him", is not the same as saying "get ride of everyone in real life". NO NO NO NO, and knock it off.

Jews don't get a pass anymore than they give Muslims on their claims, anymore than Christians should on their claims. NOBODY should call for the genocide of any group, but that does not give the book or the claims that people derive from them a pass.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion...h-God.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

" Yahweh is a warrior for his people, a storm-god typical of ancient Near Eastern myths"

In most of antiquity in polytheism also, it was a common flaw in human thought to attribute the success of conquest to the divine. You can find the idea of the divine intervening in human affairs in all of antiquity.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Brian37's post
24-01-2016, 06:32 AM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 06:28 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  No sorry Jews, this has nothing to do with wanting genocide of human beings in real life. I am sorry it bothers Jews that atheist go after your books of myth too. This is strictly a book review, like a bad movie or bad book. Nobody should want any group wiped out in real life, but you don't get to set up taboos to avoid criticism of bad claims.

The god character Yahweh is a tribal gang leader, no not the way humans want to view him, but a tribal leader because of the REAL life humans lived in BACK THEN, in tribal kingships, back then humans lived in very tribal groups and BACK THEN the tribe followed the king and loyalty was expected, BACK THEN.

On top of that Hebrews simply took a polytheistic lesser god of the Canaanites Yahweh, and took this polytheistic lesser god, under the head god EL who was head TOP GOD of the divine family, and took Yahweh and made him the only god.

This god was a warrior god, reflecting the tribal rivalries between REAL tribes back then. It is not that atheists say this out of hate of human rights, we say this as a criticism of taking ANY god claim literally as fact. ALL religions get upset needlessly in reality when you simply say "That is not the way it happened in reality". Just like when Muslims claim they will get 72 virgins, or when Christians claim a man can survive rigor mortis. We criticize ALL religions, and I find it sick that Jews out of all the religions in the world would forget what lack of questioning does.

Ann Frank would NOT be happy with some Jews considering the silence of criticism that lead German Christians to slaughter 6 million Jews. I do not think she would be happy with some Jews hiding behind the Holocaust to avoid criticism. "That is not true", or "Your character is not as nice as you'd like to paint him", is not the same as saying "get ride of everyone in real life". NO NO NO NO, and knock it off.

Jews don't get a pass anymore than they give Muslims on their claims, anymore than Christians should on their claims. NOBODY should call for the genocide of any group, but that does not give the book or the claims that people derive from them a pass.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion...h-God.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

" Yahweh is a warrior for his people, a storm-god typical of ancient Near Eastern myths"

In most of antiquity in polytheism also, it was a common flaw in human thought to attribute the success of conquest to the divine. You can find the idea of the divine intervening in human affairs in all of antiquity.

First link is bro...ken.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2016, 06:41 AM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
Should work now.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2016, 10:29 AM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
They're both right. Richard Dawkins can say what he wants. And Rabbi Sacks has very accurately portrayed the view of the Jewish community when he described how Christian Atheists read our book from an adversarial position and then hold us accountable to their mistranslated rendering of our book. It's frustrating for us and the translation they use did result in large-scale deaths for the Jewish people in the middle ages. There are wounds in the Jewish community and Dawkins sounds like he could have been more delicate.

I generally favor everyone just having a tougher skin. This didn't need to be escalated like it was.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
24-01-2016, 10:47 AM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 10:29 AM)Aliza Wrote:  They're both right. Richard Dawkins can say what he wants. And Rabbi Sacks has very accurately portrayed the view of the Jewish community when he described how Christian Atheists read our book from an adversarial position and then hold us accountable to their mistranslated rendering of our book. It's frustrating for us and the translation they use did result in large-scale deaths for the Jewish people in the middle ages. There are wounds in the Jewish community and Dawkins sounds like he could have been more delicate.

I generally favor everyone just having a tougher skin. This didn't need to be escalated like it was.

Dawkins' description of the Old Testament's god is based on mistranslations?
And how exactly did a wrong translation cause the death of Jews centuries ago and why should Dawkins or anyone for that matter be delicate when criticizing any religion (especially when the events people get sensitive about happened 1000 years ago)?

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes undergroundp's post
24-01-2016, 10:52 AM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
If saying that biblical god is bloody, primitive tyrant is anti-semitic then it appears that I'm anti-semite too. But such things are to be expected as accusations of hatred against Jews are easy way to label and silence oponent. And what other thing believers can do when Bible speaks for itself?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
24-01-2016, 01:31 PM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 10:29 AM)Aliza Wrote:  They're both right. Richard Dawkins can say what he wants. And Rabbi Sacks has very accurately portrayed the view of the Jewish community when he described how Christian Atheists read our book from an adversarial position and then hold us accountable to their mistranslated rendering of our book. It's frustrating for us and the translation they use did result in large-scale deaths for the Jewish people in the middle ages. There are wounds in the Jewish community and Dawkins sounds like he could have been more delicate.

I generally favor everyone just having a tougher skin. This didn't need to be escalated like it was.

Alright. You're a thieving sod.

Am I right?

Sadly it has become a Jewish custom to call any criticism Anti Semitism. Frankly, it's getting old.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2016, 01:33 PM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 10:47 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(24-01-2016 10:29 AM)Aliza Wrote:  They're both right. Richard Dawkins can say what he wants. And Rabbi Sacks has very accurately portrayed the view of the Jewish community when he described how Christian Atheists read our book from an adversarial position and then hold us accountable to their mistranslated rendering of our book. It's frustrating for us and the translation they use did result in large-scale deaths for the Jewish people in the middle ages. There are wounds in the Jewish community and Dawkins sounds like he could have been more delicate.

I generally favor everyone just having a tougher skin. This didn't need to be escalated like it was.

Dawkins' description of the Old Testament's god is based on mistranslations?
And how exactly did a wrong translation cause the death of Jews centuries ago and why should Dawkins or anyone for that matter be delicate when criticizing any religion (especially when the events people get sensitive about happened 1000 years ago)?

No it is not, but even if I agreed, then what would that say about an alleged "all powerful" god's ability to be efficient. If you can "poof" all this into existence in a bling of an eye, and your goal is for humans to get along, seems a bit of out of your way drama and overkill, if you have a simple message for all of humanity.

No, he is right, and for very REAL literary reasons.

The god Yahweh, was a lesser god in the Canaanite polytheism, and that lesser god in the divine family was a warrior god which simply got turned into the only god by the Hebrews.

ALL ALL ALL the gods of all three books are literally the same god stemming from prior polytheism.

In real life, in most of antiquity life was tribal and humans centered their lives around the local tribes and kingships that ruled over them. In real life you had a ruling class, a warrior class who held the most wealth, and humans merely mistook wealth and success in conquest as coming from a higher power.

Back then, even in polytheism, the mortality rate was much higher, so it was much more incumbent for the individual to defend the tribal line.

That is why if you read any of those books of Abraham, you see at best, this character will tolerate others as long as they know their place. But most of the time the slightest dissent is squashed by the sanction of this god, or done by the god directly.

Even prior to the modern three monotheism of Hebrew/Christian or Islam, the Egyptians had their conquest motifs, they had their own trinity in Ra/Osiris/Horus. Horus was seen as the savoir god born to save humanity and Ra and Osiris and Horus sat in judgment of the dead.

Point being, is "misinterpretation" is a dodge. Every religion has the same books and many with different interpretations and versions. It is absurd to claim a perfect being who is out to protect us who goes out of it's way to make things confusing to the point humans fight and kill vying for his attention.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2016, 02:12 PM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 10:47 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(24-01-2016 10:29 AM)Aliza Wrote:  They're both right. Richard Dawkins can say what he wants. And Rabbi Sacks has very accurately portrayed the view of the Jewish community when he described how Christian Atheists read our book from an adversarial position and then hold us accountable to their mistranslated rendering of our book. It's frustrating for us and the translation they use did result in large-scale deaths for the Jewish people in the middle ages. There are wounds in the Jewish community and Dawkins sounds like he could have been more delicate.

I generally favor everyone just having a tougher skin. This didn't need to be escalated like it was.
Dawkins' description of the Old Testament's god is based on mistranslations?

Yes, I believe Dawkins is relying on a mistranslated version of the Hebrew bible. –Actually, my initial post might have more accurately said, “mistranslated, misunderstood and very skewed” version of the Hebrew Bible. Which is not to say that every verse he’s reading will be mistranslated, but the overarching main ideas in the Christian bible are very distorted from the original Hebrew reading (and understanding) due to mistranslations, most of which are deliberate. This is a real point of contention within the Jewish community because people who have no education on Judaism or appreciation of the vast differences between Judaism and Christianity hold us accountable for their Christian-based understanding of the Hebrew Bible.

Rabbi Sacks probably wants people to understand that the explanation that Dawkins is providing in his book about Jewish texts is not in any way representative of the Jewish teachings or the view that Jews hold about G-d. Sadly, this doesn’t go without saying.

(24-01-2016 10:47 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  ….And how exactly did a wrong translation cause the death of Jews centuries ago

Mistranslations in the bible have painted Jews out to be a stupid, stubborn group of people who, according to Christianity, are too dumb to look in their own book to see that the “truth” of Jesus Christ is painted all throughout the scriptures as plain as day. We have been characterized as being dishonest and devious for refusing to recognize their messiah, and this characterization has turned the Jews into a scapegoat which has resulted in mass expulsions from entire countries, torture, pogroms, death and genocide.

Even though the events that Rabbi Sacks mentioned occurred 1000 years ago, they’re a part of our history and we note that the patterns have repeated themselves over and over. My grandparents, and the parents or grandparents of almost every Jewish person I know were impacted by anti-Semitism which can very easily be traced back to long-held Christian attitudes about Jews. These problems are not limited to a by-gone era that perhaps warrants some of the sting being eased over time. The wounds have been reopened every few generations and there are people alive today who have been personally affected by them.

(24-01-2016 10:47 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  and why should Dawkins or anyone for that matter be delicate when criticizing any religion (especially when the events people get sensitive about happened 1000 years ago)?

To be clear, I think Dawkins should not have to go gentle on any one group of people. His views are his views, and he’s entitled to have them and spread them at will (I exercise my right to not purchase or read his book). While I’m of the opinion that Dawkins tends to go overboard with his characterizations, if he is indelicate with everyone else, he should be as equally indelicate with the Jews.

Rabbi Sacks didn’t need to comment on this at all. I generally take the position that we (all of us) need to have a thicker skin and be able to handle a little criticism with grace and decorum.

To Rabbi Sack’s point, though, if you’re going to hate our theology, at least hate it for what it actually is and not Christians tell you it is. –I think that’s the nuts and bolts of what the Rabbi was really trying to convey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aliza's post
24-01-2016, 02:27 PM
RE: Rabbi falsely calls Dawkins anti Semite.
(24-01-2016 06:28 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  No sorry Jews, this has nothing to do with wanting genocide of human beings in real life. I am sorry it bothers Jews that atheist go after your books of myth too. This is strictly a book review, like a bad movie or bad book. Nobody should want any group wiped out in real life, but you don't get to set up taboos to avoid criticism of bad claims.

The god character Yahweh is a tribal gang leader, no not the way humans want to view him, but a tribal leader because of the REAL life humans lived in BACK THEN, in tribal kingships, back then humans lived in very tribal groups and BACK THEN the tribe followed the king and loyalty was expected, BACK THEN.

On top of that Hebrews simply took a polytheistic lesser god of the Canaanites Yahweh, and took this polytheistic lesser god, under the head god EL who was head TOP GOD of the divine family, and took Yahweh and made him the only god.

This god was a warrior god, reflecting the tribal rivalries between REAL tribes back then. It is not that atheists say this out of hate of human rights, we say this as a criticism of taking ANY god claim literally as fact. ALL religions get upset needlessly in reality when you simply say "That is not the way it happened in reality". Just like when Muslims claim they will get 72 virgins, or when Christians claim a man can survive rigor mortis. We criticize ALL religions, and I find it sick that Jews out of all the religions in the world would forget what lack of questioning does.

Ann Frank would NOT be happy with some Jews considering the silence of criticism that lead German Christians to slaughter 6 million Jews. I do not think she would be happy with some Jews hiding behind the Holocaust to avoid criticism. "That is not true", or "Your character is not as nice as you'd like to paint him", is not the same as saying "get ride of everyone in real life". NO NO NO NO, and knock it off.

Jews don't get a pass anymore than they give Muslims on their claims, anymore than Christians should on their claims. NOBODY should call for the genocide of any group, but that does not give the book or the claims that people derive from them a pass.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion...h-God.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

" Yahweh is a warrior for his people, a storm-god typical of ancient Near Eastern myths"

In most of antiquity in polytheism also, it was a common flaw in human thought to attribute the success of conquest to the divine. You can find the idea of the divine intervening in human affairs in all of antiquity.

Is it wrong that this only wants to make me convert to Judaism even more? Hobo .... goddam Jews. Always spoiling shit and whatnot.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: