It all traces back to the Talmud, which is a much more recent creation than Christianity and has nothing whatsoever to do with the old or new testament.
It’s easier to consider it like church doctrine, writ very, very large.
The same way the Methodist church is currently promoting LGBTP wamen pastors of color, and the Episcopalian church is aiding and abetting an invasion, they’re both doing so based off doctrine, and not scripture.
Just like these church doctrines, there are parts of the Talmud that are not off-base - merely context and historic records, and there are other parts that are horrific.
All teachings must be weighed against scripture, which a lot of Talmudists, and increasingly, Christian denominations, do not do very regularly.
Reasonable take but the Talmud is worse that what you're saying. Jesus said the Pharisees were the children of the devil. Those pharisee and their students are responsible for the Talmud. The Talmud is the work of the children of Satan. It's full of lies and deception.
No, I noted that there are portions of the Talmud that are “horrifically” bad, and portions that are indeed reasonable commentary and historic notes, which is also true.
If you like, I’ll add that there are probably sections that are incorrect, but not as bad.
We have now covered all three cases.
I do not believe the books are generally worth knowing except as a means of showing errancy or perhaps occasionally looking up a historical context, and I have other things to do with my time. There’s too much to learn about the Bible itself. Doesn’t mean I’m not going to try and be objective.
It all traces back to the Talmud, which is a much more recent creation than Christianity and has nothing whatsoever to do with the old or new testament.
It’s easier to consider it like church doctrine, writ very, very large.
The same way the Methodist church is currently promoting LGBTP wamen pastors of color, and the Episcopalian church is aiding and abetting an invasion, they’re both doing so based off doctrine, and not scripture.
Just like these church doctrines, there are parts of the Talmud that are not off-base - merely context and historic records, and there are other parts that are horrific.
All teachings must be weighed against scripture, which a lot of Talmudists, and increasingly, Christian denominations, do not do very regularly.
Reasonable take but the Talmud is worse that what you're saying. Jesus said the Pharisees were the children of the devil. Those pharisee and their students are responsible for the Talmud. The Talmud is the work of the children of Satan. It's full of lies and deception.
No, I noted that there are portions of the Talmud that are “horrifically” bad, and portions that are indeed reasonable commentary and historic notes, which is also true.
If you like, I’ll add that there are probably sections that are incorrect, but not as bad.
We have now covered all three cases.
I do not believe the books are generally worth knowing except as a means of showing errancy or perhaps occasionally looking up a historical context, and I have other things to do with my time. There’s too much to learn about the Bible itself. Doesn’t mean I’m not going to try and be objective.