Just one last correction. Hebrew Scripture is a moral not literal history. The emphasis is on what is the lesson for how we should live not the objective chronicling of events (which is how "history" is defined today). I can share yet another example of this in Scripture in the events described in Judges (Chapter 11) concerning Jephthah and his daughter. Jephthah of Gilead told G-d if He gives him victory in battle, he would sacrifice the first thing he sees upon his return. The first thing he sees is his beloved daughter, and she is sacrificed to great lament. Now, Jewish Law is quite explicit that human sacrifice is expressly forbidden by G-d, and an "abomination" (e.g. Vayikrah [Lev.] 18:21). No one therefore mistook the parable as "history" nor "legend" of true events. It is a moral cautionary tale. First, Jews are not to treat with G-d like the idolators, making personal deals in return for one's worship. Second, breaking a vow (one's given word) has serious consequences and thus one should never make rash vows.
The same mistake should not be applied to the literal interpretation of the story of Exodus, nor to assuming one knows better than G-d.
Thus Scripture's relevance is greater to a Jew than mere "legend."
The plague upon the firstborn of Egypt. Surely, there were some innocent children who were killed by God. Surely, such an act is evil. That pretty much gets us back to where we were. Uru
Oh, that. I'm not sure I have much to add to my last post (reprinted below). We could look for additional views on how religious and ethical scholars discuss the accusation down the centuries,... more
That we see evidence of a thing does not make it right or good. That God is claimed to have done a thing does not make it right or good, either. I am sure that it was a great consolation to the... more
There are at least two points here, I can share. First, a Believer's definition of G-d per Scripture is that what He performs is "right and good." We may not perceive it at the time, or possibly... more
...unless it is chosen. This applies to God as much as it does to any of us. So acts are not good because God does them. God chooses to do acts that are objectively good according to an independent... more
As I said in my prior two posts, this is the essence of our disagreement. For me, in the final matter, "I am not G-d," and "G-d is the definition of Good and Just." Our foundations for understanding... more
This is the essence of our disagreement. For me, in the final matter, goodness must be freely chosen in order to have meaning. If every act of a being is used to define what goodness is, then... more
The older I've become, the more I've studied and learned, I've come to realize the less I know or could possibly. I've grown less self-assured and self-centered, I believe. I certainly thought I knew ... more
And before I note something more comprehensive, I want to point out that passion does not = Frank. Passion need not be burning. It simply reaches the core of who we are and helps define us. I think... more
There are always differences of perspective. And, of course, I too could say the same and urge you to similarly "consider it (the view from my perspective) a moment." I know your perspective, Hammer. ... more
1) The tale is legend, not literal history. Okay, I can definitely go there. But, that only has me pull back one step, because I think that if the idea is to learn lessons, you have to be aware of... more