If a book is considered divine, is in the eyes of its reader.
Even if I consider it devine not only of its message and spirit, but also litterally word by word, I must admit that it's given and written in the language of human beings, under the will to be understood by the people.

And also if G-d doesn't maybe change, the people do.
So how come a normal person shouldn't think about what he is reading, also by feeling that the written word is of G-d?

Why shouldn't G-d be willing and able to make an analphabet his Prophet and to make the pharao speaking to Haman, if Moses wasn't really able to understand a thing sitting in Rabbi Akiva's class, not even realizing that he had already understood?

Why do some Jews write "G-d" instead of "God"?

ANSWER BY:
Rabbi Victor S. Appell

Writing "G-d" instead of God is a fairly recent custom in America. Many believe this to be a sign of respect, and the custom comes from an interpretation of the commandment in Deuteronomy 12:3-4 regarding the destruction of pagan altars. According to the the medieval commentator, Rashi, we should not erase or destroy God’s name and should avoid writing it. In a Responsa (legal opinion) by the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the primary prohibition against erasure of the name God applies to the sacred names in a written text of Torah. With the advent of computers and the internet, rabbinic authorities have debated whether or not this applies to what is typed on a computer or read on a screen. Most have concurred that it does not apply. The bulk of Jewish legal opinion agrees that the law applies only to the written name of God when written in Hebrew and not when written in other languages. Reform Jewish practice reflects this opinion. Some Jews will avoid discarding paper or books in which God’s name appears in Hebrew. Rather than being thrown out or destroyed, they may be stored in a genizah (a storage place) and buried in a Jewish cemetery.

Source

I thought it was a kind of familiar, sloppy kind of greeting, you know like if you meet Jesus after the rapture..: "Hey JC how´s it hanging bro?" and he says: "Not cool dude, GD, my father in heaven, is pissed with you guys"

Something like that.

But seriously, I´d be in the market for a new deity instead of going to all that trouble.

Akin to Christians insisting that God should be address as "thee" as a sign of respect. Of course, all Yorkshire folk know that it isn't, as in "don't thee thou my, thee thou thyself and see how thee likes it". Because "thee" is the equivalent of German "du" and French "tu".

So the song based on Psalm 42, which I learned as a young lad:

As the deer pants for the water
So my soul longs after you
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship you

You alone are my strength, my shield
To you alone will my spirit yield
You alone are my hearts desire
And I long to worship you

Has been transformed into this monstrosity by some pious git.

As the deer panteth for the water
So my soul longeth after thee
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship thee

You alone are my strength, my shield
To you alone may my spirit yield
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship thee

It's not even grammatically correct!

__________________
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

I thought it was getting pretty hot and heavy until the whole 'worship' part

Just like any and every other religious text then? No point picking holes in any of them, unless, like any self-respecting atheist, you regard them all with equal disbelief.

In other words, an adherent of any faith-based, holy-book derived, religion has absolutely no business taking issue with any other. Now that would really be hypocritical.

Seems to be a sensitive issue to you. I did not mean to offend anyone. It's the truth, which can hurt. Please check it.

Eh? I don't know what you were reading, but I'm sure it can't be what I posted.

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

And to be honest, I care even less.

As Ace1 mentioned, its a nonsense to try and disprove one holy book using another holy book. What you need is a third party account, someone like a Roman tax collector

True, I read somewhere that according to Roman tax assessors or "publicanus" the history of the bible and the torah are in serious need of an editor.

effodit internet: During the time of Jesus in first century Israel, there were publicans and tax collectors who could walk up to a man and tax him for what he was carrying, and much more. These tax collectors were hated and despised because they were usually fellow Jews who worked for Rome. There were many taxes needed from the provinces to administrate the Roman Empire. These taxes paid for a good system of roads, law and order, security, religious freedom, a certain amount of self government and other benefits.

Publicanus, pub, publican, wow now I understand...

__________________
Lummerland
Eine Insel mit zwei Bergen,
und im tiefen weiten Meer,
mit viel Tunnels und Geleisen
und dem Eisenbahnverkehr
nun wie mag die Insel heißen
ringsherum ist schöner Strand
jeder sollte einmal reisen
in das schöne Lummerland

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2...f-irving.html/

Can't help but love Texas sometimes.

This logic reminds me too much of he-who-must-not-be-named

Pathetic; what a bunch of unfocussed losers.
No doubt their hearts were in the right place but I have no clue where their brains were living!

Well you all know the Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same "Ibrahamic" God.


Each of these religions have their own holy book which are in each case described in some way as the "word of this "Ibrahimic" God". These books have some similarities but more differences.


So did God change his "Word" for each religion with the objective of confusing everyone and starting conflicts?


Or is it all a fantasy?

True, but incapable of proof reading the result

About "What exactly is a "muslim embassy"? Presumably they're somewhat different to Christian embassies" Male circumcision has a lot to answer for

Can't be a fantasy. There has to be a Divine Book given by G-d which is without any mistake whatsoever, otherwise who would believe what's written in it ? The question is which one is divine ?


First let me say this, look at the brilliance of the creation. With its galaxies, two million species animals. The human brain with its trillions of connections,all in the size of an apple. Multiply by seven billion people, going back generations. You cannot claim that a watch was created by itself, obviously it was created by someone, as the chair was created by a carpenter. Now every creation has a purpose, it can't that it was created for no reason. So what is the purpose of the creation ?


Islam - I wrote about it in an earlier post. Cannot be divine, as it has major mistakes.
Christianity - created 2000 years ago. 70 years (some say 300 years) after the death of Jesus. also cannot be divine, it has many mistakes.
1. The New Testament mentions the burial place of Abraham in Schem (Nablus) whereas the Old Testament says it is in the City of Chevron.
It is still today. There are more mistakes which I can add on if you're interested.


Both Islam and Christianity acknowledge that G-d gave the divine Old Testament to the Jews. They then claim that because the Jews betrayed G-d they received a new Version the Koran and the New Testament.


All the answers to your question can only be found in the divine Book which was given 3300 years ago on Mount Sinai in front of millions of Hebrews.

Photo or it didn't happen!

@treverus. I get your meaning and of course there is truth in what you say, but with all due respect, sharia is on an entirely different level when it comes to regulating adherents' religious duties and obligations. It is an entire body of law governing everything from the minutiae of family life, to sophisticated financial transactions, to Islam's laws of war. Your comment serves as an excellent example of how westerners erroneously equate Islam with Christianity. There are stark differences that should be better understood by all of us.

When I served as an Islamic law research assistant in law school, I was struck by how brilliant prominent Islamic scholars were - on par with those of the Renaissance in their intellectual abilities. However, whilst the great minds of the Renaissance generally applied their intelligence to advancing mankind and liberating it from dogma, the Islamic scholars were sadly dedicated to achieving the exact opposite. It was a view into an alternate history of what things would be like if all of the Renaissance's great minds had been on "the other side of history".

I hope you do consider Ibn Rushd (Averroes)* as the exception...it's actually after his dismissal obtained by the radical scholars that the muslim empire in Andalus collapsed and signaled the end of the hegemony.

*Averroes is often described as the founder of the "secular thought in western europe".