Read Scripture: Genesis Ch. 1-11
The artwork in this storytelling is detailed 'crazy'! In a really good way"
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
DISCLAIMER: The purposes of this sharing is purely informational. We, do not care about your religious or irreligious standing in life. Also, these videos are free to you. - CB.
I find I could not decide which video is best for 'airing' today. Both accounts, while similar and created by The Bible Project Series, have nuanced differences. These are a telling of the Genesis story Chapter 1 -11. The 'attention to detail' is quite, quite amazing. I think you will agree!
The artwork in these productions are interesting, stimulating, and high quality (awesome) in my opinion. This version is enhanced with more Jewish "expression" by its end:
In addition, these videos are free to you. -CB
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
418 visitors
This is a new start to telling a really, old 'book.'
Raheet!
(Beginning!)
The word is בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית or In the beginning and pronounced Baraysheet. What you wrote is raysheet (phonetically)
From the Torah:
בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ:
In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
just fyi. That is the true Jewish version.
Thank you. This is what it s all about learning and sharing.
To be clear, I 'copied' the word from the closed caption version of the video (at 10 seconds). (I do not know Hebrew!)
However this is interesting in the Microsoft translator,
( Hebrew to English ): The sounds are as you stated respectively for each word.
ראש֖ית = בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית
I like the Mel Brooks version better.
These are your 15 (CRASH) 10 commandments, LOL!
Kind of.. The bet makes it "in". The translator messes up sometimes. You should see what it does in German.
Coincidentally, thank you for this perspective. It adds depth to the discussion!
Yeah, that was a good one. Classic
Department of Oops!
RASHEET
@2, when copying from "cc" (closed captioning) in the 2nd video above, I mangled a Hebrew word for Genesis ("Beginning"). I left out this letter "s."
Silly me! My apologies.
I think this production is tastefully illustrative, visually stimulating, and easy to understand. It deals with a protracted, old set of subject matter with grace and style. A+
It is, but it is still told from a Christian perspective. While Christians view part 1 and the link to part 2 as a link to Jesus, Jews view part 1 as literally the beginning of humans and their flaws and part 2 as the start of civilized man.
And this is captured in the 1st video "perfectly" around the five minutes mark! And, immediately spun out out from the 2nd video at opening. I am thrilled with this series opening vids!
NOTE: As a Christian believer, I see this emphasis placed on human flaws as different, new, and interesting. Certainly, the foreshadowing of Jesus (the Christ) is already well-established for generations in the churches.
For Jews, the second part is more about what sets up the covenant. The concept of the Messiah isn't there. But I previewed part 2 and we can discuss it there.
A question comes to me: Both perspectives flow from the text, no?
So far, yes, except for the concept of "original sin". There is no context for that in Judisim, because it is just not in the Torah. In fact, Jews believe that people are born sinless.
I understand and accept your statements on behalf of Judaism. I offer these statements below as partial and limited support for the doctrine of so-called, "original sin."
(DISCLAIMER: For educational purposes only. )
This area in blue (and red) is later referred to in the so-called, "New Testament" gospels in part as helping to build a foundation through scripture for a need for a Savior .
Matthew 26:
52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way? ”
55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. 56 But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled. ”
Luke 24:
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
John 5:
39 “ You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life ; it is these that testify about Me ; 40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
A 'sanctuary' for the good impulses of NewsTalkers.
PROFESSOR STEVEN T. KATZ
Department of Religion, Cornell University
Judaism, God and the Astronomers
THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS of the past three centuries have challenged the traditional world views of the major religions of mankind. The dialogue is best known through the interaction between Christian thought and science, as in the conflict between Galileo and the Papacy in the seventeenth century, and between Darwinism and nineteenth-century religious beliefs in the biblical account of creation. But modern science poses profound questions for Judaism as well.
Basic to the discussion of Judaism and scientific cosmology is the fact that in the Jewish religion “the deed is the essential thing.” Hence, the greatest intellectual efforts of the Jewish tradition have been spent on understanding and clarifying the Torah to extract from it rules of behavior, both “duties of the body” and “duties of the heart.” As a consequence, Judaism is more an orthopraxis, or religion emphasizing correct behavior, both inner and outer, than an orthodoxy, or religion emphasizing correct beliefs. Doctrines and beliefs are indeed integral to Judaism, e.g., belief in a strict monotheism, or belief in the divinely revealed origin of the Torah, but their role in Jewish religious thought, although central, is limited.
As a consequence, Judaism permits considerable freedom in the realm of ideas. Thus, for example, allowing for what Genesis tells us, Judaism is open to many interpretations and differences of opinion on just what Genesis means. Indeed, it is probably true to say that there is no one correct Jewish answer to such questions as the “how” of Creation.
Certainly some opinions are incompatible with Judaism, and majority and minority views exist within the traditional sources, e.g., the Mishna, the Gemara, the medieval and modern commentaries and codes, but no systematic attempt has been made over the centuries to define an orthodox cosmology to which every Jew must subscribe, beyond the affirmation that the world was brought into being “somehow” by God.
Another fact to be borne in mind is that Judaism is not a fundamentalist religion,- Jewish religious tradition does not propose to be carrying out the word of od as revealed in the Bible, without human interpretation. The basic assumption of rabbinic Judaism is that while the Torah is the literal revelation of God to Moses at Sinai, and eternally valid for all generations, it requires interpretation (Deut. 17:11). It is made explicit by the Sages of the Talmud that the Torah provides broad and general regulations, while the process of extracting the full significance of these prescriptions, with all relevant details and corollaries, is left to human reason guided by tradition.
For example, the Torah speaks of marriage, but does not specify what constitutes marriage; or again, it forbids “work” on the Sabbath, but fails to specify what constitutes work. Is lighting a lamp work? Is cooking work? If Israel were to have legitimate marriages and refrain from desecration of the Sabbath, it had to “interpret” the implications of these Divine Commands. Thus within agreed limits, and using agreed procedures, mankind is free, and even encouraged from necessity, to search out the meaning of Torah.
Through the historic desire of countless generations of the Jewish people to be guided by the Torah, this process of interpretation was constantly called into play to renew continually the significance of God's revelation in the midst of new or changing circumstances. This process of explication and exegesis is known in Judaism as the Oral Torah (Torah she be-al Pe) and is the legitimate, as well as necessary, companion of the Written Torah (Torah she-bichtav).
The interpretation of the Written Torah is a complex matter of the most fundamental religious significance. Hence, rules of biblical interpretation, as well as more general theological-hermeneutical principles, needed to be agreed upon by the Sages, for without common rules of procedure there could be no agreed interpretations of Scripture, and thus no valid substantive conclusions. As a consequence, in this fundamental sense Judaism is a “method” as well as a set of teachings and laws.
The significance of this theory of the necessity of biblical interpretation for the encounter of scientific claims and Judaism is that it legitimates interpretative moves that might lessen any tension existing between Scripture and science by, for example, reading certain passages of Scripture allegorically or metaphorically. Thus, Maimonides, the greatest of medieval Jewish thinkers, felt free to write regarding the understanding of the secrets of creation (Maaseh Bereshit) that they have “been treated (in Genesis) in metaphors, in order that the uneducated may comprehend it according to the measure of their faculties and the feebleness of their comprehension,- while the educated take it in a different [i.e., allegorical or nonliteral] sense”. Maimonides' remarks provide the appropriate introduction to Judaic discussion of the specifics of the new cosmology in relation to Jewish thought.
Source: God and the Astronomers 2nd, Edition, Robert Jastrow, 1992. Pp. 125-128.
RePOSTED
PROFESSOR STEVEN T. KATZ
Department of Religion, Cornell University
Judaism, God and the Astronomers
(Continued from above.)
CREATION
Cosmologists have debated the “Big Bang” theory of cosmic origin versus the steady theory of an eternal Universe for half a century. Now the matter appears to be settled to the satisfaction of the majority of astronomers in favor of the Big Bang, a scientific version of the Creation. But then one asks, did the Creation occur ex nihilo, out of nothing, or was our Universe formed out of pre-existing matter?
My understanding of the scientific debate is that astronomers have foresworn any opinion on this question. In Jewish thought, as in Christian thought, the majority of traditional authorities reject such arguments as those of Aristotle for the eternal existence of matter in favor of creation ex nihilo. The Midrash on Genesis (1:9) records the following encounter:
A certain philosopher asked R. Gamaliel, saying to him: “Your God was indeed a great artist, but surely He found good materials which assisted Him?” “What are they?” said R. Gamaliel—to him. “Tohu, bohu (darkness, water), ruah (wind), and tehom (the deep),” replied the philosopher. “Woe to that man,” R. Gameliel-exclaimed. “The term creation' is used by Scripture in connection with all of them, “—i.e., they are all created by God and are not coeternal with Him-.- Tohu and bohu: “I make peace and create evil” (Isa. 45: 7], darkness: I form the light, and create darkness (ib.); water: Praise Him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that are above the heavens (Ps. 148:4); For He commanded, and they were created (ib. S); wind: For, lo, He that formeth mountains, and createth wind (Amos 4 A 3); the depths-. When there were no depths, 1 was brought forth (Prov. 8:24).
Here Aristotle's view of the eternity of matter is rejected by the Sages of the Talmudic era in favor of creation, and specifically creation exnihilo. Still again in the medieval era, Maimonides, in the Guide for the Perplexed, gives both a paradigmatic Jewish statement on the matter, and teaches a fundamental methodological lesson regarding the encounter of science and Judaism. “In my opinion,” he writes,
none of what, Aristotle and his followers adduce in support of the worlds eternity is a conclusive demonstration. Rather there are grave doubts surrounding their proofs, as you shall shortly hear. What I hope to establish is that the worlds coming into being, the doctrine of our Law, which I have explained, is not impossible, and that all the Philosophers' arguments to the effect can be refuted . . . If I can accomplish this and show that both creation and eternity are possible, then it will be possible, I believe, with the cfuestion reopened, to receive an answer from revelation, which makes clear things which thinking alone has not the power to reach.... Once I have made it clear that what we believe is possible, I shall undertake to show that it is the most probable of the contending views as well, using arguments based on reason.- i.e., I shall endeavor to show the preferability of the doctrine of the worlds creation,- I shall show that even more embarrassing consequences follow from the doctrine of the world ‘s eternity.
In other words, when the answer is not determined by scientific evidence, the Jew chooses the biblical over the nonbiblical position because of the further authority of Scripture. Conversely, the implications of Maimonides' argument are clear: had Aristotle been indubitably correct, he would have accepted Aristotle's metaphysics and interpreted Genesis accordingly. The Jewish response in favor of creation ex nihilo is buttressed by a compelling and independent philosophical argument, which is also employed by the advocates of the Big Bang cosmology. The argument is simple to state: whatever conditions govern the processes of the existing world, these conditions need not apply either to a pre-creation reality, i.e., God in His pristine wisdom and Estate, or to the instant fact of creation itself. For God creates the world, and the laws of nature which govern therein, without being Himself bound by these laws.
In this sense Judaism and the astronomers move to somewhat parallel positions, namely, that the circumstances operative in the instant of creation cannot be deduced from later events. From the scientific point of view one speaks of the meltdown, in the intense heat of the “Big Bang,” of all the evidence bearing on the cause of the explosion. Hence, the scientific account precludes all possibility of reconstituting the pre-creation state and limits scientific investigation to the post-creation reality. From the Jewish point of view one speaks of God as Creator of nature, not nature's servant, hence free of its causal and physical determinants. For both, the Creation is a unique event whose character transcends the application of physical theories and laws valid in the created world. From Bereshit Rabbah (1:10):
Bar Kappara quoted [the biblical verse:] “For ask now of the days past which were before these, since the day that God created man upon the earth. (Deut. 4:32)”. [and commented thereon] you may speculate from the day that days were created, but you may not speculate on what was before that.
So it must be, for the notion of creation does not properly belong to the scientific vocabulary, which deals in causal connections and is premised on the assumption that causality operates everywhere and over everything. Whether or not the Big Bang cosmology complements or parallels the Genesis account, it does reinforce an overriding consideration: to talk of creation is to point to another category of reality, requiring at least an openness to other than narrowly scientific questions, and even more important, an openness to other than narrowly positivistic answers.
Source: God and the Astronomers 2nd, Edition, Robert Jastrow, 1992. Pp. 129-133 (Top of page).