[Roosh]

I started reading the Old Testament (KJV primarily) and thought I'd get a thread going for some questions and observations.

One comment is on Abraham and how willing he is to "lie" about his wife being his sister and pass her on to different rulers just to save his own skin. Why would god reward this?

[kbell]

It sounds like Sarai was so pretty he didn't want to be killed by Pharoah, so he could take his wife. Somehow Pharoah found out and sent Abraham out of Egypt for this.

https://ajewishvoice.wordpress.com/2012/...ter-sarah/

And for those not wanting to link.

Quote:

Abraham in Egypt:



This part happens shortly after Abraham enters Canaan, caused by famine in the land. It is before he receives the name Abraham, being Abram, and his wife still being called Sarai.

When entering Egypt, Abraham said to Sarah that if the Egyptians would know that she was his wife, then they would probably kill him for her beauty, so in order to prevent that they should say that she was his sister. Indeed, the Egyptians did become astonished by her beauty, and the “princes of Egypt” related or her beauty to Pharaoh himself, who called for her to be brought to his house[1]. Abraham was dealt well with for her sake, and given many belongings, all being mentioned as being animals or servants. This didn’t sit well with G-D though, who plagued Pharaoh and his house, who after that called for Abraham and complained of his lie. Somehow Pharaoh found out that Sarah was his wife, how we are not told. Abraham is not allowed to defend himself though, being given Sarah back and then ordered to leave Egypt, escorted by Pharaoh’s men.

The text is told in ten verses, having six parts, as far as I can see, namely a) the background for leaving Canaan for Egypt (verse 10), b) the convincing Sarah to say that she is Abraham’s wife (verses 11-13), c) the Egyptians seeing her beauty, relating it to Pharaoh, who then takes her to his house, and dealing well with Abraham (verses 14-16), d) G-D plaguing Pharaoh (verse 17), e) Pharaoh confronting Abraham (verses 18-19), and f) Abraham being escorted out of Egypt.

The parts should have the following titles:

a) Leaving for Egypt.

b) Convincing Sarah.

c) Pharaoh taking Sarah.

d) G-D plaguing Pharaoh.

e) Pharaoh confronting Abraham.

f) Abraham leaving Egypt.

I believe to really understand the Torah you need to study the oral Law as well which is called Mishna. And that is about 800 pages...

[MMM]

The Old Testament is wild. War, rape, incest and murder. It should come with a trigger warning.

[seneca]

Ecclesiastes is one of my all-time favorite works of literature; I recommend it to theist and atheist friends alike. The prose is so powerful it's hard not to believe that the words came from another plane; from 'above the sun,' as Solomon might say....

[h3ltrsk3ltr]

I think that god is ok with the end justifying the means a lot. Also, while god apparently says that every sin is equal, there's a lot of times where he says it's ok to murder, lie...and I'm fairly certain he's granted more than one pussy pass.

Christians like to say you can't take these little inconsistencies into account because "it's not enough to read just one passage, you have to read ALL of it." I've literally heard that at least 100 times in my life. But how many Christians have actually read and comprehended the whole thing? I'd be surprised if it was half.

[Truth Teller]

First, get rid of the KJV and get a better translation. The best commonly available one is the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version). There are other good ones, but they're either a) expensive or b) difficult to find.

Let me preface my answer to Roosh's question by saying that I don't know a ton about the OT. I know far more about the NT, but that's mainly because I've studied it more. Abraham knows that he'll be killed if Pharaoh finds out that Sarah is his wife. He also knows that the Egyptians will trade far better with him if he tells them that Sarah is his sister. It doesn't seem like God really rewards him for this- God rewards Abraham for other reasons.

On another level, this passage relates rather well to form criticism. It seems as though the whole pericope of Abram (Abraham) and Sarah in Egypt relates very well to the later Exodus, where the Egyptians are again afflicted with plagues.

[N°6]

(05-20-2015 10:46 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

I started reading the Old Testament (KJV primarily) and thought I'd get a thread going for some questions and observations.

One comment is on Abraham and how willing he is to "lie" about his wife being his sister and pass her on to different rulers just to save his own skin. Why would god reward this?

I'd recommend reading the KJV Old Testament along with Alexander Scourby's narration. You'll get through the OT very quickly this way.

Abraham was not rewarded for his lie (he actually repeated this lie with another king later on in Genesis).

This is where his reward came from:

Genesis 15:6 Wrote:

And he [Abram] believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Righteousness is a covenant term. It means 'right standing' and the person who is right standing has qualified to benefit from the covenant - it is his right. It was Abraham's faith that gave him this right standing when he believed that God would provide the sacrifice and that he wouldn't have to sacrifice Isaac.

If you learn one thing from the OT (which sets up the New Testament) is that it is a blood covenant book. Men used to know the dire obligations of the blood covenant. If you don't understand blood covenant, you'll never understand the Bible. The other word for covenant is testament. A will and testament only comes into force through someone's death.

[billbudsocket]

The Authorized 1611 KJV is the best, most accurate translation.

Regarding lying, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any prohibition on lying in the Old Testament. You can look up the story of Rahab and the spies to see an example of someone being rewarding for lying in order to do the right thing.

The Bible is very red pill. Read Isaiah 3:16-24 describe the stupid shit attention whoring woman were into back then. Also, the Bible is very clear that Eve is the one who sinned first, not Adam, (1 Titus 2:14) - You will never see a pastor acknowledge this.

[Atlantic]

Best part of the old Testament is King David:

-Scouted as the next King by the profit Samuel. Chosen from his 8 brothers
-Single handily had killed a lion and a bear from his days as a Sheppard
- Worked his way into royal court by being an excellent musician. Became personal musician and armor-bearer to the King.
- Was sent to bring supplies to his brothers in the army while they faced off the Philistines. Accepts the challenge of Goliath (a giant from the other army) to single handed combat. Slays him with a stone from a sling and cuts off his head. Other army flees. Becomes local legend.
-King makes him a commander. Says he can marry his daughter if he cuts off 100 enemy dicks. He comes back with 200.
- Becomes too popular and King tries to have him killed in battle. He doesn't and becomes even more popular from succeeding in battle.
- Forced into hiding a leads a band of warriors who each have an impressive reputation in battle and combat.
- Starts a rebellion
-King is killed in battle and David is made the new king
-Massively expands the empire
-Steals a mans wife and has him sent to the battle front to die
-And much more...

[Rutting Elephant]

Shocker: the original story had Abraham actually killing Isaac, but post-human-sacrifice rewrites clumsily fixed it. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromot...led-isaac/

[philosophical_recovery]

Count me in, although I'm on my 4th or so try reading the new testament, not the old. Luke is where I actually started to enjoy it. I didn't like the sections before then.

[billbudsocket]

(05-20-2015 12:56 PM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

I think that god is ok with the end justifying the means a lot. Also, while god apparently says that every sin is equal, there's a lot of times where he says it's ok to murder, lie...and I'm fairly certain he's granted more than one pussy pass.

Christians like to say you can't take these little inconsistencies into account because "it's not enough to read just one passage, you have to read ALL of it." I've literally heard that at least 100 times in my life. But how many Christians have actually read and comprehended the whole thing? I'd be surprised if it was half.

Could you post some examples here? Where does it say that every sin is equal?

[alexdagr81]

(05-20-2015 03:39 PM)Rutting Elephant Wrote:  

Shocker: the original story had Abraham actually killing Isaac, but post-human-sacrifice rewrites clumsily fixed it. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromot...led-isaac/

That theory uses the documentary hypothesis as its premise. A hypothesis that has more holes in it than believing it was written by one author. For instance when pointed out that the "E" author also uses the words "Jahveh/Jehovah/Yahweh", believers in this had to move the goalposts.

[h3ltrsk3ltr]

(05-20-2015 05:41 PM)billbudsocket Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 12:56 PM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

I think that god is ok with the end justifying the means a lot. Also, while god apparently says that every sin is equal, there's a lot of times where he says it's ok to murder, lie...and I'm fairly certain he's granted more than one pussy pass.

Christians like to say you can't take these little inconsistencies into account because "it's not enough to read just one passage, you have to read ALL of it." I've literally heard that at least 100 times in my life. But how many Christians have actually read and comprehended the whole thing? I'd be surprised if it was half.

Could you post some examples here? Where does it say that every sin is equal?

"Theologians have sought for centuries to determine what the essence of sin is. Some have chosen sensuality, others selfishness, and still others pride or unbelief. In the Old Testament, God applied different penalties to different sins, suggesting variations in the seriousness of some sins. A thief paid restitution; an occult practitioner was cut off from Israel; one who committed adultery or a homosexual act or cursed his parents was put to death (see Exodus, chapter 22 and Leviticus, chapter 20)."

“For the wages of sin is death …” (Romans 6:23), applies to all sin, whether in thought, word, or deed.

http://billygraham.org/story/billy-graha...gods-eyes/

Apparently, since god gets to be the ultimate decider, he isn't bound by rules and consistencies, one of the things in my mind that really makes him a true god (in the sense of mythical god-like-ness).

In the end, god get's to change the rules to suit his purpose. His end justifies the means. I'm being a little lazy by not finding more evidence to fit my point but even if I were to cite everything, this discussion of the morality of what is in the bible lends itself to a discussion where people will only argue for what they've already determined to be the truth. Because of this, I think the best answer to OP's question is to treat the bible in the same way we might treat the Star Wars world. We can discuss its significance and meaning and even its relation to "reality" within the confines of science fiction.

That's not to say the bible is fiction. Regardless of what I believe, studying one of the oldest and most significant pieces of literature is bound to bring about a benefit of one kind or another to the student.

In regard to Roosh's question about god rewarding his "bad" act for a selfish reason, I'm going with the idea that god just liked Abraham enough to allow it. Abraham was useful to god in such a way that letting this happen worked within the "Master Plan"...or something like that.

[lskdfjldsf]

Quote:

Ecclesiastes is one of my all-time favorite works of literature; I recommend it to theist and atheist friends alike. The prose is so powerful it's hard not to believe that the words came from another plane; from 'above the sun,' as Solomon might say....

I can read it a thousand times, never gets old. The entire human experience in one piece of text.

@Roosh, I'd start there and with the NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...sion=NIV). It's a book unlike anything you'd come to expect in the Bible (let alone the Old Testament) and will make some of the stories you're reading less consuming when you know what's moving the pieces. To a new reader, the Old Testament can sometimes seem like a Game of Thrones episode with many characters, family lines, and alternating plots that only fully make sense with a bit of faith. If you want to examine the Bible as something more than a just a piece of literature (find meaning, answer the big questions, etc.) Ecclesiastes is a good place to start.

Quote:

I said to myself, “Look, I have increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge.” Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind.

For with much wisdom comes much sorrow;
the more knowledge, the more grief.

I said to myself, “Come now, I will test you with pleasure to find out what is good.” But that also proved to be meaningless. “Laughter,” I said, “is madness. And what does pleasure accomplish?” I tried cheering myself with wine, and embracing folly—my mind still guiding me with wisdom. I wanted to see what was good for people to do under the heavens during the few days of their lives.

[Truth Teller]

(05-20-2015 05:45 PM)alexdagr81 Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 03:39 PM)Rutting Elephant Wrote:  

Shocker: the original story had Abraham actually killing Isaac, but post-human-sacrifice rewrites clumsily fixed it. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromot...led-isaac/

That theory uses the documentary hypothesis as its premise. A hypothesis that has more holes in it than believing it was written by one author. For instance when pointed out that the "E" author also uses the words "Jahveh/Jehovah/Yahweh", believers in this had to move the goalposts.

The documentary hypothesis, in Wellenhausen's original form, has significant problems. A modified hypothesis, where J/E are two traditions that come together very early (1000 BC or earlier) makes a lot of sense. I'm fairly convinced that the E source doesn't exist as its own, independent source. Or, if it does, it's almost impossible to differentiate it from the J source.

[Truth Teller]

(05-20-2015 02:55 PM)billbudsocket Wrote:  

The Authorized 1611 KJV is the best, most accurate translation.

Regarding lying, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any prohibition on lying in the Old Testament. You can look up the story of Rahab and the spies to see an example of someone being rewarding for lying in order to do the right thing.

The Bible is very red pill. Read Isaiah 3:16-24 describe the stupid shit attention whoring woman were into back then. Also, the Bible is very clear that Eve is the one who sinned first, not Adam, (1 Titus 2:14) - You will never see a pastor acknowledge this.

The KJV is a mediocre translation at best. Yes, the Bible is extremely red pill, but interesting that you choose Titus to show original sin. Romans is more often used to cite it, and Timothy actually says that a woman is not to lord over a man.

Prohibition on lying in the OT? Exodus 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."

The 10 commandments also appear again in Deuteronomy.

If people are really interested, I wouldn't mind opening a thread describing the origins of the OT and talking about the more pedantic points of it (the Documentary Hypothesis, dating, reliability, etc.).

[memcpy]

If you want the real meaning then you need to look at the Hebrew and Greek translations, since that was the original language it was written in. Lot's of shit is completely different when the real translation is understood.

Example-
"Hell" or "Sheol" in Hebrew Manuscripts of the Old Testament, occurs 65 times, and means "the place of the dead" or "pit."

"Gehenna" a Greek word, has been mistranslated as meaning "hell" when it refers to the city dump that was kept alight to burn all the city rubbish.

[billbudsocket]

(05-20-2015 08:53 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(05-20-2015 02:55 PM)billbudsocket Wrote:  

The Authorized 1611 KJV is the best, most accurate translation.

Regarding lying, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any prohibition on lying in the Old Testament. You can look up the story of Rahab and the spies to see an example of someone being rewarding for lying in order to do the right thing.

The Bible is very red pill. Read Isaiah 3:16-24 describe the stupid shit attention whoring woman were into back then. Also, the Bible is very clear that Eve is the one who sinned first, not Adam, (1 Titus 2:14) - You will never see a pastor acknowledge this.

The KJV is a mediocre translation at best. Yes, the Bible is extremely red pill, but interesting that you choose Titus to show original sin. Romans is more often used to cite it, and Timothy actually says that a woman is not to lord over a man.

Prohibition on lying in the OT? Exodus 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."

The 10 commandments also appear again in Deuteronomy.

If people are really interested, I wouldn't mind opening a thread describing the origins of the OT and talking about the more pedantic points of it (the Documentary Hypothesis, dating, reliability, etc.).

"Bearing false witness" is making false accusations, like a false rape accusation for example.

[RawGod]

I second those who recommend a modern translation over the KJV. Coming to it for the first time and trying to get a sense of what it's all about, there's no need to add the layer of archaic English to it. The Hebrew writers weren't trying to sound all old-timey, so it gives a false impression.

I like parts of the wisdom books - Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and the book of Job. Timeless stuff. Some of the historical books are entertaining, and the rest of the OT is just the ramblings of the priestly class of a barbaric tribe.

[TheWastelander]

You should use the KJV version but look up a verse on biblehub if you have questions about it. It'll display the same verse from several different bibles as well as commentaries. It's very handy.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-1.htm

Unfortunately modern versions like the NIV have changed some verses to the point of ruining the meaning entirely. For instance, the stuff Jesus says about divorce in the New Testament was stripped of its proper meaning in the NIV and modern versions.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...on=NIV;KJV

From the link above, Matthew 19:9:

NIV

Quote:

9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

KJV

Quote:

9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

In the NIV it says "sexual immorality." This can mean anything and is often used by feminized Churchians as justification to allow a wife to divorce her husband over stupid shit like him looking at pornography. Nevermind the fact that nowhere in the Bible is there an example of a woman divorcing a man. It was unthinkable and probably never allowed.

In the KJV it uses "fornication" which was sex before marriage. Adultery is an extramarital affair. So basically in that society at that time, for a Christian, divorce was only allowed if your wife lied about being a virgin before your marriage. This was identical to what Moses allowed in the Old Testament. A woman who lied about being a virgin at marriage in the Old Testament could be stoned to death. Of course, if the man falsely accused her of being a sloot he had to pay her parents a certain amount of money.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

It's all pretty interesting. But yeah, in the end it's just best to look at multiple sources if you ever wonder what the hell it's trying to say.

As far as reading the Old Testament's concerned, it can become pretty tedious in parts. I suggest just reading four or five chapters a day and maybe skipping around. The lineage stuff is boring and all the laws, regulations, and specifications Moses lays down for the Jewish people get too in detail for me. I never really cared how long a pole in the tabernacle should be. You're not quite there yet, though.

[SunW]

(05-20-2015 10:46 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

I started reading the Old Testament (KJV primarily) and thought I'd get a thread going for some questions and observations.

One comment is on Abraham and how willing he is to "lie" about his wife being his sister and pass her on to different rulers just to save his own skin. Why would god reward this?

It's been a while since I read the Bible, but I've read it a few times, so here's an answer based on what I recall:

Sarah is Abraham's sister, partially. I think Genesis 19 or 20 confirms this when Abraham tells another individual that Sarah is his sister, being the offspring of the same dad. I may be wrong, but I don't recall the story you're talking about actually stating that Abraham lied, just that he suggested to Sarah that she emphasize that she was his sister (which was true).

Pharaoh also sent Abraham and Sarah away in the end, which caused Abraham to miss the opportunity for protection from famine (which was why he was in Egypt), so he was punished for the way he treated Pharaoh.

[Socrates]

Info on Sarah

Excerpt about the incident w/ Pharoah:

Quote:

Though advanced in years, Sarah was very beautiful in appearance. Therefore, Abraham had earlier requested that, whenever necessary in the course of their travels, Sarah identify him as her brother, lest others kill him and then take her. (Ge 20:13) In Egypt this resulted in Sarah’s being taken into the household of Pharaoh on the recommendation of his princes. But divine intervention prevented Pharaoh from violating her. Thereafter he returned Sarah to Abraham, requesting that they leave the land. He also provided safe conduct for Abraham and his possessions.—Ge 12:11-20.

It is noteworthy that an ancient papyrus tells of a Pharaoh who commissioned armed men to seize an attractive woman and kill her husband. Thus Abraham’s fear that he might be killed on account of Sarah was not unfounded. Instead of endangering his life in an unsuccessful attempt to save the honor of his wife in an alien land, Abraham followed what appeared to him to be the safest course. It should be remembered that Abraham was the owner of his wife. Sarah was happy to serve Jehovah and Abraham in this way. Never do the Scriptures censure Abraham for having done this.

[billbudsocket]

(05-21-2015 10:31 AM)SunW Wrote:  

It's been a while since I read the Bible, but I've read it a few times, so here's an answer based on what I recall:

Sarah is Abraham's sister, partially. I think Genesis 19 or 20 confirms this when Abraham tells another individual that Sarah is his sister, being the offspring of the same dad. I may be wrong, but I don't recall the story you're talking about actually stating that Abraham lied, just that he suggested to Sarah that she emphasize that she was his sister (which was true).

Pharaoh also sent Abraham and Sarah away in the end, which caused Abraham to miss the opportunity for protection from famine (which was why he was in Egypt), so he was punished for the way he treated Pharaoh.

They were not siblings. The genealogy from Adam to Abraham and his family is listed in Genesis 11.

[heavy]

My dad was a preacher. I've read the bible completely (not bragging, just saying back in the day I was a nerdy thumper).

I second what another post said...get an updated version. My dad, a biblical scholar, says NASB (New American Standard Bible) is the most accurate (I've heard him discuss the reasons why on far too many occasions).

The question is what makes the most sense of the original Hebrew to our ears with American English. It's not just what's easy to read, it's what translates most accurately to our language...and KJV and NKJV simply don't.

NIV, NASB, NRSV as True Teller said. I'm sure they're all fine.