Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts

11 August 2014

Review of The Bible Unearthed


The power of the biblical saga stems from its being a compelling and coherent narrative expression of the timeless themes of a people liberation, continuing resistance to oppression, and quest for social equality.  It eloquently expresses the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive. 
(Finkelstein and Silberman, The Bible Unearthed, 318)
If you’re looking for a book to bolster your beliefs in the absolutely 100% historical accuracy of the Bible, this is not that book.  That being said, the authors do respect the biblical narrative and the texts and realize their import in the lives of millions of people worldwide, calling it a “great national epic of liberation.”
… it is only when we recognize when and why the ideas, images, and events described in the Bible came to be so skillfully woven together that we can at last begin to appreciate the true genius and continuing power of this single most influential literary and spiritual creation in the history of humanity. (Finkelstein and Silberman, The Bible Unearthed, 318)
This book gently, but firmly breaks down several major parts of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament for you Christians out there); Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman present archaeological and historical evidence that much of the Bible was written to help coalesce the nation after several years of exile.  The Christian New Testament is not covered in this book, and partly, I believe that after chopping at the foundations, the building built on those foundations will also suffer; but, mostly, I believe it’s because the authors are Jewish and not Christian: hence, the New Testament is not their Bible.

So, I guess you could say that The Bible Unearthed actually uncovers the facts and many of the events that in fact took place, many directly opposed to what we find written in the pages of the Bible.  So, I guess you could say The Bible Unearthed unearths what happened outside of the Bible as we know it, and gives us something closer to what actually took place.  It gives detailed information, including bibliography and index and a few maps and illustrations.

Where does Biblical Inerrancy fit in here?  Some believe the Bible is 100% accurate history, science, etc.  They attempt to strengthen their arguments and their belief by going to the Bible itself.  Others have tried to manipulate archaeological and historical finds to fit what the Bible says.  At the end of the day, you just have to believe that if we were created, then God would not have given us minds that could figure things out if he didn’t want us to figure them out.  Also, if the Bible is inspired by God, and God is all-knowing (yes, I know the fancy word is omniscient), then he woulda known a looooong time ago that some smartass would come along and show how all the things written in there are not 100% accurate.  Some of those who attempt to defend the Bible forget that if there God is as powerful as they say they believe he is, he is more than capable of taking care of it himself.
  
Does that mean they are false?  NO!  It means the Bible is made up of stories which are meant to lead people to live a better life.  It was written to show people how to love and how to behave in the world.  It’s not always pretty; much of the Hebrew Bible is blood, murder, and other awfulness that one wouldn’t expect to see in a book about a God who is love.
 
I’m not trying to attack anyone’s faith, and I don’t believe that is Finkelstein and Silberman’s desire, either.  In fact, my faith was strengthened because I realized that Christianity wouldn’t be here if the Jews hadn’t pulled together and written their Tanakh (I know some fancy words, I know!  Actually, that’s an acronym for the three sections of the Hebrew Bible: Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim: or The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings), and much of what I take for granted may never have happened.  I also realize that a lot of bloodshed wouldn’t have happened: i.e. the Crusades; the bloody Protestant/Catholic conflicts; the whole awful war going on in Israel and Palestine and that which is going on in the Middle East.

All the good and bad can be traced right back to that time when a group of Jewish exiles decided to put together a book for their nation, and then, use stories of their ancestors who obeyed and were blessed; and others who disobeyed and were cursed.  The blessings and the cursings all go back to those stories.  And, that is what they are: stories.

You cannot build a science on Genesis.  You cannot build a history on any of the “historical” books.  Yes, some of them have accurate depictions, but the timing is off.  The Exodus is a big one; as is the stories of the kings of both Judah and Israel. 

While this book does not cover the New Testament, I think Paul’s epistle to Timothy has probably come to mind and so, I will quote from verses 15 – 17 of the third chapter:
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

You see?  It says there that all scripture is given by inspiration of God.  That’s the King James Version.  The English Standard Version says, in verse 16: “All Scripture is breathed out by God …”  New International Version says: “God-breathed.”  But, notice what these verses do not say.  They do not say that everything in the scripture is to be considered 100% accurate.  Does it have to say that?  Apparently some believe it does.  I for one have read the Bible many times and have never read in its pages anything remotely saying that it’s to be taken literally.  Rather, the more I read it, the more I believe it should be read literarily.
 
Basically, this guy's up here writing this review and saying that the Bible shouldn't be believed.  I am not saying that!  I’m saying that believe it the way it’s meant to be believed.  Use it for doctrine (a fancy word for the teachings of your particular belief system), for reproof (an antiquated word which means discipline), for correction, and for instruction in righteousness.  How can one do that with literature?  People do it all the time; in fact, it’s what we have all been doing for centuries. 

Realizing that something is not the way you have believed it can be difficult.  It can stun you, I know.  But, it can be liberating, too.  It can open completely new ways of thinking and understanding.  And, once your mind has been stretched to see something, it cannot un-see it, barring permanent amnesia. 
According to the entry on Biblical Inerrancy at the Religious Tolerance website:
Belief of biblical inerrancy in the U.S.:
On 2007-MAY-25, Gallup reported the results of a national poll on Biblical inerrancy. Those polled were asked which of three statements comes closest to describing their personal views about the Bible. The average of polls taken during MAY of 2005, 2006 and 2007 were:
  • 31% believe that "The Bible is the actual word of God, and is to be taken literally, word for word." This would imply acceptance of biblical inerrancy.
  • 47% believe that "The Bible is the inspired word of God, but not everything in it should be taken literally."
  • 19% believe that "The Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man."
  • 3% were uncertain or didn't answer.
  • Margin of error was ±3 percentage points.
An identical poll taken during 2011-MAY showed little change:
  • 30% believe that "The Bible is the actual word of God, and is to be taken literally, word for word."
  • 49% believe that "The Bible is the inspired word of God, but not everything in it should be taken literally."
  • 17% believe that "The Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man."
  • 4% were uncertain or didn't answer.

Only 30% of those asked believe that each and every word of the Bible is to be taken literally.  I’m in between the 17% and the 49%: I believe that the Bible is inspired, but that it is recorded by humans.  Harold Bloom argues, in his The Book of J, that possibly parts of the Hebrew Bible (those written by one scholars call the Jahwist) were possibly written by a woman.  I like to think that that could be true: I like to hope that it is.  For more on these ideas of the “documentary hypothesis,” read this

There is a humorous take on the idea of taking the Bible literally on the Religious Tolerance site.

I love this book.  I really have to buy myself a copy, so I can spend more time going through it and its sources.  If you’re interested in the history of the Levant, the nation of Israel, the Bible, or in archaeology, or in old texts, I think you will enjoy this book.  If you don’t, please don’t throw it at me,  it is a pretty hefty tome and might do some serious damage to my spectacles. 



18 July 2014

Early Review of Mitchell Bard's Death to the Infidels: Radical Islam's Against the Jews

Death to the Infidels: Radical Islam's War Against the JewsDeath to the Infidels: Radical Islam's War Against the Jews by Mitchell G. Bard
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Mitchell Bard's Death to the Infidels: Radical Islam's War Against the Jews, is an information packed history of the Israeli/Arab conflict. Bard makes the argument that Muslim states, particularly those who are radical will stop at nothing to see Jews wiped from the face of the Earth. I was gripped with the intensity with which the Israeli Jews fear for their lives.

The book is useful; I would have liked a few more sources, especially for those areas speaking against Israel's enemies. I know I can search online, but when I'm in the middle of a book, the last thing I want to do is to go online and get distracted while trying to find some piece of information that I expect to be in a book like this. Bard includes several sources, but there are a few places where he doesn't—and in those places they would do a lot to strengthen his side of the argument. As I pointed out, Bard includes a fair number of sources; a bibliography would facilitate the further study of these issues.

Bard argues that the conflict is at that bottom a religious one rather than a political one. It could be political using religion to carry our its ends. It wouldn't be the first time and that interpretation can be gathered from Bard's book.

I'm reminded while reading Death to the Infidels to try to look at both sides of the issue. When so much smoke and mirror propaganda and spin is being used by both sides of the issue, it's very difficult to know where to stand. From my view, which is not in the thick of it, I can see that both sides have done atrocious things to the other; that many people: soldiers, as well as non-military fighters, as well as civilians not involved in the fighting—innocent men, women, and children have died in this conflict that goes on for so long that media in the West stops covering because it's no longer news.

My heart breaks for the Israeli Jews who just want a homeland and it breaks for the Palestinians who want the same thing. It breaks for all those who are caught in the middle of this religio-political melee.

It's difficult to read/research both sides because each side has its own suffering and each side has its spin-doctors. I tend to agree with what Daniel Gilbert writes in Stumbling on Happiness, “When pro-Israeli and pro-Arab viewers [of news] are shown identical samples of Middle East news coverage, both proponents claim that the fact clearly show that the press was biased against their side” (168). They also claim that the other side started it. Gilbert later writes: “Alas, the only thing these facts clearly show is that people tend to see what they want to see” (168, emphasis in original). Bard has made it easier to see the Jewish side, and the fear that keeps the Israelis from giving in to the demands of the Palestinians.

According to Bard, every time the Israelis have given an inch, the Palestinians have taken a mile and have continued to bring terror in the form of firing rockets and suicide bombings. He makes the point, however, that when Israel fires back in defense, they are reprimanded by other nations. It's also interesting that each side claims that the West, especially the U.S. is aiding the other side: the Palestinians say that the U.S. helps Israel; Israel says the U.S. helps Palestine. Books like Bard's are important; he's not afraid to go against the current “politically correct” flow and to tell it like he sees it. He pulls no punches in saying that those who want Israel's and especially the Jews' demise are not moderate and radical, but should rather be called radical and more radical. He quotes (with sources) several who call for the decimation/annihilation of the Jews even if it takes centuries. Because of the lengths to which these radicals are willing to go, Bard argues, Jews and Israel have a long, hard road ahead of the them.

Bard covers a lot of information in a short book, and all of it is important. Read this if you're interested in this heart-wrenching conflict that has cost so many lives and will cost many more before it's over, if it will /can ever be over. I for one hope (probably foolishly) that Bard is wrong, even a little. Alas, it's not very likely: just look at the new escalation that is in the news right now (18 July 2014).

NOTE: This book is due to be published in September 2014.

View all my reviews

15 April 2014

Review of Michael Krasny's Spiritual Envy: And Agnostic's Quest

Spiritual Envy: An Agnostic's QuestSpiritual Envy: An Agnostic's Quest by Michael Krasny
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Krasny asks a book long question (that I shared to some extent), and asks the reader to join the question; he invites the reader to seek along with him. It's probably safe to say that not all agnostics feel the way he feels; but, questioning comes with the territory, I think. Krasny doesn't claim to know the answers. I really appreciate that in this time of such overpowering (sometimes almost nauseating) certainty: in both the believer and atheist camps. Certainty eludes me, as it eludes Krasny, and he isn't afraid to share his uncertainty and what he is doing in spite of it.

Lately, I've had some slight envy, similar to what Krasny writes about, and questions of how to be the best person I can be in this life I have. I don't believe religion is necessary for morality, but I can see how it has shaped morality, mores, and ethics in different societies and for individuals within those societies.

What I miss is the camaraderie that I enjoyed when I was a practicing Christian and that is the envy I have for those who are confident and solid in their faith. Occasionally, I envy the comfort that would come with certainty, but then I remember that if I were certain, I would not have the curiosity to keep my mental hunger fed.

If you are interested in how some agnostics think, this book can help you ask the kinds of questions to find your own way, without telling you how you should think or believe. Read it and see what you think.



View all my reviews

Get yourself a copy, here:
Spiritual Envy: An Agnostic's Quest