Posted: Sep 29, 2017 8:04 am
Zadocfish2 wrote:
The only other examples you give are from NT retroactive changes to OT interpretation.
And how do you know that ? How do you know that it's just an omission that's been corrected later on ? How do you know it's not it's not something that was willingly kept away at first, then revealed ?
My point here is that the Bible is not trustworthy. Neither from the Judaism view, nor from the Christian view. Just like some texts have been taken away from being canonic because they didn't fit the message religious authorities wanted to pass at the moment (Jesus' relationship for example), it's perfectly possible that some stories that didn't fit the Judaic vision were removed.
I understand your point, and pelfdaddy explained why you get those reactions you get pretty well. If you wanted to speak only about Judaism, then the Bible isn't the text you should have taken as reference. One of the main problems we have with (Christian) believers, is that they build their belief on a small part of their book. Yet they still consider it sacred a a whole. That's a major flaw in their argumentation. By trying to justify some rules set in the OT without accepting what's said about them in the NT, you play the exact same game.