EDIT:
There wasn't enough room for all of the characters I wanted to use for the title of this post... it cuts off with: "...Yal" which makes no sense...

The complete title should read:
"Introduction to the Old Testament with Christine Hayes - Yale University"

TM

**************************

I thought some of you folks might like to see this... Yale University and others are offering free course lectures online. This one in the link below is an Intro to the Old Testament. I have not yet watched any of the videos, but it might be a very good learning experience not usually obtained outside of Yale, etc...

Here is the link to the online course:

http://open.yale.edu/courses/religious_studies/introduction-to-the-old-testament-hebrew-bible/home.html

This page is an intro page, there is a link "view class lessons >>" If you click that link, the next page has links to all of the lectures. There are several options to choose from. You can listen to mp3 audio only, or if you have high speed Internet, you can watch the actual Yale class lecture.

I found out about these classes and such through a classmate at college who sent me an e-mail with a link to this article:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/19/america/19physics.php

There are also other free classes available online... the article is in reference to the M.I.T., Professor Walter H. G. Lewin, who has caused quite a stir on the Internet by allowing his lectures to be accessible and free via the Internet.

All I did was copy/paste this: "Introduction to the Old Testament with Christine Hayes" from the ninth paragraph of this article into a Google search, and Professor Hayes' lectures on the Old Testament came up at the top of the search. The other free online lectures could be found in a similar way.


The Internet amazes me every day with some new thing...

Enjoy,


TM

This is cool thanks for posting as I am interested. The video is fantasic on this. Very clear.

Question: Do the Jewish people use just the Old Testament?

Being a practicing Catholic I work with the New Testament.

Looking forward to this discussion if anyone can chime in.

John

Catholics don't use the Old Testament?

Yes! But the OT is pre Jesus. The New Covenant is after Christ's death. There is crossreferenced OT and Catholics use the New Testament in Church.... Not just the Old by itself. In fact, doesn't the Catholic bible contain more Old Testament book than any other?

Wrong post

Normally "Roman Catholics" have a printed "missalette" (or Catholic "missal") in each pew (((since the 1960s... see: http://www.americancatholicpress.org/missalettedisc.html ))) that has the entire seasons sermons, scripture readings, etc. already printed out months in advance... this is handed down to the churches from the Pope to the Cardinals, etc... which has readings from the entire Bible, including the 7 books of (what the Protestants sometimes call) "the Apocrypha" that are not in the Protestant Bible.

These books are also referred to in theology as the "Deuterocanonical" books, here is a list of what is in the Catholic Bible that is not considered canonical scripture in any Protestant Bible:

The deuterocanonical scriptural texts are:

* Tobit
* Judith
* Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24, but see also Esther in the NAB)
* Wisdom
* Ben Sira, also called Sirach or Ecclesiasticus
* Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint[2])
* Additions to Daniel:
o Song of the Three Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24-90)
o Story of Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue)
o The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue)
* 1 Maccabees
* 2 Maccabees

You can read some more about this here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books

However, when reading anything on Wikipedia, remember that it is not a 100% credible reference. It is not accepted as a credible reference in college level courses because anybody can go in and change any topic at any time. For instance, our chemistry teacher said his son got into a lot of trouble by changing a post about George W. Bush. He changed Wikipedia to state that Bush had larger than normal ears. Of course some one on Wikipedia changed it, and noted the young man's IP address, but that's how it goes over there... lot's of good stuff, though.

And as far as stating that you don't think your particular Catholic church uses the Old Testament... you might want to have a one-to-one chat with your priest. You may not have personal knowledge of the book, but I will assure you every Catholic church uses and embraces the Old and New Testaments as scripture.

As far as your question about the Jewish "Bible"... the Holy scriptures of the Jewish religion are those writings that Christians call "The Old Testament." Those writings came first historically, and it is in these writings where we find all of the prophecies concerning Jesus Christ. The main difference is that the Jewish faith does not accept that this man Jesus was the promised Messiah talked about in the scriptures. That is the division between the Jewish faith and the Christian faith. The keyword here being "faith."

You might do a search on "typology" sometime. Typology is the study of Old Testament scriptures that pertain to a type of Christ. Namely, scriptures in the Old Testament that are the prophecies related to the coming of the Messiah. In Christian teachings, these scriptures in the Old Testament are valued lessons that bestow an enriched understanding of who the Christ is, and why the Christian faith believes this Messiah or Christ to be the man from Galilee, the man who lived in Nazareth with his father Joseph who was a carpenter. It is an interesting study.

And no... Santa Claus is not in the Bible.... LOL !



TM

That was the kind of answer I was looking for. I wrote my original question and statement in the wrong manner.

Thanks

J

Happy to help!

TM

Doesn’t anyone think that it’s strange that the Bible, a book that is supposed to the word of the supreme creator of this universe, it so ambiguous?

Clearly there are intelligent well-educated scholars who are Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Protestants, and so on and so forth, yet none of these intelligent well-educated men can come to a consensus on what the hell the book is saying?

Why would a supposedly all-wise God write such an incoherent muddled book?

Does this God like the idea of playing hide and seek, or what?

Why would a God create such an ambiguous message???

In fact, we can’t discount the well-educated scholars who studied this book and decided that it clearly could not have been from the creator of this universe. These men include, Albert Einstein, Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman and even the great Isaac Newton arguably the brightest man who ever lived. These men have all studied the Bible and found it to be without merit. We can’t discount their conclusions simply because they chose to conclude that it isn’t even written by a supreme being at all. That’s a valid conclusion!

It’s totally ignorant to just brush off the people who have decided that the book is without merit as being nothing more than ‘non-believers’ or ‘skeptics’. Clearly all of these men would have believed in the book had it made any sense!!! They reason they reject it is because they have indeed found it to be nonsensical, inconsistent, logically contradictive, and generally absurd. It’s not that they just had a predisposition to not want to believe in a God.

I’m totally in agreement with this last group of men who have denounced the book as being purely manmade fairytales. If there is anything at all that religious scholars have shown us it’s that they can’t even agree with each other on what the book says. The only crystal clear truth about the Bible is that it is indeed extremely ambiguous.

None the less, I would like to watch this video course. Too bad I don’t have DSL.

Thank you for sharing that TelephoneMan. I have posted the link in the coffeehouse chat room so a few more people can see it.

Abra,

The Bible is a complex book. If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense that G-d gave us something that has deeper levels of understanding and won't be a simplistic kindergarten book. The Bible speaks to all people even if they are very different levels of personal development and understanding of life. Real people have different levels of sophistication. What is really amazing is that the Bible can be understood even at various levels.

The two main keepers and studiers of the Bible are the Jews and the Christians. I think Spider and I are good examples. We may respectfully differ on a number of key issues but we agree on the vast majority of issues within the Bible. I greatly respect Spiders views and he has an honest and open approach to his beliefs.

So yes there is nuance and enlightened understanding within the text. Two crucial points to remember.

1. The vast majority agree on most things that are very direct and open in the Bible.
2. The Bible was designed to connect to you on the level you are.

You are very quick to dismiss the conversation when you ask a question. For example, you state that there are different interpretations to the Bible so therefore you can dismiss the Bible as a book written by G-d. (You have done this in many previous discussions as well.)

I would respectfully ask you to ask questions and then ponder or wait for a response before repeatedly coming to a conclusion. Can you imagine investigating anything with this method? Each time you have a question, don't immediately come to a conclusion. Otherwise you can't really investigate anything. Questions are great! Quick conclusions are not.

Fair enough?

Abra,

I have noticed many posts where you seem to comment on the pessimistic side of Christianity, and I find it interesting.

If not Christianity, or a Biblical explanation to philosophical questions, then I am curious to know what you believe are the answers to philosophical ponderings?

Where did life come from?

What is reality?

If not religion or religion-based answers, then how do you explain unexplainable things?

I have seen a lot of discussions erupt in arguments, I'm not an arguer. I am however very curious to hear your viewpoints, as you have worked them out, and decided upon your own belief system or political system which ever might steer you as you pursue this thing we call life.

Feel free to comment here, not as a weapon to complain about people having faith, but I want to hear what your views are, disassociated from any faith, religion, etc...

If not religion, then what do you have? And this is not a trick to try to proselytize anything I believe, either. I don't do that, neither do I figure what I have, you need to have.

I am genuinely curious to open a forum to allow you to express what it is you personally believe, minus all the rumpled attacks on religion... tell us all what it is you think in regards to philosophy. I find differing viewpoints fascinating, and worthy of discussion.



TM

I appreciate you posting that, Telephoneman. I'll take advantage of it but I don't think our adversaries will.lol

I would have to say most Jews are way more in agreement than chr-stians. Even though they are succumbing to society and forgoing the ways of thier forfathers. I know years ago thier were just in the US over 700 different sects of chr-stianity. Spliting over something in the scriptures. The OT and NT is man made. Thier is only the scriptures.Thier are sects of Jews who claim the burning Bush is still alive. They have built a monestary thier. They now only accept the 1st 6 books of the scriptures ending with joshua. The apocrapha in most cases is considered history. Yet in maccabbes it would seem to be more that that. We do have to realize which I do not believe most chr-stians have given any thought to is in the 1 century at least thier was no NT. All the apostles were quoting and explaining from the so called OT. So you have to realize that without a very good knowledge of the OT and just sticking with the NT as your most canacal book. That you loose the complete thought that was going on within the believers. One case in point would be the sacraficial system. Yahshua said in 3 days he would destroy this temple. The temple still stood for appr. 35 more years. Yet Hebrews speaks against sacraficing why? We can read it and seem to make sence of it but it instead of all of pauls writings are the most difficult to understand. If we believe Paul was a special vessel to the Messiah how could he sacrafice?

Acts 21:17-27
And we having come to Jerusalem, the brethren did gladly receive us,

18 and on the morrow Paul was going in with us unto James, all the elders also came,

19 and having saluted them, he was declaring, one by one, each of the things Elohim did among the nations through his ministration,

20 and they having heard, were glorifying the Master. They said also to him, 'Thou seest, brother, how many myriads there are of Jews who have believed, and all are zealous of the law,

21 and they are instructed concerning thee, that apostacy from Moses thou dost teach to all Jews among the nations, saying — Not to circumcise the children, nor after the customs to walk;

22 what then is it? certainly the multitude it behoveth to come together, for they will hear that thou hast come.

23'This, therefore, do that we say to thee: We have four men having a vow on themselves,

24 these having taken, be purified with them, and be at expence with them, that they may shave the head, and all may know that the things of which they have been instructed concerning thee are nothing, but thou dost walk — thyself also — the law keeping.

25'And concerning those of the nations who have believed, we have written, having given judgment, that they observe no such thing, except to keep themselves both from idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom.'

26 Then Paul, having taken the men, on the following day, with them having purified himself, was entering into the temple, announcing the fulfilment of the days of the purification, till the offering was offered for each one of them.

27 And, as the seven days were about to be fully ended, the Jews from Asia having beheld him in the temple, were stirring up all the multitude, and they laid hands upon him,
YLT


We have to deal with verse 24 that they said you have to show them you keep the law. Why if the law has been done away? Do we just keep parts of it? Now these 4 men had a vow on them . What was that vow from the law?

Num 6:13-21

13'And this [is] the law of the Nazarite; in the day of the fulness of the days of his separation doth [one] bring him in unto the opening of the tent of meeting,

14 and he hath brought near his offering to Yahweh, one he-lamb, a son of a year, a perfect one, for a burnt-offering, and one she-lamb, a daughter of a year, a perfect one, for a sin-offering, and one ram, a perfect one, for peace-offerings,

15 and a basket of unleavened things of flour, cakes mixed with oil, and thin cakes of unleavened things anointed with oil, and their present, and their libations.

16'And the priest hath brought [them] near before Yahweh, and hath made his sin-offering and his burnt-offering;

17 and the ram he maketh a sacrifice of peace-offerings to Yahweh, besides the basket of unleavened things; and the priest hath made its present and its libation.

18'And the Nazarite hath shaved (at the opening of the tent of meeting) the head of his separation, and hath taken the hair of the head of his separation, and hath put [it] on the fire which [is] under the sacrifice of the peace-offerings.

19'And the priest hath taken the boiled shoulder from the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one thin unleavened cake, and hath put on the palms of the Nazarite after his shaving his separation;

20 and the priest hath waved them, a wave-offering before Yahweh; it [is] holy to the priest, besides the breast of the wave-offering, and besides the leg of the heave-offering; and afterwards doth the Nazarite drink wine.

21'This [is] the law of the Nazarite, who voweth his offering to Jehovah for his separation, apart from that which his hand attaineth; according to his vow which he voweth so he doth by the law of his separation.'
YLT


This vow Paul acted as a priest. Apperently he was. Now he had just been with James. Was heading to jerusalem his brethern said show the people that you keep the law. And he did. He went with them offered the sacrafices for 7 days and shaved his head. The same vow John the Baptist had.

So this is an introduction to the old Testament to you. Either you believe paul was a chosen vessel or you believe he is a false prophet. Either way the way you have to look at the scriptures after our messiah is not just a NT way of life. It is following the complete scriptures have them of equal measures. Yahweh said he is the same yesterday, today and tommorrow and Pauls actions prove this. I would hope that you would question all you have been taught. As the scriptures say you will not be taught by men but by his Holy Spirit. Yahshua does not want a following blind sheep. He wants us to prove all things so you do not have doubt. Then the hearing of the word will ring true when you hear it increasing your faith.


May Yahweh's Spirit Always Guide Us....Blessings...Miles

Miles - I know you wrote a lot of words... but could you condense that to a sentence or two? I'm not really sure what the point is that you are making (?) It must be a good point, because you felt strongly enough to write so many words, but after reading, I'm just not sure what you are trying to say..

TM

Telephoneman

basically I was giving a little history of where our belief system has come from. For most it is from catholizism. Prodestant meaning Pro Testant. Of the Catholic church. The Jews I believe have stuck with what they believe the closest. I was also explaining that 1st century believers did not have a NT they used the OT to explain what was happenening and Pauls going in and Sacrafising in Acts 21 is a proof of this. This OT and NT stuff is just a scapegoat obscuring the real thought and meaning of the scriptures. Playings as if thier is a change of great porportions.Which thier is not.In any field of study the basics are always needed to go on to higher learning. The chr-stian masses have been taught to believe this is not so. So I showed Acts 21 and the law Paul was acting upon as a questioning block so to speak. If what you have been taught then deal with Paul sacraficing or label him a false prophet. He can not be both then Yahshua choosing him as a chosen vessel throws the whole thing out. Your introduction to the Old Testament is good I hope all would/will learn it like the back of thier hand and then the Yahshua's comming may take on a whole new light. Sorry i could not say that in 2 or 3 sentences. May Yahweh Bless His Children...Blessings...Miles

Someday you will get over your anger my friend. In the mean time, consider

1. Not everyone agrees on what Shakespeare wrote.
2. God did not intend for everyone to understand without pursuing the truth with sincerity. Therefore, Christ spoke in parables so that He would not be understood

Mar 4:10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

In like manner, The bible itself was also written so that it would not be understood by everyone.

Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
Isa 28:12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.



The answer is so that people like you would not understand it Abra. There is a key to understanding the book. God plainly gives us that key, but no one wants to use it. That key is this:

Psa 111:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.

Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; Joh 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Thus, God tells us if we will sincerely strive to live by His commandments, then we will be able to understand the book. However, most people want to believe that the Bible says those things that they want it to say in order to justify doing what they want to do. As Jesus explained regarding the religious leaders of his day:

Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Mar 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men,. . . Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

So, the religion you grew up with read their own tradition into the scriptures, and you reject that. But, you have made the mistake of rejecting God and the Bible too.



The answer is yes. He is God. He is not begging you to care about Him. He is not like you. He is the Almighty God. He is not crawling on His knees to get your acceptance or the approval of anyone else.

You think that if there is a god, he should be like you. So, no matter what you or others might read in the book, you cannot understand it. So, because you don't understand it, you mock it. Aren't you the smart one, mocking what you don't understand?

God has made Himself available to man. He has been written in the pages of history, and this book called the Bible. If anyone wants to find Him, they must seek Him. However, He has rules. Those who seek Him must do so understanding who He is. They must respect Him and seek Him by obedience if they want to understand.



There is no ambiguity in the Bible. It clearly says to obey God from Genesis to Revelation. That is the message of its history. That is the message of its poetry. That is the message of it prophecy. It is the clear undeniable message of the bible. You have to think about these here scholars of yours. I know you and the scholars don't understand it, but you get my point. The message of the bible is too simple for them and you to grasp.

So, because you don't want to obey God, you ridicule God and the Bible as ambiguous. You tell everyone that we can't really know what it says.

You think that your conclusion is valid. Of course it is valid for someone who does not know what he is talking about. You admit you don't understand it. It is ambiguous to you. So, you become the judge of it instead of the disciple of it. Is there any other things you don't understand that you would like to condemn or make accusations against? I am sure the world is waiting for your opinion.

In truth is that, if we do understand God's book, we actually can discount the scholars. They are generally filled with pride. They don't understand the book. As God says:

Isa 29:11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he says, I cannot; for it is sealed:

The learned or scholars are too smart to humble themselves to obey God and thus understand the book. It is sealed to them. It does not make sense.



The truth is that it is totally ignorant to brush off the Bible because we are so filled with our own pregudice that we can't understand it. This is so ironic. Just simplify your position and think. It runs like this. "I don't understand, so because I don't understand, it can't be true." "Further other smart men don't understand it. So it must not be true." Great thinking!

Further, you and the scholars do have a predisposition to not want to believe in God. Adam and Eve did not, and the Israelites did not. And, mankind in general has not believed. You do not understand, and it for a reason. Notice what Paul writes:

Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

In other words, without the spirit of God to guide us, then our minds are hostile to God's law. Without that spirit we can't --you can't be subject to God's law, and can't understand it.

How do we get the spirit? By obedience:

Act 5:32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given to them that obey him.



What I think is so funny is that no one who studies the Bible really cares if you agree with anyone or not? This post was not about what you think about the bible. Did you ever think of that? You came into the post to mock the bible. But the post was for believers who wanted to study the Old Covenant and writings and learn from it. I think it is so presumptions. But then again, that is the very exact reason you don't understand.



REGARDING SIR ISSAC NEWTON

Of unequaled mental ability during his entire adult life until his death at age 85, Newton's powers are legendary. It is often told, for example, how later in his life a problem in mathematical physics posed by the great mathematician, Bernoulli, was forwarded to the Royal Society. The problem, to determine the curve of minimum time for a heavy particle to move downward between two given points, had baffled the famous 18th century mathematicians of Europe for over six months. Receiving the problem in the afternoon, Newton solved it before going to bed!

In addition to his scientific work (Newton would have said as a part of his scientific work), he devoted a substantial portion of his enormous energy to the study of the Bible and Biblical texts and history. He read the Bible daily throughout his life and wrote over a million words of notes regarding his study of it.

Isaac Newton believed that the Bible is literally true in every respect. Throughout his life, he continually tested Biblical truth against the physical truths of experimental and theoretical science. He never observed a contradiction. In fact, he viewed his own scientific work as a method by which to reinforce belief in Biblical truth.

He was a formidable Biblical scholar, was fluent in the ancient languages, and had extensive knowledge of ancient history. He believed that each person should read the Bible, and through that reading, establish for himself an understanding of the universal truth it contains.

Only one book of Newton's about the Bible was ever published. In 1733, six years after his death, J. Darby and T. Browne, published Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John. http://www.reformation.org/newton.html

Abra, this is another example of you preaching things you don't understand. I would dismiss your opinion. You don't understand.



Get a job there my friend, dsl is not that expensive. 29-50 bucks a month? How do you date the nice ladies on this site with no money?

Art