Being "saved"

[LoAmmi]

Didn't end up as slaves? Joseph's older brothers sold him into slavery where he wound up as a ruler. The Brothers came to Egypt in famine, and wound up under Joseph's care. Eventually anyone that had known Joseph was gone and the Hebrews were oppressed. Some 400 years of slavery between that story and Moses leading them out. Your Tanakh doesn't have any of that?

And where's the connection between the descendants of Jacob sinning and them falling into slavery, since that's what you are arguing?

Let's take a look at the (translated) text:
1 Now these are the names of the sons of Israel who came to Egypt with Jacob; they came each one with his household: 2 Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah; 3 Issachar, Zebulun and Benjamin; 4 Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher. 5 All the persons who came from the loins of Jacob were seventy in number, but Joseph was already in Egypt. 6 Joseph died, and all his brothers and all that generation. 7 But the sons of Israel were fruitful and increased greatly, and multiplied, and became exceedingly mighty, so that the land was filled with them.

8 Now a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. 9 He said to his people, “Behold, the people of the sons of Israel are more and mightier than we. 10 Come, let us deal wisely with them, or else they will multiply and in the event of war, they will also join themselves to those who hate us, and fight against us and [h]depart from the land.” 11 So they appointed taskmasters over them to afflict them with hard labor. And they built for Pharaoh storage cities, Pithom and Raamses. 12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and the more they spread out, so that they were in dread of the sons of Israel. 13 The Egyptians compelled the sons of Israel to labor rigorously; 14 and they made their lives bitter with hard labor in mortar and bricks and at all kinds of labor in the field, all their labors which they rigorously imposed on them.


This says that the Hebrews were oppressed out of fear of them growing too mighty, not because they sinned. Could you please point out in that bit of scripture where it says they were enslaved because they sinned.

 

[AskTheFamily]

I think it's important to be concerned about what you do with your soul and be concerned about your well being in general including that of your souls.

We should always fear being in error as well, because, we often look at human beings in error with regards to moral issues and find it disgraces them in one form or another, so we should fear that with regards to ourselves.

 

[theophilus777]

And where's the connection between the descendants of Jacob sinning and them falling into slavery, since that's what you are arguing?

Because if they had treated Joseph like a Brother they never would've wound up in slavery?

Btw your text reads just like mine. What version do you use?

 

[LoAmmi]

Because if they had treated Joseph like a Brother they never would've wound up in slavery?

Are the descendants of those brothers punished for the sins of their ancestors? The ancestors did not end up in slavery, I will remind you. They were well taken care of.

Btw your text reads just like mine. What version do you use?

I use Christian translations here because I have received objections in using Jewish ones.

 

[dlamberth]

I use Christian translations here because I have received objections in using Jewish ones.

I read this and wondered: Is there much of a difference between Christian and Jewish versions?

.

 

[South Bound]

Feeling closer to feeling is a wonderful start to awaken those feelings of being close to God. But there's much more. For myself in feeling closer to God there are more than several trajectories that all come together as One. I'll start out with "seeing" the Divine with in other human beings makes me feel closer to God.

What is "the Divine"?

 

[smaneck]

Because if they had treated Joseph like a Brother they never would've wound up in slavery?

Uh, they didn't go to Egypt to find their brother, they went because there was a famine in the land and they were starving. If they had treated Joseph like a brother they would likely all starved to death together and had no descendants to worry about.

 

[theophilus777]

Are the descendants of those brothers punished for the sins of their ancestors? The ancestors did not end up in slavery, I will remind you. They were well taken care of.

What? Who wound up in slavery?

I use Christian translations here because I have received objections in using Jewish ones.

Boo, hiss. I was hoping to see what differences there might be. What version do you normally use?

 

[LoAmmi]

I read this and wondered: Is there much of a difference between Christian and Jewish versions?

.

There are some. Not in the Torah usually, but when you get to the prophets there are.

 

[smaneck]

Boo, hiss. I was hoping to see what differences there might be. What version do you normally use?

Bible Gateway has a couple of Jewish translations. The major difference I see is that some key phrases are left in the Hebrew. Also the passage "Unto us a child is born" has a radically different translation. And where Christians see a reference to a virgin birth, the Jewish translation simply speak of a young woman bearing a child.

 

[LoAmmi]

What? Who wound up in slavery?

The brothers of Joseph did not end up in slavery. Their descendants, and Joseph's, became slaves after a new ruler in Egypt feared them gaining power over the Egyptians. The text is pretty clear on this point.


I go here most often for the commentary:

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

 

[theophilus777]

The brothers of Joseph did not end up in slavery. Their descendants, and Joseph's, became slaves after a new ruler in Egypt feared them gaining power over the Egyptians. The text is pretty clear on this point.

Right. You said the descendants didn't wind up in slavery. You meant the brothers didn't, but their descendants did, later. This is new to me that Judaism never linked the slavery in any way to sin.

I go here most often for the commentary:

The Complete Tanach with Rashi's Commentary - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

Thanks. As far as just text goes, what (English) version do you prefer? Are you able to read a Hebrew version?

 

[LoAmmi]

Right. You said the descendants didn't wind up in slavery. You meant the brothers didn't, but their descendants did, later. This is new to me that Judaism never linked the slavery in any way to sin.

Ah, I see. I've been awake since about 3:30 this morning, so forgive me if I have any slips here.

I've never been taught the sin and slavery connection. It's why I asked CM because he has often shown me things I had not read before. There's a few thousand years of Jewish literature out in the world and it's certainly not impossible that I've missed quite a lot of it.

Thanks. As far as just text goes, what (English) version do you prefer? Are you able to read a Hebrew version?

I'm working on learning to understand Hebrew.

I actually use the one I linked for the purposes of finding quotes but I have a few translations in my house that I go to for studying. I'd have to go get them to let you know and I can do that later.

 

[theophilus777]

There's a few thousand years of Jewish literature out in the world and it's certainly not impossible that I've missed quite a lot of it.

I heard that!

I'm working on learning to understand Hebrew.

Its a hard language. The ancient forms kinda fascinate me with all the meaning they held, (almost like pictograms) but that's not part of the modern language you'd be learning.

I actually use the one I linked for the purposes of finding quotes but I have a few translations in my house that I go to for studying. I'd have to go get them to let you know and I can do that later.

Ah, so that link is to the full text and not just a commentary! The names of your hard-copy versions interest me too, when you get the chance. Like someone else asked, I'm not that sure of the differences between our texts either, but its something I've long wanted to examine.

 

[Eyes wide Open]

Very well put! I can agree with parts of that too. Especially the parts about 'upon death' and self realization. There is much thought that what determines your afterlife or next life is in fact what you think about or what you realize upon death. Souls can be damned or saved at death depending on their state of mind. I think that helps Christians alot when they think of Jesus at death. I bet many find peace there

Personally I don't think a soul has a state of mind, more it has, or it is in a state of being, and that being would be an awareness of such. Its aware and the awareness creates the being, but not a being in an identity sense. It wouldn't be an 'I' but more an 'it'. That awareness at death would present an absence of ignorance to 'it's true identity, an ignorance that was created by that individual state of mind (the I) If this ignorance is overcome in life I would assess that to being 'saved' because that awareness of being then starts to express 'it'self in physical reality (you shall know them by their fruits) Upon death we are all saved, because the ignorance will be gone, the veil shall be lifted, the kingdom shall be received.

Yes IF we rebirth after that homecoming, it could be deemed that a rebirth is a damnation, but I suspect that this awareness of being (soul etc) just wants to express 'it'self, and that a rebirth in physical form again is an opportunity for 'it' to do that, and that the opportunity for it to express itself is beyond its control (as it will be its only course of action) but its one it will gladly take. Yes its a rebirth that involves hardship and suffering (hell) etc, and is that the 'condemned to hell for an eternity' (in the eternal process of life) that we see relayed??? But of course its all conjecture and we live in the mystery.

Thanks. I am not really Hindu. I just find that's the closest my beliefs come to and my 'holy book' is the Bhagavad Gita.

Yes me too.

 

[smaneck]

The brothers of Joseph did not end up in slavery. Their descendants, and Joseph's, became slaves after a new ruler in Egypt feared them gaining power over the Egyptians. The text is pretty clear on this point.

What probably happened is that Joseph became the PM of Egypt when the Hyksos ruled, who like the Hebrew people, were from the Levant. When the Hyksos were tossed out there was a great wave of xenophobia in Egypt and they mistreated virtually all those of foreign descent. To put it in Maoist terms, the Hebrews would have been seen as the running-dogs of the hated imperialists.

 

[smaneck]

Right. You said the descendants didn't wind up in slavery. You meant the brothers didn't, but their descendants did, later. This is new to me that Judaism never linked the slavery in any way to sin.

I think the Babylonian Captivity was more closely linked with sin.

 

[light upon light]

What probably happened is that Joseph became the PM of Egypt when the Hyksos ruled, who like the Hebrew people, were from the Levant. When the Hyksos were tossed out there was a great wave of xenophobia in Egypt and they mistreated virtually all those of foreign descent. To put it in Maoist terms, the Hebrews would have been seen as the running-dogs of the hated imperialists.

I'm curious.

I thought the Egyptian slavery of Israel was now regarded as ahistorical?

 

[ContraMundum]

Oh, I have a big point, namely how can you say God taught something when in fact it is just the opinion of a single person and the opinion of someone who is neither God, the Son of God, or even a Prophet of God? And why should I believe it?

Hilariously ironic coming from a Baha'i!

 

[theophilus777]

I think the Babylonian Captivity was more closely linked with sin.

No doubt the Babylonian captivity was God's judgment for sin