Thankfully, Hell is actually a bitchin' party with drinks and good company and hanging out and the like. They've got room's for everyone's taste of parties!
After the hot-tub and casino, we're going to listen to George Carlin do stand up. You game?
Frokane: From what my christian friends and aquantinces have told me is that if you dont accept jesus christ as your saviour before you die you wont go to heaven, so that which would mean you go to hell.
but then there are those who say as long as you are generally a good person you will go to heaven.
what is the truth?
. Well, Jews say there is no hell for you to go to. If you sin against god the people affected from it will be you and your ancestors.
Um, no, that's actually an incredibly unorthodox viewpoint in Judaism, and not one I think I've ever heard of. Gehinnom is basically Hell.
. I blame BABYLON for that. For fuck's sake there is so much additions after what you have in the Bible that I don't know where to go to. At some point Judaism confirmed and added a Hell and this whole bleedin' mythology and commands and mitzahs... The Bible itself does not mention such a place. Kudos on knowing the Hebrew word for "Hell".
DJjaffacake: I had a think, and it definitely isn't, those are the principles on which people base their lives. If I think killing people is wrong, and a big floaty man tells me it isn't, then I'll tell him to fuck off and consider him a massive dick.
As for the gay thing, creating people who are gay, and telling them it is fine to have those feelings, but then condemning them if they should, shock horror, act on those feelings, is cruel and unnecessary, and an omniscient being should know better.
Well it is wrong for you to kill.
Yeah God forbid people be able to control their urges...your view strikes me as being selfish, everything is about what can God do for you.
The killing thing was just an example, and it is not selfish to expect an omnipotent being to not be a dick. There's no reason to make people gay if you then make it a crime to act on that. If you had the power to easily end world hunger and disease, I would hope that you would do so. If doing something wonderful takes little or no effort there is no reason to not do it. I'll agree that god is awesome once he demonstrates that fact, and not before.
A sin and a crime are not the same thing first of all though in some cases a sin can also be a crime. I think you understand that but I just want to be clear on this. Crime is a transgression of human laws. A sin is a transgression against God.
As for the ills of the world, I believe that all ills can be traced back to sin. We know that actions have a ripple effect that we can only trace so far. It should be easy to understand that sinful actions have a ripple effect that negatively affect the world in ways that cannot easily be traced back to a single sin.
What you mean is that you will believe that God is awesome once God personally does what you want God to. God has already demonstrated that He is awesome. There should be no reason for Him to do so again.
-snip- God created you with the freedom to decide for yourself. I'm sorry if you do not like that answer but it is the correct answer.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
TheIronRuler: I blame BABYLON for that. For fuck's sake there is so much additions after what you have in the Bible that I don't know where to go to. At some point Judaism confirmed and added a Hell and this whole bleedin' mythology and commands and mitzahs... The Bible itself does not mention such a place.
Going solely on what the Torah itself says, like a Sadducee or Karaite, is nonsense. You won't know how kosher slaughter works, let alone the afterlife.
Though I guess Gehinnom is more like what Catholics call 'Purgatory' and the whole thing is very vague anyway.
-snip- God created you with the freedom to decide for yourself. I'm sorry if you do not like that answer but it is the correct answer.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
. HE FORCE PHARAOH AGAINST HIS OWN FREE WILL. How can you deny that?
-snip- God created you with the freedom to decide for yourself. I'm sorry if you do not like that answer but it is the correct answer.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
Surely to offer only one way of doing things on pain of an eternity of suffering is the very essence of forcing someone?
-snip- God created you with the freedom to decide for yourself. I'm sorry if you do not like that answer but it is the correct answer.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
I predict a long ass discussion on the hardening of Pharaoh's heart
TheIronRuler: I blame BABYLON for that. For fuck's sake there is so much additions after what you have in the Bible that I don't know where to go to. At some point Judaism confirmed and added a Hell and this whole bleedin' mythology and commands and mitzahs... The Bible itself does not mention such a place.
Going solely on what the Torah itself says, like a Sadducee or Karaite, is nonsense. You won't know how kosher slaughter works, let alone the afterlife.
Though I guess Gehinnom is more like what Catholics call 'Purgatory' and the whole thing is very vague anyway.
. I know what you're talking about... It's one of the reasons I don't like this religion very much. In a hundred years or so we will have new rules on space travel on the Sabbath. You're also correct about that - it's very vague. In the mainstream? You die and when the Messiah comes you are resurrected to live in a happy world. Which is why organ donation is frowned on in Israel, and people are dying because of that.
Yeah God forbid people be able to control their urges...your view strikes me as being selfish, everything is about what can God do for you.
The killing thing was just an example, and it is not selfish to expect an omnipotent being to not be a dick. There's no reason to make people gay if you then make it a crime to act on that. If you had the power to easily end world hunger and disease, I would hope that you would do so. If doing something wonderful takes little or no effort there is no reason to not do it. I'll agree that god is awesome once he demonstrates that fact, and not before.
A sin and a crime are not the same thing first of all though in some cases a sin can also be a crime. I think you understand that but I just want to be clear on this. Crime is a transgression of human laws. A sin is a transgression against God.
As for the ills of the world, I believe that all ills can be traced back to sin. We know that actions have a ripple effect that we can only trace so far. It should be easy to understand that sinful actions have a ripple effect that negatively affect the world in ways that cannot easily be traced back to a single sin.
What you mean is that you will believe that God is awesome once God personally does what you want God to. God has already demonstrated that He is awesome. There should be no reason for Him to do so again.
Yeah, I get the difference, but a sin is basically a crime against the laws of god, so it works from my point of view.
The evils of the world being traced back to sin exactly proves my point. Why would god create sin in the first place. He was the only thing in existence at the beginning of time, he could have done anything, why create sin?
And basically yes to your last, because what I want god to do is make the world better, which is easily within his power. If I were to wake up tommorrow and everything was perfect in the world, then one of my first thoughts would be, "Well there must be a god, no way this could have happened on its own." And I have seen no demonstration that god is awesome. I have read parts of a book that claims that. I have also read a book that claims there is a school for wizards in Scotland, and a book that claims four children went to a parallel universe during WW2.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
. HE FORCE PHARAOH AGAINST HIS OWN FREE WILL. How can you deny that?
Pharaoh was not going to let the Hebrews go anyway. The only thing God did was make it easier for him to suffer through the plagues. God did not force Pharaoh to act make a decision contrary to his own inclinations.
DJjaffacake: The killing thing was just an example, and it is not selfish to expect an omnipotent being to not be a dick. There's no reason to make people gay if you then make it a crime to act on that. If you had the power to easily end world hunger and disease, I would hope that you would do so. If doing something wonderful takes little or no effort there is no reason to not do it. I'll agree that god is awesome once he demonstrates that fact, and not before.
A sin and a crime are not the same thing first of all though in some cases a sin can also be a crime. I think you understand that but I just want to be clear on this. Crime is a transgression of human laws. A sin is a transgression against God.
As for the ills of the world, I believe that all ills can be traced back to sin. We know that actions have a ripple effect that we can only trace so far. It should be easy to understand that sinful actions have a ripple effect that negatively affect the world in ways that cannot easily be traced back to a single sin.
What you mean is that you will believe that God is awesome once God personally does what you want God to. God has already demonstrated that He is awesome. There should be no reason for Him to do so again.
Yeah, I get the difference, but a sin is basically a crime against the laws of god, so it works from my point of view.
The evils of the world being traced back to sin exactly proves my point. Why would god create sin in the first place. He was the only thing in existence at the beginning of time, he could have done anything, why create sin?
And basically yes to your last, because what I want god to do is make the world better, which is easily within his power. If I were to wake up tommorrow and everything was perfect in the world, then one of my first thoughts would be, "Well there must be a god, no way this could have happened on its own." And I have seen no demonstration that god is awesome. I have read parts of a book that claims that. I have also read a book that claims there is a school for wizards in Scotland, and a book that claims four children went to a parallel universe during WW2.
You just raised an interesting question, did God create sin or did God just name sin? Now a sin is disobeying God and the human mind tells us that someone cannot very well disobey themselves. Assuming God conforms to the human mind (which God does not) then God cannot disobey Himself and therefore cannot sin and if God cannot sin then its impossible God could have created the first sin. I am not sure if this line of logic is correct or not but its interesting.
. This is false. God goes against himself in many occasions and takes away the will of man on his whims.
That is incorrect. I really don't know what else to say in response to this. God does not, and would not use His power to force a person to choose to do something they would not otherwise choose.
. HE FORCE PHARAOH AGAINST HIS OWN FREE WILL. How can you deny that?
This is true, actually, though it only happens after the fifth plague. Two relevant quotes:
The Holy One, Blessed is He, gives someone a chance to repent, and not only one opportunity but several chances: once, twice, three times. But then, if the person still has not repented, G-d locks the person's heart altogether, cutting off the possibility of repentance in the future.
...
Since Pharaoh sinned on his own impulse and mistreated the Israelites who sojourned in his land...justice required that repentance be withheld until retribution had been visited upon him.
First is shemot raba, second is laws of repentance by Maimonides.
Pharaoh was not going to let the Hebrews go anyway. The only thing God did was make it easier for him to suffer through the plagues. God did not force Pharaoh to act make a decision contrary to his own inclinations.
. Cakes was correct. I read the original script. You are wrong. Stop doing this. He was going to let them go because of his suffering but god wanted him to suffer to a point the Egyptians would unload their gold and possessions on the Jews so they would just fucking leave.
A sin and a crime are not the same thing first of all though in some cases a sin can also be a crime. I think you understand that but I just want to be clear on this. Crime is a transgression of human laws. A sin is a transgression against God.
As for the ills of the world, I believe that all ills can be traced back to sin. We know that actions have a ripple effect that we can only trace so far. It should be easy to understand that sinful actions have a ripple effect that negatively affect the world in ways that cannot easily be traced back to a single sin.
What you mean is that you will believe that God is awesome once God personally does what you want God to. God has already demonstrated that He is awesome. There should be no reason for Him to do so again.
Yeah, I get the difference, but a sin is basically a crime against the laws of god, so it works from my point of view.
The evils of the world being traced back to sin exactly proves my point. Why would god create sin in the first place. He was the only thing in existence at the beginning of time, he could have done anything, why create sin?
And basically yes to your last, because what I want god to do is make the world better, which is easily within his power. If I were to wake up tommorrow and everything was perfect in the world, then one of my first thoughts would be, "Well there must be a god, no way this could have happened on its own." And I have seen no demonstration that god is awesome. I have read parts of a book that claims that. I have also read a book that claims there is a school for wizards in Scotland, and a book that claims four children went to a parallel universe during WW2.
You just raised an interesting question, did God create sin or did God just name sin? Now a sin is disobeying God and the human mind tells us that someone cannot very well disobey themselves. Assuming God conforms to the human mind (which God does not) then God cannot disobey Himself and therefore cannot sin and if God cannot sin then its impossible God could have created the first sin. I am not sure if this line of logic is correct or not but its interesting.
God created everything, if we are to assume he is real, ergo he created sin, as sin is a part of everything. But what about my other points?
-snip- God created everything, if we are to assume he is real, ergo he created sin, as sin is a part of everything. But what about my other points?
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
-snip- God created everything, if we are to assume he is real, ergo he created sin, as sin is a part of everything. But what about my other points?
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
Really? What about all that, "In the beginning there was only the Word and the Word was God," malarkey?
-snip- God created everything, if we are to assume he is real, ergo he created sin, as sin is a part of everything. But what about my other points?
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
Really? What about all that, "In the beginning there was only the Word and the Word was God," malarkey?
-snip- God created everything, if we are to assume he is real, ergo he created sin, as sin is a part of everything. But what about my other points?
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
Really? What about all that, "In the beginning there was only the Word and the Word was God," malarkey?
. "In the beginning God made the earth and the heaven, and the earth was chaos and darkness over an abyss and the spirit of god floating above the water. And god said let there be light"
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
Really? What about all that, "In the beginning there was only the Word and the Word was God," malarkey?
That's John, not Genesis.
Oh, right, thanks, I only really read Revelations all the way through, and only for the apocalypse.
. God didn't create everything... Looking at the first chapter, one could see that he only created order in the chaos, he did not actually create it all. He just separated one from another.
Really? What about all that, "In the beginning there was only the Word and the Word was God," malarkey?
. "In the beginning God made the earth and the heaven, and the earth was chaos and darkness over an abyss and the spirit of god floating above the water. And god said let there be light"
But doesn't that quote back up my understanding, if god created stuff and then there was chaos?
Please don't use that word. If you are referring to the Jewish God, that's not the correct name and its considered disrespectful to use his name, even if you got it right. Please use the preferred conversational name, Hashem.
If you are referring to the Christian god, that's not what they call him (with the exception of one christian sect). Please just stick to "christian god" if you want to be specific about what god you are referring to.
Also this is known to be a BAD translitteration of a translitteration of a deliberate spelling error and using it to sound informed doesn't actually have that end effect.
Thanks for your consideration
...It's disrespectful to use the name of a deity. Well colour me stunned. That wont stop me using it. Freedom of speech and what not and it does make it clear which deity out of the many thousands that humanity has worshipped that I am on about.
Using what is factually a WRONG name is clearly disrespectful. Do you like it when people insist on calling you by the wrong name even knowing its wrong? Free speech doesn't change the fact that I'm supposed to treat you with consideration. I pointed out what you said was considered rude, and I gave you a correction that would allow you to be specific without being rude. I guess we learned something about you.
The Jewish deity is the Christian one, and the Islamic one.
I agree the Islamic and Jewish deity is the same. I do not believe modern Christianity follows the same god, even if they think they do. I believe they have falling into a pagan religion. Besides, with one exception they don't use the name you used so we are back to it being an inappropriate reference.
I did mispell it though. It's Yahweh or that's as close as we have it. If you feel it is incorrect, please show your work. Otherwise I will continue to use Yahweh to refer to the deity of the Abrahamic faiths.
Fine, the name mistranslated that way can be abbreviated in English as YHVH, for the hebrew letters yud - hey - vav - hey. Not that the "V" (Vav) can sound like "V" "oo" or "o", it doesn't however sound like "W". That's a bad transliteration between Latin and English.
The remainder of the "vowel" sounds have been lost (they aren't written in traditional Hebrew) but the one thing we know for a fact is that the vowel sounds that were translated to create yahew from YHVH are based on the work in transliteration of a single monk in the middle ages who, working from a hebrew document, saw two "helper" characters (the way vowel sounds are now written when they are written) and he correctly transliterated those helpers.
The problem is that it was well documented that the vowel sounds for the name of god starting with A, the one we use instead of the personal name starting Y in prayer, were substituted into the Y name to remind people to never pronounce it but to use the alternate word. In other words, he read the deliberately wrong vowel sounds and thought they were right. Plus, the particular vowel combination he assumed incorrectly was right substantially changes the way you would pronounce that end from its default H to an "eh".
So while we don't know exactly how to pronounce the name anymore, we do know that particular transliteration is borked.
Pharaoh was not going to let the Hebrews go anyway. The only thing God did was make it easier for him to suffer through the plagues. God did not force Pharaoh to act make a decision contrary to his own inclinations.
. Cakes was correct. I read the original script. You are wrong. Stop doing this. He was going to let them go because of his suffering but god wanted him to suffer to a point the Egyptians would unload their gold and possessions on the Jews so they would just fucking leave.
Also, arguably, he wanted to make his point to the Israelites that their god was hugely powerful.
Frokane: From what my christian friends and aquantinces have told me is that if you dont accept jesus christ as your saviour before you die you wont go to heaven, so that which would mean you go to hell.
but then there are those who say as long as you are generally a good person you will go to heaven.
what is the truth?
The truth is, your Christian friends are not privy to any more truthful information than you are on the matter. As much as Seekster and others throw around their 'knowledge' or whatever it is, they don't know any better than you do. They just state what they think as if they might. One need only look at how they justify (or more often decline to justify) their assertions to be sure of this. When Seekster says "God created you with the freedom to decide for yourself. I'm sorry if you do not like that answer but it is the correct answer" he isn't speaking from knowledge.
I must have missed these passages. Would you mind directing me to them?
. Not evolution per se, but it's god somehow changing his mind how he wants people to worship him. The major one is the centralization of the practice of the religion. Before the conquest of Jerusalem by David and then the building of the Temple in the city, worshiping god was done in platforms throughout the lands where the Levis would sacrifice an offering, chant a few things and then eat the meat together with the person bringing the offering (Not before burning it to a crisp). But then David wanted to centralize the religion and move it to the Jerusalem, thus making it the political AND religious center of the tribes of Israel, thus giving the King more power over the religion and the faith of his people. Do you really want me to continue with this one? It's super long. Another example is two slightly different versions of the ten commandments from the tribal days to the agricultural days, the time jump is somehow around the 2-3 generations. Some things are added while others are omitted to signify the change in the lifestyle of the people. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS WERE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. YES, DON'T BE SHOCKED.
I was more referring to depictions of heaven and hell, since I have yet to see a single one within the bible. Dante's Inferno was amusing, but not quite what I'm looking for here.
I must have missed these passages. Would you mind directing me to them?
. Not evolution per se, but it's god somehow changing his mind how he wants people to worship him. The major one is the centralization of the practice of the religion. Before the conquest of Jerusalem by David and then the building of the Temple in the city, worshiping god was done in platforms throughout the lands where the Levis would sacrifice an offering, chant a few things and then eat the meat together with the person bringing the offering (Not before burning it to a crisp). But then David wanted to centralize the religion and move it to the Jerusalem, thus making it the political AND religious center of the tribes of Israel, thus giving the King more power over the religion and the faith of his people. Do you really want me to continue with this one? It's super long. Another example is two slightly different versions of the ten commandments from the tribal days to the agricultural days, the time jump is somehow around the 2-3 generations. Some things are added while others are omitted to signify the change in the lifestyle of the people. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS WERE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. YES, DON'T BE SHOCKED.
I was more referring to depictions of heaven and hell, since I have yet to see a single one within the bible. Dante's Inferno was amusing, but not quite what I'm looking for here.
. You have almost none in the Hebrew Bible. It appears first in the works of the wise men in the Middle Ages. Basically it's a very bad place to be in, but its purpose is for you to atone for your sins (Not really mentioned how) and then you get up to heaven which is a place where all of the righteous men and women go to. The Christian scripture? You do have mention of lake of fire and suffering, though not as detailed as you can find it now. Can't help you much with this one.
. Not evolution per se, but it's god somehow changing his mind how he wants people to worship him. The major one is the centralization of the practice of the religion. Before the conquest of Jerusalem by David and then the building of the Temple in the city, worshiping god was done in platforms throughout the lands where the Levis would sacrifice an offering, chant a few things and then eat the meat together with the person bringing the offering (Not before burning it to a crisp). But then David wanted to centralize the religion and move it to the Jerusalem, thus making it the political AND religious center of the tribes of Israel, thus giving the King more power over the religion and the faith of his people. Do you really want me to continue with this one? It's super long. Another example is two slightly different versions of the ten commandments from the tribal days to the agricultural days, the time jump is somehow around the 2-3 generations. Some things are added while others are omitted to signify the change in the lifestyle of the people. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS WERE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. YES, DON'T BE SHOCKED.
I was more referring to depictions of heaven and hell, since I have yet to see a single one within the bible. Dante's Inferno was amusing, but not quite what I'm looking for here.
. You have almost none in the Hebrew Bible. It appears first in the works of the wise men in the Middle Ages. Basically it's a very bad place to be in, but its purpose is for you to atone for your sins (Not really mentioned how) and then you get up to heaven which is a place where all of the righteous men and women go to. The Christian scripture? You do have mention of lake of fire and suffering, though not as detailed as you can find it now. Can't help you much with this one.
No new information, then. Thanks for the help regardless.
I was more referring to depictions of heaven and hell, since I have yet to see a single one within the bible. Dante's Inferno was amusing, but not quite what I'm looking for here.
. You have almost none in the Hebrew Bible. It appears first in the works of the wise men in the Middle Ages. Basically it's a very bad place to be in, but its purpose is for you to atone for your sins (Not really mentioned how) and then you get up to heaven which is a place where all of the righteous men and women go to. The Christian scripture? You do have mention of lake of fire and suffering, though not as detailed as you can find it now. Can't help you much with this one.
No new information, then. Thanks for the help regardless.
. Sorry to disappoint. *sob* I hope you... get your info... *sob* If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
. You have almost none in the Hebrew Bible. It appears first in the works of the wise men in the Middle Ages. Basically it's a very bad place to be in, but its purpose is for you to atone for your sins (Not really mentioned how) and then you get up to heaven which is a place where all of the righteous men and women go to. The Christian scripture? You do have mention of lake of fire and suffering, though not as detailed as you can find it now. Can't help you much with this one.
No new information, then. Thanks for the help regardless.
. Sorry to disappoint. *sob* I hope you... get your info... *sob* If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
I'm a bit of a biblical scholar, myself, so comparing notes is always nice. I was hoping you had ran across something that I had missed.
-snip- I'm a bit of a biblical scholar, myself, so comparing notes is always nice. I was hoping you had ran across something that I had missed.
. How much do you hold up the Talmod? It gives Hell a much bigger role. It all depends on the way you look at Judaism. In my eyes there is no mention of it in the Bible itself. You can find it starring in a Rabbi's speeches nowadays. (By the way, the perception of punishment turns from collective to a person taking responsibility for his actions, yet there are still sins that if you commit will DOOM your future generations (Up to some point), like being born a Bastard.)
Frokane: From what my christian friends and aquantinces have told me is that if you dont accept jesus christ as your saviour before you die you wont go to heaven, so that which would mean you go to hell.
but then there are those who say as long as you are generally a good person you will go to heaven.
what is the truth?
. Well, Jews say there is no hell for you to go to. If you sin against god the people affected from it will be you and your ancestors.
Um, no, that's actually an incredibly unorthodox viewpoint in Judaism, and not one I think I've ever heard of. Gehinnom is basically Hell, and your sins shouldn't have any impact on your descendants.
. NNNNNNNOPE. In Today's Israel, if you are born a Bastard or are THE OFFSPRING OF A BASTARD then you may not(!) legally marry another Jew. You may only marry another Bastard or a Gentile. A-HA! Punishment over generations still counts.
-snip- I'm a bit of a biblical scholar, myself, so comparing notes is always nice. I was hoping you had ran across something that I had missed.
. How much do you hold up the Talmod? It gives Hell a much bigger role. It all depends on the way you look at Judaism. In my eyes there is no mention of it in the Bible itself. You can find it starring in a Rabbi's speeches nowadays. (By the way, the perception of punishment turns from collective to a person taking responsibility for his actions, yet there are still sins that if you commit will DOOM your future generations (Up to some point), like being born a Bastard.)
I haven't, in truth, gone through the Talmod as much as I'd like to have. There was some mention within the Nag Hammadi texts about the afterlife, but it was more of an aside from Jesus basically criticizing the apostles for even thinking of the afterlife yet. Those texts are quite a pain to go through though, what with all the double-talk, symbolic storytelling, and references to biblical passages that don't exist.
I'd love to just swap some notes on it, though. I'd love to have someone who has more information on Judaism than I do.
TheIronRuler: NNNNNNNOPE. In Today's Israel, if you are born a Bastard or are THE OFFSPRING OF A BASTARD then you may not(!) legally marry another Jew. You may only marry another Bastard or a Gentile. A-HA! Punishment over generations still counts.
Being a mamzer isn't a "punishment", they are still considered full members of the Jewish community. I don't think there is a single Rabbi in history who has told a mamzer they're better off marrying a Gentile, by the way.
TheIronRuler: NNNNNNNOPE. In Today's Israel, if you are born a Bastard or are THE OFFSPRING OF A BASTARD then you may not(!) legally marry another Jew. You may only marry another Bastard or a Gentile. A-HA! Punishment over generations still counts.
Being a mamzer isn't a "punishment", they are still considered full members of the Jewish community. I don't think there is a single Rabbi in history who has told a mamzer they're better off marrying a Gentile, by the way.
. I just remembered that a moment before I posted this. They can't marry another Jew legally, they can only marry another Bastard of a Gentile. Of course no Rabbi would suggest a Bastard to marry a Gentile. This is overlooked to some degree - there are even court cases stating that a fatherhood test shall not be had if one of its results may end up causing a person to become a Bastard (Unless it was threatening his life - he needs an organ transplant or whatnot). They can still be the greatest scholars and know the Torah and scriptures inside out, but they are still a Bastard. Which is a punishment that carries on for generations.
After the hot-tub and casino, we're going to listen to George Carlin do stand up. You game?