@AlchoPwnWith you, it is not a logical or clear discussion.
You have an agenda, and then take quotes to fit it.
No, that is paranoia on your part. I could easily say that you are the one with the agenda, seeing how you want to whitewash the dubious and ugly history of your people in their formative years. That is a form of dishonesty that does you no credit.
@AlchoPwn I explained at length when we last clashed on another thread, that simply reading the bible in English, will provide only a superficial reading.
And yet you offer nothing by way of supporting text to support anything you say. Where are your references? No references=zero credibility for your claims. Of course your references also need to satisfy cross-examination. As to so-called superficial readings, as opposed to what? Reading informed by cult membership? That won't be entirely unbiased now, will it?
The way it is read and studeied by Jews involves context. That comes only from knowing the four basic levels of Torah, and from understanding the Talmud (Oral Torah) and the commentaries.
I am well aware of Yeshiva studies and their limitations, but this is entirely diversionary on your part. Back to the actual point...
If you recall, you took issue with me claiming that the Rabbi in question who has been keeping 50 women in his cult as concubines was not in fact following normal practice for ancient Judaism. I have clearly demonstrated that his behavior is indeed consistent with the practices of ancient Judaism, and I have done so in detail. Your claims however have been repeatedly proven dishonest and false, yet you persist in making them, so I persist in proving you wrong and dishonest.
Not to mention that it is written in Hebrew, and studying in it in Hebrew means knowledge of word roots, and letter placements, and Gematria, which convey the proper meaning.
Yes, well, given that I used to translate Hebrew, Aramaic, Ancient Greek and Arabic for a living, I do know about such things. I am also utterly unimpressed by Gematria, as for every time it yields something interesting, one must ignore a dozen times when it reveals noise rather than signal. Claiming therefore that it is anything other than a superstition is pure confirmation bias. Are you aware that Greek also has access to a form of Gematria? Of course it is open to the same criticism.
You are single handedly trying to impose your basic "cut and paste" reading of things as some kind of truth, in the face of centuries of study by Jewish scholars. It's bizarre.
I'm hardly going too waste serious scholarship on you. I am dashing this off on the fly, offer only enough evidence to prove that you're wrong. You on the other hand offer no actual quotes to support anything you say. Highly suspicious.
Hence your insistence on execution being common is not correct, for a study of Talmud shows this was a "Once in a generation" occurence.
You are clearly wrong about this. Did you even read the link I left that clearly shows that executions in the ancient Jewish states happened on a regular basis, and multiple crimes carried capital punishment as a penalty? No, you didn't , because you're intellectually dishonest, and would sooner repeat false information to support your agenda of misrepresenting history.
Any dictionary will clearly define concubine.
Great! Then please include 8 easily accessible links to the information so that people can verify your claims. Or can't you do that?
The examples of Zilpah and Bilha show integral members of a household, whose sons became some of the 12 Tribes.
Again, you expect everyone to suddenly have access to this information. Where are the links? If you provide no links, then everything you say is here-say.
Basically there was a recently busted coercion cult in Israel. The local religious Jews tried to stop it. The man who ran it was not using any known form of Judaism to justify what he did, he basically "went rogue" and it was a crime against religious and civil law.
He broke modern laws, not ancient laws. That was the point I was making all along. I still stand by it. There is no law to suggest that a Rabbi cannot have concubines in great profusion should he be able to do so. It only becomes a problem when there are modern laws about coercion that there is an issue. In ancient times? Not so much.
There seems little point in continuing this subject as you are far removed from the established body of knowledge and understanding. A fresh approach to a subject is all well and good, but not if it is based on such a "face-value" approach.
I agree that there is little point in continuing. Clearly you can't offer a single piece of documentary evidence to support your spurious claims, and that makes this a pretty one-sided exchange. Your lack of knowledge about your people's history is shameful, as is your inability to offer any supporting documentation to support your spurious claims. Clearly you don't know what you're talking about.