Comments To Dr. Pipe's Comments To "The Pope Got It Right"

Submitted by orange yonason (United States), Jul 12, 2006 at 00:55

BS"D

"Daniel Pipes wrote: Second, I must register my respectful disagreement. The Koran indeed can be interpreted. Indeed, Muslims interpret the Koran no less than Jews and Christians interpret the Bible, and those interpretations have changed no less over time. The Koran, like the Bible, has a history."

I've said this before. I can't speak for Islam or Christianity, but there is no precident for change in the Torah. What we got at Sinai is what we have today; and the Prophets did not add to it, they merely elaborated on it. Nothing has changed, nor can it. And the further back we go, the more authoritative are the statements of the Rabbis of the time.

If it can be "interpreted" (more correctly, "understood") consistant with what went before, fine; but any interpretation (understanding) that is in conflict with the body of already accepted material must be rejected as incorrect. The "history" of the Torah is one of perpetuating it, not of attempting to modify it to 'keep up with the times'.

Therefore, you need to know that it is not correct to use the Torah as proof for your implicit assertions that either the fundamental tenets of a Religion can be modified, or that "outmoded" ideas can be ignored or rewritten. True, various groups of Jews have attempted that through history. But since in the end they all either return to Torah or dissappear, they can't be relied upon for proof. Sorry, but in this case the facts just don't support your thesis.

"It is a great mistake to assume that because something has not happened it cannot happen."

Yes, but wishful thinking can also be great mistake, especially when it is founded on flawed assumptions. The stakes are too high to grasp at such straws. And I haven't even touched on the, eh, 'difficulties' of estimating a probablility for an event that has never occurred, though if you want to wrestle with it, here's how this paper dealt with one example. (Actually, now that I think about it, that might be a really good example. Perhaps just recast individual Muslims as "votes" for or against terror and see where that takes you, though I have a hunch you won't like the neighborhood ---- unless perhaps you could somehow prevent the vast majority of them from 'voting', if you catch my drift.)

Very Respectfully
yonason

NOTE: I am not saying your thesis is wrong, only that:

(1) you can't use how Jews "interpret" Torah to prove it, and
(2) from my uninformed perspective it looks like the longshot of the millenium.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".