You can tell how smart a religious group is by how many words are in their holy books.
>Jewish holy books have more words than Christian holy books>Christian holy books are Jewish holy books + more
>>18721844Huh? Are you just combining all the Talmuds or something? The Hebrew bible absolutely doesn't reach a millions words.
>>18721844Judaism is kind of bloated if you include the Talmud, since the Talmud is multiple volumes in length, but it's really only meant for Rabbi
>>18721844Is this a 6 million Holocaust joke? Where are you getting g these numbers? The talmud is obly like 2 million, and that's the bloated part of their books. The Tanakh isn't even half a million.
>>18721844This is stupid table. What even is the measure? There are many hadiths and the full Islamic tradition has 10 million or more words.
>>18721872>There are many hadithsOh it shows, it shows
>>18721844>>18721850>>18721853>>18721858I think he included "the Zohar" as a holy book, which is iffy as most practicing jews would probably say it's sacred but it's also not considered a 'scripture' the way Christians view the bible, and it's also not an authoritative text the way Islam views the Hadiths. Basically jews see it as sacred but it's sorta just there.
>>18721895I attended an orthodox synagogue for a while and the rabbi there straight up told me Kabbalah is bullshit and the people calling themselves Kabbalists are just grifting
>>18721895There are Jews that don't even consider the Talmud itself to be scripture
>>18721906None of them do, the Talmud is equivalent to the Hadiths in its function as oral tradition, but it's still considered an authoritative morally binding framework so including it in OP's list could still count, although he evidently didn't apply the same standards with Islam, and these standards would have to include the Church traditions/Church father writings in Christianity and so on. So yeah it would have been less sloppy to just make the list scriptures only in which case Judaism has a smaller word count than Christianity by default.
>>18721898One of the dumber jews then
>>18721921>None of them doKaraites and Ethiopian Orthodox Jews literally do not consider the Talmud to be scripture anon
>>18721928No jew considers the Talmud to be scripture is what I meant. The distinctions of the sects you mentioned are the moral weights they apply to the Talmud, not whether it's scriptures. The same way Christians debate about sacred tradition vs. scripture alone. It doesn't mean that Catholics consider the sacred traditions to be scripture.
>>18721874is this hadith sahih?
>>18721848I'd assume OP is including the Talmud along with the Torah.
>>18721844congrats for repeating one of the most famous falsehoods since the history of mankindhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0qmkQGqpM8
>>18721959Do they really consider that a “holy book” or just ancient wisdom?
>>18721959The Talmud is still not enough, he's almost certainly including the Zohar as well.
>>18721933In Catholicism the catechism effectively is Scripture (by the standards in which other religions would articulate scripture). Catholicism is pretty much the only Christian denomination with a solid equivalent to the Talmud.
>>18722013On the other hand the entire Talmud can be described as ancient tradition, whereas the CCC is little more than the mouth piece of the current pope and consequently includes concepts from modernist liberalism (e.g. death penalty is LE BAD)
>>18721959Would you include the entire Catholic and/or Orthodox traditional canon in Christianity's count?
>>18721844>how do yo know its the word of god>the poetry anon, look at it, it is beautiful muslims are too inbred
>>18722013>(by the standards in which other religions would articulate scripture)We just talked about this - Judaism itself doesn't consider the Talmud to be scripture, so where are those "standards" exactly?
>>18721844Care to make an argument?
>>18721895The Zohar was unironically forged in medieval Al-Andalus but Jewtards actually believe it to have been written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, geg!look up, “esnoga zohar”
>>18722159Judaism takes the Talmud more seriously than it does the actual Bible, and rabbis spend more of their training studying that
>>18722280The Talmud is decidedly not scripture in Judaism and its moral weight is assigned equally, at most, with the Tanakh. The Talmud, as already established itt, is far more extensive than the Tanakh, so naturally more time is spent on studying it than the Tanakh. The Tanakh is still considered scripture while the Talmud is not, and their moral bindings are equal at most.
>>18722295Jews are not sola scriptura protestants. The Jewish position is that reading the Tanakh alone is utterly insufficient for learning the law and to fully understand the complexities of it you must study the sages, for which there is no better resource than the Talmud.It is for this reason that many Jewish practices seem totally alien to Christians that are already familiar with the Torah. It's because they're not from the Torah, they're from the sages commentaries and records of tradition. If you are defining scripture as the written basis of your religion then the Talmud is absolutely scripture. If you are defining scripture narrowly as the literal word of god then the entire Tanakh isn't even scripture, the Torah alone would be.
>>18722013Wrong.Westminster Confession of Faith
>>18722326>Jews are not sola scriptura protestantsCorrect, they assign equal moral value between the Tanakh and the Talmud. What is so hard to understand? Catholics don't consider sacred tradition to be scripture and also assign it equal moral value with the bible. Everything is consistent here, and it's actually very intuitive to Christians.>If you are defining scripture as the written basis of your religion then the Talmud is absolutely scripture. If you are defining scripture narrowly as the literal word of god then the entire Tanakh isn't even scripture, the Torah alone would be.Scripture is text said to be inspired("breathed") by god, and Judaism applies that to all 3 parts of the Tanakh, not just the Torah. Judaism does not see the Talmud as divinely inspired, it is explicitly a preservation of oral tradition which they consider essential in interpreting the Tanakh. Everything here aligns with views of scripture being distinct from church tradition even when their moral values are seen as equal, as is also the case in Christianity.
>>18722332>Scripture is text said to be inspired("breathed") by godIn that case the Talmud is scripture, as all of it supposedly comes from the oral Torah that was handed down since Moses. This definition would also expand it even further to include the Zohar as well. In fact this definition would also make the Catechism, or any official church teachings, scripture within Catholicism. As the church itself is supposed to be divinely inspired
>>18722336All you're doing is assuming your own interpretation on a word, then turning to Christians and tell "look, this should all be counter-intuitive to you". The moral structures are actually remarkably similar between Judaism and the Catholic church.
>>18722339I’m only working with the definition of scripture you yourself articulated just now. >The moral structures are actually remarkably similar between Judaism and the Catholic church.I made this exact point earlier and it was me who compared the catechism to the Talmud in the first place. If OP is including the Talmud and/or the Zohar, it would not be fair to include the Catechism and other supposedly inspired resources.
>>18722346*it would be
>pilpuling everything like a circumcised autist means le smartMarrin's ASOIAF has more words than Tolkien's LOTR. Which author is smarter?
>>18722070Are you even surprised that a jew is lying through his schnozz and misrepresenting obvious facts to gloat delusionally?
