Political Crossfire Forums

[John]

John wrote: Israel wrote: John wrote: Isaiah 53
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors.

How is this explained away?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=15984&showrashi=true

Don't you love Rashi?

No...please. Tell us in your own words.



11. From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear.

This is what Rashi said:
From the toil of his soul he would eat and be satisfied, and he would not rob and plunder.
with his knowledge… would vindicate the just My servant would judge justly all those who came to litigate before him.
and their iniquities he would bear He would bear, in the manner of all the righteous, as it is said (Num. 18:1): “You and your sons shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary.”


12. Therefore, I will allot him a portion in public, and with the strong he shall share plunder, because he poured out his soul to death, and with transgressors he was counted; and he bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors.


This is what Rashi said:
Therefore Because he did this, I will allot him an inheritance and a lot in public with the Patriarchs.
he poured out his soul to death Heb. הֶעֱרָה. An expression like (Gen. 24: 20), “And she emptied (וַתְּעַר) her pitcher.”
and with transgressors he was counted He suffered torments as if he had sinned and transgressed, and this is because of others; he bore the sin of the many.
and interceded for the transgressors through his sufferings, for good came to the world through him.




Look at this pitiful explanation.

[Israel]

John wrote: Israel wrote: John wrote: No...please. Tell us in your own words.
John, read what you bolded, tell me, what tense is it in?


Yeah...who do you think is supposed to be reading this text?

You are. :-D
What about the people for 750 years before Yeshua?

[Mailech]

John wrote: Look at this pitiful explanation.

Actually, it doesn't say anything that has any major disagreements with your arguments.

And why do you find it pitiful?
Is it because Rashi doesn't agree with your interpretation that this passage refers to your son of a w**** that you think is G-d?

[Mailech]

John wrote: Isaiah 53
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors.



How is this explained away?

What is to explain away,
The Jewish people are the ones that keep this world from being destroyed, it is certainly not you with you quasi idolatrous beliefs.
Yet despite the fact that the only reason your sorry behind has not be destroyed is the merit of the Jews who keep the Torah, your kind still tries to wipe us out one way or the other. Well guess what, you will fail, you will never convert the Jews, there will always be those that will keep the Law of Moshe, that is what G-d promised us, and unlike your belief I know that G-d does not lie.
So when Mashiach does come soon, your jaw will drop open and you will be amazed and shocked at the truth which will be so clear when it does happen.

It is all there in Isaiah 53.

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: Is it because Rashi doesn't agree with your interpretation that this passage refers to your son of a w**** that you think is G-d?
Lashon Ha-Ra, my friend... Lashon Ha-Ra.. :-|

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: It is all there in Isaiah 53.
Still trying to figure out how it could possibly be "prophetic" if it was written in 700BC in the past tense.. :think:

[Israel]

Mailech wrote: So when Mashiach does come soon, your jaw will drop open and you will be amazed and shocked at the truth which will be so clear when it does happen.
Wouldn't it be ironic if he's one of the two-hundred who run for your tzizit. :lol:

[Mailech]

psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: Is it because Rashi doesn't agree with your interpretation that this passage refers to your son of a w**** that you think is G-d?
Lashon Ha-Ra, my friend... Lashon Ha-Ra.. :-|

Not exactly true since the very few places where Lashon Hara is permitted is when talking about a person who knows better but did wrong anyway, and from what I can glean Jesus should have known better.

Besides, He disses a great holy learned man Rashi, I will diss his holy man.

[Mailech]

Israel wrote: Mailech wrote: So when Mashiach does come soon, your jaw will drop open and you will be amazed and shocked at the truth which will be so clear when it does happen.
Wouldn't it be ironic if he's one of the two-hundred who run for your tzizit. :lol:

I would be happy to take him in 8)

[Israel]

John wrote: Look at this pitiful explanation.
John, why don't you look this up: Zdayen li me ha'einaiym.

It amazes me how you can take some of the greatest torah scholars and just reduce their life-long work to 'pitiful' because it doesn't fall in-line with your beliefs.

Do you even realize how disrespectful what you said was? Imagine if I took, oh... I don't know, your NT scripture and just said, this is pitiful what crackpot wrote this? Would you be a little annoyed??? You need to show some decorum about our beliefs, especially since less then 5 hours ago, you realized their was a concept in Judaism about reincarnation, and then less then an hour after hearing this term, gilgul ha'ne'shamot, your arroagance and pride were ready to explain it's meaning to us, the people who even TOLD you about it in the first place.

Sometimes I think you argue a point just to argue. It's very intellectual dishonest. But that's okay, because your 'holy spirit' is guiding you, right? :?

[Israel]

Mailech wrote: Israel wrote: Mailech wrote: So when Mashiach does come soon, your jaw will drop open and you will be amazed and shocked at the truth which will be so clear when it does happen.
Wouldn't it be ironic if he's one of the two-hundred who run for your tzizit. :lol:
I would be happy to take him in 8)
I'm wondering if he got the joke. :)

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: Is it because Rashi doesn't agree with your interpretation that this passage refers to your son of a w**** that you think is G-d?
Lashon Ha-Ra, my friend... Lashon Ha-Ra.. :-|

Not exactly true since the very few places where Lashon Hara is permitted is when talking about a person who knows better but did wrong anyway, and from what I can glean Jesus should have known better.
Then you glean incorrectly.. Not that I disagree w/ you (or agree w/ you), but the fact is it's impossible for you judge, given the gulf of time and space and separates you from Palestine 2,000 years ago. When you cannot judge on such matters, it's best to defer and hold your tongue in silence..

Quote: Besides, He disses a great holy learned man Rashi, I will diss his holy man.
And he'll diss your holy man back, and you'll diss his holy man back, and he'll diss your's back, and you'll diss his back ad infinitum..

It's called the cycle of violence and if you haven't figured it out yet, it's not exactly a productive way to conduct your life. What you've just said here speaks volumes about the Mideast peace process, and just how *realistic* it is.. :-|

[Israel]

psholtz wrote: Then you glean incorrectly.. It's impossible for you judge, given the gulf of time and space and separates you from Palestine 2,000 years ago. When you cannot judge on such matters, it's best to defer and hold your tongue in silence..
What makes you think he didn't know better?

psholtz wrote: And he'll diss your holy man back, and you'll diss his holy man back, and he'll diss your's back, and you'll diss his back ad infinitum..
I don't even think John heard of Rashi until Duchifas mentioned it (probably a year or two ago).

psholtz wrote: It's called the cycle of violence and if you haven't figured it out yet, it's not exactly a productive way to conduct your life. What you're just said here speaks volumes about the Mideast peace process, and just how *realistic* it is.. :-|
But it's okay for John to call the Oral law idolatrous? I don't remember you saying anything in that thread.

[Mailech]

Psholtz,
From what I read if he thinks he is the son of G-d or that he was the Messiah and clearly he wasn't and he led people astray to me says that he was willfully sinning.


And also I am not a Christian, I don't turn the other cheek. (Sometimes)

[psholtz]

Israel wrote: psholtz wrote: Then you glean incorrectly.. It's impossible for you judge, given the gulf of time and space and separates you from Palestine 2,000 years ago. When you cannot judge on such matters, it's best to defer and hold your tongue in silence..
What makes you think he didn't know better?
Like I said, I'm not going to judge that.. :wink:

Quote: psholtz wrote: And he'll diss your holy man back, and you'll diss his holy man back, and he'll diss your's back, and you'll diss his back ad infinitum..
I don't even think John heard of Rashi until Duchifas mentioned it (probably a year or two ago).
Probably not, but there's no reason to get personal w/ it.. I'm going to phrase this in as *polite* a way as I know how (given the forum rules about name calling), but John is clearly not the *least* ignorant human who's ever walked the planet.

When confronted w/ such an individual, it's best (to a first approximation) to just ignore them. If that doesn't work, then counter w/ reason. But don't allow yourself to get emotional over the ignorance that such a person displays. If what John says is wrong, and you know in your heart that it is wrong, then why let it affect you? It shouldn't, period. You should have pity on that individual, for being as ignorant as they are.

Quote: psholtz wrote: It's called the cycle of violence and if you haven't figured it out yet, it's not exactly a productive way to conduct your life. What you're just said here speaks volumes about the Mideast peace process, and just how *realistic* it is.. :-|
But it's okay for John to call the Oral law idolatrous? I don't remember you saying anything in that thread.
No, it's not. But John is just saying this b/c he himself is idolatorous and therefore he'll denounce anything he doesn't understand as being idolatorous.. His spiritual understanding on such matters is like that of a small child.

You shouldn't let it affect you, or get upset about it. Argue against him w/ reason, and if that fails, just ignore him (if you feel you are correct).

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: Psholtz,
From what I read if he thinks he is the son of G-d or that he was the Messiah and clearly he wasn't and he led people astray to me says that he was willfully sinning
There are two (perhaps three) issues here:

1. Whether Yeshua was the son of G-d (or the "Messiah")
2. Whether Yeshua led his people astray

One issue one, I agree w/ you.. It's inconcievable to me that the Creator, for whom the very largest galaxy must be nothing more than the smallest atom of his Being, could (or would, or did) choose to incarnate in a small town in Syria 2,000 years, and then proceed to kill himself all b/c Eve happened to eat the wrong apple. To presume that this is true is idolatorous and (imho) a great abomination.

That said, even John is entitled to his opinions (erroneous as they likely are). If you disagree w/ them, I would argue against them w/ reason, and if that fails simply ignore him.

On issue two, I suppose that's something for you and your people to decide, but I feel there's much you can learn from reading the Christian Scriptures w/ a slightly less prejuidiced heart. Be that as it may, the choice is yours. Noone is forcing you to hold any such opinion one way or the other..

[Israel]

psholtz wrote: and then proceed to kill himself all b/c Eve happened to eat the wrong apple. To presume that this is true is idolatorous and (imho) a great abomination.
I'm not sure if Mailech or Duchifas would agree, but I believe that Adam and Eve knew what they were doing and they chose to do. To say that they accidently ate from the tree is wrong IMO. Remember, if they were created on Eriv Shabbas, if they had waited (I think 3 hours), the tree would have been Kosher to eat from. . .

[John]

Israel wrote: John wrote: Look at this pitiful explanation.
John, why don't you look this up: Zdayen li me ha'einaiym.

It amazes me how you can take some of the greatest torah scholars and just reduce their life-long work to 'pitiful' because it doesn't fall in-line with your beliefs.

Do you even realize how disrespectful what you said was? Imagine if I took, oh... I don't know, your NT scripture and just said, this is pitiful what crackpot wrote this? Would you be a little annoyed??? You need to show some decorum about our beliefs, especially since less then 5 hours ago, you realized their was a concept in Judaism about reincarnation, and then less then an hour after hearing this term, gilgul ha'ne'shamot, your arroagance and pride were ready to explain it's meaning to us, the people who even TOLD you about it in the first place.

Sometimes I think you argue a point just to argue. It's very intellectual dishonest. But that's okay, because your 'holy spirit' is guiding you, right? :?

I wasn't aware that the commentaries that Rashi wrote are considered to be "scripture".

I really don't think you should be bragging about the believe of reincarnation being accepted by the Jews. That's why I said you would look silly...I wasn't planning on debating it with you....you look silly enough just admitting that you believe in it.

[John]

Israel wrote: John wrote: Israel wrote: John wrote: No...please. Tell us in your own words.
John, read what you bolded, tell me, what tense is it in?


Yeah...who do you think is supposed to be reading this text?

You are. :-D
What about the people for 750 years before Yeshua?

They had Faith that Messiah would one day come....They up held all of the religious rituals as a testimony to this belief....but we are to believe that He already came. I believe that it's written the way it's written for our sake in recognizing the One who came and fulfilled it.

[John]

Quote: And why do you find it pitiful?

I'm sorry. Pitiful was too strong of a word to use, I apologize. :flwr: :hip: