Political Crossfire Forums

[John]

Don't you understand? The OT states that the Messiah's own people, the Jews, would reject Him and the Gentiles will believe in Him.

That HAD to happen. It's God's word.

[Duchifas]

John wrote: Don't you understand? The OT states that the Messiah's own people, the Jews, would reject Him and the Gentiles will believe in Him.

That HAD to happen. It's God's word.

John, the Original Testament states a lot of things. But you happily disregard a whole lot of them, terming it shadow this and shadow that. But then you take some mistranslated verses here and there, put them out of context, and parade them around as some sort of proof for something.

That is not in the least bit convincing and never has been.

[John]

Duchifas wrote: John wrote: Don't you understand? The OT states that the Messiah's own people, the Jews, would reject Him and the Gentiles will believe in Him.

That HAD to happen. It's God's word.

John, the Original Testament states a lot of things. But you happily disregard a whole lot of them, terming it shadow this and shadow that. But then you take some mistranslated verses here and there, put them out of context, and parade them around as some sort of proof for something.

That is not in the least bit convincing and never has been.

The fact that you're alive proves just the hypocrisy that this statement is. Did your parents stone you when you went through your rebellious stage? Nope. I bet you're pretty well off...have you ever offered a lamb to the Lord? Nope. Do you trim your beard? Yep. You don't keep half of the Mosaic Law...but you have the nerve to point your finger at me?

Please.


So...Duchifas. What exactly is the mistranslated verse?

[Mailech]

John wrote: Duchifas wrote: John wrote: Don't you understand? The OT states that the Messiah's own people, the Jews, would reject Him and the Gentiles will believe in Him.

That HAD to happen. It's God's word.

John, the Original Testament states a lot of things. But you happily disregard a whole lot of them, terming it shadow this and shadow that. But then you take some mistranslated verses here and there, put them out of context, and parade them around as some sort of proof for something.

That is not in the least bit convincing and never has been.

The fact that you're alive proves just the hypocrisy that this statement is. Did your parents stone you when you went through your rebellious stage? Nope. I bet you're pretty well off...have you ever offered a lamb to the Lord? Nope. Do you trim your beard? Yep. You don't keep half of the Mosaic Law...but you have the nerve to point your finger at me?

Please.


So...Duchifas. What exactly is the mistranslated verse?

And that is why we need the Oral Law, to explain the case of the rebelious son and to explain the parameters of shaving, because NOTHING makes sense without some form of Oral Law.

[John]

Mailech wrote: John wrote: Duchifas wrote: John wrote: Don't you understand? The OT states that the Messiah's own people, the Jews, would reject Him and the Gentiles will believe in Him.

That HAD to happen. It's God's word.

John, the Original Testament states a lot of things. But you happily disregard a whole lot of them, terming it shadow this and shadow that. But then you take some mistranslated verses here and there, put them out of context, and parade them around as some sort of proof for something.

That is not in the least bit convincing and never has been.

The fact that you're alive proves just the hypocrisy that this statement is. Did your parents stone you when you went through your rebellious stage? Nope. I bet you're pretty well off...have you ever offered a lamb to the Lord? Nope. Do you trim your beard? Yep. You don't keep half of the Mosaic Law...but you have the nerve to point your finger at me?

Please.


So...Duchifas. What exactly is the mistranslated verse?

And that is why we need the Oral Law, to explain the case of the rebelious son and to explain the parameters of shaving, because NOTHING makes sense without some form of Oral Law.

And that's the SAME thing the New Testament is for. Except it's INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit...as is the OT.

It's your choice to reject what Jesus brought to us if you want...but don't throw hypocritical arguments at me.

[John]

What you need to admit is that a lot of the Oral Law was written in response and defence against Christianity.

[Duchifas]

John wrote: The fact that you're alive proves just the hypocrisy that this statement is. Did your parents stone you when you went through your rebellious stage? Nope.

I did not go through a rebellious stage. And I most certainly did not reach the threshold required for being stoned as ben sorer umoreh. In fact, no child ever has, in all of history.

Quote: I bet you're pretty well off...have you ever offered a lamb to the Lord? Nope.

As soon as I get my Temple back.

Quote: Do you trim your beard? Yep.

Step one: learn Hebrew. Step two: read the passage in Hebrew.

Quote: You don't keep half of the Mosaic Law...but you have the nerve to point your finger at me?

Please.

If you read my post more carefully than you did, you would have seen that I don't point a finger at you personally, but rather at the credibility of your arguments. If you took as some sort of personal criticism of your private life, it was not intended to be such.

Quote: So...Duchifas. What exactly is the mistranslated verse?

Verses. I said verses. There are plenty of them, floating all over the NASB.

[Israel]

John wrote: What exactly is the mistranslated verse?
Well, I don't think there is just one... Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 53, Psalms 22, Psalms 110 are a few, but I'm sure there are tons more.

[Israel]

John wrote: Do you trim your beard? Yep.
John, it is only forbidden for a man to shave the sides of his face with a razor (Leviticus 19:27).

The third Lubavitcher Rebbe is I believe, the only sage who who said it was forbidden to even trim it. Most sages say it's okay under certain circumstances.

If you're actually interested in learning what he said... Yoreh De'ah Responsa 93

[Duchifas]

John wrote: And that's the SAME thing the New Testament is for. Except it's INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit...as is the OT.

Ahh, there is this guy, Almar, who started posting recently. He also claims he is INSPIRED. Well, all these inspirations have about the same level of credibility in my eyes.

Try prove to him that he is not inspired.

[cap'n queasy]

Israel wrote: John wrote: Do you trim your beard? Yep.
John, it is only forbidden for a man to shave the sides of his face with a razor (Leviticus 19:27).

The third Lubavitcher Rebbe is I believe, the only sage who who said it was forbidden to even trim it. Most sages say it's okay under certain circumstances.

If you're actually interested in learning what he said... Yoreh De'ah Responsa 93

Do you wear a beard Israel? I haven't trimmed mine in several years.

:-D
I don't know why, I just don't want to. Why does the Rebbe say not to?

[Israel]

cap'n queasy wrote: Do you wear a beard Israel?
I don't know if wear is the correct word, but yes, I have grown a beard.

cap'n queasy wrote: I haven't trimmed mine in several years.
I trim mine about twice a year.

cap'n queasy wrote: I don't know why, I just don't want to. Why does the Rebbe say not to?
Look it up... Yoreh Deah Responsa 93. I also found this...

Gemara Makkot 21a: One cannot shave with a razor but can shave with scissors. One can also use a powder even though it completely destroys the hairs.

[Mailech]

John wrote: What you need to admit is that a lot of the Oral Law was written in response and defence against Christianity.

The Oral Law was written as a response to the diaspora. It would have been hard to keep the Oral transmision process going when people are all over and constantly on the run. That is why it was written.

The Oral Law exists, to explain the Written one.
LeHavdil, like the US Constitution has court precidents to explain the Constitution and apply it to the modern day.
The same is true of all things. Why go to school, when you could just read all the texts, because alot of information is transmitted orally that cannot be done through reading. If one person studies alone, he can absorb a text, when two learn together there is solid exchange of ideas and the learning process is so much stronger.

John do you beleive in the Protocals of the Elders of Zion?
Do you beleive that the Torah was written about 2500 to 3000 years ago by a cabal of Rabbis? That Jews control the media? That Israel controls America? That Jews control world banking?

You see there are alot of conspiracy theories out there about Jewish people going behind the scenes, inventing things controlling history.

You saying that the the entire Jewish people got together and created the Oral Law as a response to Christianity is as stupid as it is insulting.

The same thing that makes the Torah unique in its mass revelation that precludes forgery, as it commands the transmision from generation to generation. The Oral Law has the same thing. Do you think the Rabbi Judah the Prince when he wrote the Mishnah was making up the names of what people before him said. People were happily doing thier 613 commandments (many of which are incomprehensible without the Oral Law) when suddenly some Rabbis came along and said wait no this is too easy make it harder. What does the Torah say about the Jews? That we are a stiff necked people. That means that the same people who threw Jesus out on his ass for being a false Messiah would have thrown these crazy Rabbis out for imposing these crazy restrictions and illucidations. Unless, unless it already existed. :think:

Besides the idea that it is a response to Christianity is rediculous. Do you know that the earliest Tannaim, like Hillel and Shamai where before Christianity, so this "cabal of rabbis" must have been doing their thing even before Christianity.

[psholtz]

Duchifas wrote: Quote: I bet you're pretty well off...have you ever offered a lamb to the Lord? Nope.

As soon as I get my Temple back.
You already have your Temple..

You're just too ignorant to realize it or make use of it (as is 99.9% of the rest of humanity).

See my above post concerning Leonardo DaVinci..

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: Besides the idea that it is a response to Christianity is rediculous. Do you know that the earliest Tannaim, like Hillel and Shamai where before Christianity, so this "cabal of rabbis" must have been doing their thing even before Christianity.
Christianity is by *far* (far, far, far) the oldest form of outward religious worship on this planet. By far.. (although it hasn't always gone by that name.. a rose by any other name still being a rose).

The Church that today calls itself the "Christian" Church can *easily* trace its history back for the past 7,000-10,000 years at least, at it's probably *far* older than even that..

[psholtz]

Mailech wrote: The same thing that makes the Torah unique in its mass revelation that precludes forgery, as it commands the transmision from generation to generation.
There is no such thing as "mass revelation".. It's a contradiction in terms..

[Israel]

psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: Besides the idea that it is a response to Christianity is rediculous. Do you know that the earliest Tannaim, like Hillel and Shamai where before Christianity, so this "cabal of rabbis" must have been doing their thing even before Christianity.
Christianity is by *far* (far, far, far) the oldest form of outward religious worship on this planet. By far.. (although it hasn't always gone by that name.. a rose by any other name still being a rose).

The Church that today calls itself the "Christian" Church can *easily* trace its history back for the past 7,000-10,000 years at least, at it's probably *far* older than even that..

I can't be reading this right.... The Christian Church existed before:

1) The Torah was given to Moses.
2) Before Jacob.
3) Before Isaac.
4) Before Abraham.
5) Before Noah.
6) But why stop there? Before Adam. Hell, let's keep going...
7) Before the earth was created.

Smooth...

[psholtz]

Israel wrote: psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: Besides the idea that it is a response to Christianity is rediculous. Do you know that the earliest Tannaim, like Hillel and Shamai where before Christianity, so this "cabal of rabbis" must have been doing their thing even before Christianity.
Christianity is by *far* (far, far, far) the oldest form of outward religious worship on this planet. By far.. (although it hasn't always gone by that name.. a rose by any other name still being a rose).

The Church that today calls itself the "Christian" Church can *easily* trace its history back for the past 7,000-10,000 years at least, at it's probably *far* older than even that..

I can't be reading this right.... The Christian Church existed before:

1) The Torah was given to Moses.
2) Before Jacob.
3) Before Isaac.
4) Before Abraham.
5) Before Noah.
6) But why stop there? Before Adam. Hell, let's keep going...
7) Before the earth was created.

Smooth...
Everyone you mentioned there is an allegorical figure, not a historical figure.

But yes, the Church that today calls itself "Christian" is far older than your Scriptures would place these people as being. In fact, it's far older than the age of the Universe (6,000 years) according to your world view. Moreover, these people on your list have little to nothing to do w/ Christianity. Historically, Christianity grew out of the Egyptian Mysteries, and borrowed heavily from the Greek Orphic Rites and what would become Neo-Platonism. It never had much to do w/ Judaism, so I'm not sure why you're comparing the two..

[Duchifas]

psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: The same thing that makes the Torah unique in its mass revelation that precludes forgery, as it commands the transmision from generation to generation.
There is no such thing as "mass revelation".. It's a contradiction in terms..

How so?

[psholtz]

Duchifas wrote: psholtz wrote: Mailech wrote: The same thing that makes the Torah unique in its mass revelation that precludes forgery, as it commands the transmision from generation to generation.
There is no such thing as "mass revelation".. It's a contradiction in terms..

How so?
It simply doesn't happen like that. The Universe is not constructed in that way.

Each human Soul is an "individuality" and it has a unique set of obligations that it comes to Earth to fulfill. In order for there to be a "mass" relevation, that would mean that you have a "mass" of Souls who are all identical little Communist automatons and who, through sheer coincidence, have all managed to fulfill their destinies at precisely the same instant in time.

It doesn't work like that.. Never did, never will..