Saturday, June 21, 2008

Leveling the Playing Field- # 2: Spiritual Death

Potential converts are often told that accepting Jesus is their only chance to avoid burning in hell for all of eternity. Belief in Jesus is saviour is a 'get out of hell free' card. Missionaries love to claim that Jews have 'nothing to lose and everything to gain' by accepting Jesus as their saviour.

To this, it is necessary to respond that if Jesus is not a deity, worshipping him as G-d constitutes idolatry. The punishment of an idolater is spiritual death, and being cut off forever from G-d in the World to Come, karet. "But the soul that sinneth high-handedly, whether he be home-born or a stranger, the same blasphemeth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Because he hath despised the word of the LORD, and hath broken His commandment; that soul shall utterly be cut off, his iniquity shall be upon him." (Num. 15:30-31). Idolatry is one of the the three cardinal sins which a Jew must give his life before committing. Indeed, throughout the ages, Jews have prefered death than baptism. During the Crusades, tens of communities were destroyed and thousands of Jews were massacred, yet only a few individuals accepted Christianity. Most sang the Shemah, the Jewish testament to G-d's Unity, before being slaughtered.

G-d lay our eternal allegiance after rescuing us from the Egyptian bondage. At Sinai, He told us that we should have no other gods before Him ie. as intercessors between Him and us. There is no need for an intermediary to reach HaShem; He saved us Himself and wants a personal and direct relationship with all of us. "And I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt, and gods beside Me you should not know, and there is no savior but Me" (Hosea 13:4). This applies equally to Jews who accept false saviour-gods, thinking that this will lead them closer to G-d. G-d explained at Sinai exactly how He should be worshipped. Any deviance from what G-d commanded us at Sinai is idolatry. G-d told us specifically that "G-d is not a man, that He should lie" (Numbers 23:19) This same concept is repeated in I Samuel 15:29. G-d has no form or image and in non-corporeal. He is unbound by time and space, completely limitless and therefore cannot be restricted by physical shapes. This was the sin of the Jews who worshipped the Golden Calf. They believed that Moses had died and they desired a god to serve as an intermediary between them and HaShem. "Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves--for ye saw no manner of form on the day that the LORD spoke unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire-- lest ye deal corruptly, and make you a graven image, even the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female." (Deut. 4:15-16) Any attempt to give G-d a physical image places limits on Him, the Unbound and Limitless One.

A Jew is meant to bear witness to the Unity of G-d. "Ye are My witnesses, saith the LORD, and My servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He; before Me there was no god formed, neither shall any be after Me." (Isaiah 43:10) Twice a day, in the morning and evening, and then again before he goes to sleep, a Jew recites the Shemah and testifies that HaShem is One. These words are contained in the tefillin which he dons every weekday, and engraved on the mezuzot on his doorpost. These are the very last words that a Jew should say before he leaves this world. When a Jew accepts Christianity, he loses his exalted status and commits idolatry, invoking the sin of karet. Far from gaining G-d's grace, by believing in Jesus as a divinity, a Jew loses all of his share in the World to Come and is eternally cut off from G-d.

"Return, O Israel, unto the LORD thy God; for thou hast stumbled in thine iniquity." (Hosea 14:1)

76 comments:

Ralph said...

"Potential converts are often told that accepting Jesus is their only chance to avoid burning in hell for all of eternity."

Someone should tell them missionaries to 'get a light'.

Devash said...

Whatever that means.

Devash said...

BK, it strikes me that they can claim to worship ONE G-D and yet call him three-in-one and like Nicolas Sarkozy in Jerusalem today say "We stand with Israel" but "you have to deport the Jews from Judea and Samaria and divide Jerusalem."

When your life is already based on a pile of lies, what's a few more? I mean, they are so self-deceived that they don't even realize when they're being inconsistent and contradictory.

Yehudi01 said...

Ralph, I'm a little confused about your comment. Do you disagree with the missionaries? Do you believe that Jews can go to Heaven without believing in J-sus?

Ralph said...

Devash said...
"Whatever that means."

Basically it means, 'come out of the dark', turn the lights on.

Ralph said...

Yehudi01 you asked:-
1."Do you disagree with the missionaries?"

Yes.

"2.Do you believe that Jews can go to Heaven without believing in J-sus?"

No. I don't find scriptural evidence that suggests ANYBODY 'goes to heaven'.

eg:
"Act 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day."
and
"Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,.."
(source: e-Sword AKJ)

King David, a man after G-d's own heart as in:-
"Act 13:22 And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will."
(AKJ-and these words spoken by a Pharisee)

A man described here:- "1Sa 16:13 And Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward: and Samuel arose, and departed to Armathaim."
(Septuagint-Brenton)

A man who was in possession of the 'Ruach HaKodesh' all of his adult life, is not "ascended into the heavens"; as quoted above.

What I do find is this:-
"Mat 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."
(AKJ)

Papa Frank said...

Ralph --

John 14:2+3

2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Out of curiosity -- what is your take on this passage?

Ralph said...

Papa Frank you asked:-
"Out of curiosity -- what is your take on this passage?"

If you would allow some praphrasing and a little 'poetic license' it would be:-

John 14:
2 "In my Father's Kingdom (house) are many positions of authority (mansions) I go to prepare one of those positions (a place) for (each) of you."

3 "And if I go and prepare a position (place) for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; (1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.) that where I am, (Zec 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day on the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave asunder, half of it toward the east and the west, a very great division; and half the mountain shall lean to the north, and half of it to the south.) there ye may be also. (Mat 6:10 Thy kingdom come ********* in earth, as it is in heaven.)

["Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth]


(OT Septuagint-Brenton. NT e-Sword AKJ)

and Amen to that!

ps. I think the 'tongue' of Rev.5:10 will more than likely be Hebrew, ie. a perfect Hebrew.

Ralph said...

0oops!!

Please delete my ps. of June 24. I think I had my mind on another topic, sorry.

Yehudi01 said...

Ok, so let me be a little more specific with my question:

Do you believe that Jews merit a place in the World To Come apart from J-sus?

Ralph said...

Yehudi01 you said...
"Ok, so let me be a little more specific with my question:"
and asked:
"Do you believe that Jews merit a place in the World To Come apart from J-sus?"

So I will tell you what:-

I believe:

That for all men, Jew and non-Jew alike, the GIFT of G-d is ‘eternal life’.
“Gen 13:15 for all the land which thou (Abraham) seest, I will give it to thee and to thy seed for ever.”

“Gen 13:16 And I will make thy (Abraham) seed like the dust of the earth; if any one is able to number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be numbered.”

Abraham was NOT a Jew, a descendant of Judah, but its progenitor. At any time during the course of the history of Judah, could the number of Jews be described as the “dust of the earth”?

Even today their number cannot compare with that of say, the USA, or even Britain, and yet “Gen 13:16 And I will make thy seed like the dust of the earth; if any one is able to number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be numbered.”

“I will give it to thee (Abraham) and to thy seed for ever.”
“For ever – Ha Olam” is an eternal inheritance and as such demands or, calls for, ‘eternal life’.
“Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”
---
I also believe:

That G-d is no respecter of persons: “Act 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that G-d is no respecter of persons:”
Jew and non-Jew are all equal in His sight.

The Gospel is the message of the coming Kingdom of G-d which will be ushered into this world by the Messiah whom both the Jews and disciples of Christ wait for.

The Gospel is literally the ‘GOOD NEWS” of that event.

The Gospel is the “GOOD NEWS” which Jesus of Nazareth taught.

It is the Gospel “OF” Jesus Christ, not the Gospel “about” Jesus Christ
“Mar 1:1 The beginning of the gospel OF Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

The Gospel, that He preached during His ministry on this earth.
“Mat 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.”

“Mar 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of G-d,”

“Luk 4:43 And he (Jesus) said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of G-d to other cities also: for therefore am I sent.
He was not ‘sent’ to redeem the world at that time but to …..preach the kingdom of G-d

Eternal life is a “GIFT of G-d” which cannot be earned and in which one may boast, but it is one for which we can ‘qualify’:-
“Ecc 12:13 Hear the end of the matter, ….. : Fear G-d, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole man.”
“Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, G-d: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments
---

Perhaps a ‘long winded’ response to your question but one which I felt the need to qualify.

I believe that Jews ‘merit a place in the World to Come’, that is to say, can ‘qualify’ for entry into the ‘Kingdom of G-d’, upon belief of the Gospel (the ‘Good News’), repentance and baptism, just the same as anyone else.

One other requirement is acknowledgement as to the identity of the ‘Coming King’ of that ‘Kingdom of G-d’.
Just like anybody else who desires the ‘GIFT OF ETERNAL LIFE’.

(All scriptural references are from: OT # Septuagint-Brenton. NT # e-Sword AKJ)

גילוי said...

Ralph:

You wrote "At any time during the course of the history of Judah, could the number of Jews be described as the “dust of the earth”?"

You are familiar with Deuteronomy 1:10, no.

"Hashem your G-d has made you numerous, and behold you are today like the stars of heaven."

Moshe says there that the promise was fulfilled, and this was with 600,000 males alone. Now I admit, the promise was made to Avraham of stars of the heaven and sand of the beach, but Yaakov also received a promise regarding the "low-down", Genesis 28:14.

You can find this phrase numerous times, and you can see that it doesn't mean Christians just because of hte number. See also the book of Joshua, verse 11:4. Talking about peopls in the ancient area of Eretz Yisrael.

No matter how you count it, both populations pale in comparison to the current size of identifiable descendents of Am Yisrael, who are called today the Jewish nation.

Yehudi01 said...

Ralph, remember when I made the point that if any part of 'scripture' contradicts the Torah, it must be dismised. Your NT is so full of inconsistancies and anti-Torah statements that it cannot possibly be scripture. Therefore, for the sake of our debates, please do not use it. If the NT is the word of G-d, then you should be able to make any argument that you would reference in the NT from the Torah. We know the Torah is the word of G-d, so the Tanakh will be our source material.

Yehudi01 said...

Ralph I also noticed that you quote extensively from the Septuagint. Do you know the history of that translation?

The Origin of the Septuagint
Talmud - Megillah 9a
The following is a translation of a page of the Talmud, which addresses the origin of the Greek translation of the Scriptures, the Septuagint. This translation comes from the Davka CD-ROM Talmud. Numbers highlighted in blue denote footnotes beneath the Talmud quote.

‘R. Judah said: When our teachers permitted Greek, they permitted it only for a scroll of the Torah’.1 This was on account of the incident related in connection with King Ptolemy,2 as it has been taught: ‘It is related of King Ptolemy that he brought together seventy-two elders and placed them in seventy-two [separate] rooms, without telling them why he had brought them together, and he went in to each one of them and said to him, Translate3 for me the Torah of Moses your master.4 G-d then prompted each one of them and they all conceived the same idea and wrote for him, G-d created in the beginning,5 I shall make man in image and likeness,6 And he finished on the sixth day,and rested on the seventh day,7 Male and female he created him 8 [but they did not write ‘created them’],9 Come let me descend and confound their tongues,10 And Sarah laughed among her relatives;11 For in their anger they slew an ox and in their wrath they digged up a stall;12 And Moses took his wife and his children, and made them ride on a carrier of men;13And the abode of the children of Israel which they stayed in Egypt and in other lands was four hundred years,14 And he sent the elect of the children of Israel;15 And against the elect of the children of Israel he put not forth his and;

(The Talmud goes to the next page to list the rest of the changes from the original Hebrew that were made in the translation.)


(1) Thus R. Judah forbade other books of the Scripture to be written save in the original language.
(2) It seems to be an historical fact that a Greek translation of the Pentateuch was made in the time of King Ptolemy Philadelphus of Egypt (285-247), but many regard this as apocryphal; cf, The Letter of Aristeas.
(3) Lit., ‘write’.
(4) Here follow a number of cases in which the translation of the Elders did not follow the Massoretic text. We do not find all these variants in our texts of the Septuagint.
(5) Instead of ‘In the beginning G-d created’. The purpose of this change was apparently to prevent the idea of Two Powers being read into the text, i.e., ‘In the beginning’ and ‘G-d’. V. Rashi and Tosaf. a.I.
(6) Gen. 1, 26, instead of ‘Let us make’, for the same reason.
(7) Ibid. II, 2, instead of ‘and he finished on the seventh day’, which might be taken to imply that some work was done on the seventh day.
(8) Ibid. V, 2.
(9) Which might be taken to mean that they were separate from the first.
(10) Ibid. XI, 7: ‘me’ instead of ‘us’. V. n. 7.
(11) Ibid. XVIII, 12: instead of ‘in herself’, in order to make a distinction between Sarah and Abraham, who also laughed inwardly.
(12) Ibid. XLIX, 6: ‘ox’ instead of ‘man’, to save the name of Jacob's sons.
(13) Ex. IV, 20: carrier of men’ instead of ‘ass’, to save the dignity of Moses.
(14) Ibid. XII, 40. The words ‘and in other lands’ are inserted because, according to the Biblical record, the Israelites were at the utmost 210 years in Egypt.
(14) Ibid. XXIV, 5: ‘elect’ instead of ‘young men’, which is regarded as not suitable to the context.
(15) Ibid. 11 : ‘elect’ instead of ‘nobles’.

Furthermore, we see corroboration of this from the works of Flavius Josephus, in his preface to Antiquities of the Jews.

I found, therefore, that the second of the Ptolemies was a king who was extraordinarily diligent in what concerned learning, and the collection of books; that he was also peculiarly ambitious to procure a translation of our law, and of the constitution of our government therein contained, into the Greek tongue. Now Eleazar the high priest, one not inferior to any other of that dignity among us, did not envy the forenamed king the participation of that advantage, which otherwise he would for certain have denied him, but that he knew the custom of our nation was, to hinder nothing of what we esteemed ourselves from being communicated to others. Accordingly, I thought it became me both to imitate the generosity of our high priest, and to suppose there might even now be many lovers of learning like the king; for he did not obtain all our writings at that time; but those who were sent to Alexandria as interpreters, gave him only the books of the law, while there were a vast number of other matters in our sacred books. They, indeed, contain in them the history of five thousand years; in which time happened many strange accidents, many chances of war, and great actions of the commanders, and mutations of the form of our government. Upon the whole, a man that will peruse this history, may principally learn from it, that all events succeed well, even to an incredible degree, and the reward of felicity is proposed by G-d; but then it is to those that follow his will, and do not venture to break his excellent laws: and that so far as men any way apostatize from the accurate observation of them, what was practical before becomes impracticable and whatsoever they set about as a good thing, is converted into an incurable calamity.


So, we see, the Septuagint, as it was in its original form, was only a translation of only the Torah for a specific reason, and that reason is that the Sages would not allow the Prophets and Writings to be translated at that time. Often you find Christian apologists and missionaries pointing to the Prophets and the Writings in the Septuagint, saying "don't you see? This is how the rabbis translated it into Greek!"

Those portions of the LXX were translated by Christians to advance Christian theology.

I believe there is much you don't know about the very foundation of christianity that is quite disturbing when unearthed.

Yehudi01 said...

Ralph...one more thing. This is by far the most important, as well. I asked you if you believe Jews will merit a place in the World To Come apart from J-sus. You then gave me the standard christian answer. Here are some scriptures to consider that suggest otherwise:

Psalms 51:16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [17] The sacrifices of G-d [are] a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O G-d, thou wilt not despise. (KJV)

Psalms 69:30 I will praise the name of G-d with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. [31] [This] also shall please the LORD better than an ox [or] bullock that hath horns and hoofs. (KJV)

Proverbs 15:8 The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright [is] His delight. [9] The way of the wicked [is] an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness. (KJV)

Proverbs 16:6 By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil. (KJV)

Isaiah 58:3 Wherefore have we fasted, say they, and thou seest not? wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge? Behold, in the day of your fast ye find pleasure, and exact all your labours. (KJV)

Isaiah 58:5 Is it such a fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD? (KJV)

See also Jeremiah 4:1-2, 7:3, 7:22-23, 25:5, 26:3-6, 36:3, 36:7, and 50:20!

Micah 7:18 Who is a G-d like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy. [19] He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea. [20] Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (KJV)

Daniel 4:27 Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity. (KJV)

Exodus 30:16 And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls. (KJV)


Atonement money? Monetary sacrifice serves for atonement?

Numbers 14:20 And the LORD said, I have pardoned according to thy word. (KJV)

This verse makes it plainly clear that the Lord accepts prayer for expiation of sin.

Jonah 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed G-d, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. [6] For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. [7] And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: [8] But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto G-d: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. [9] Who can tell if G-d will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? [10] And G-d saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and G-d repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. (KJV)

Nineveh was forgiven of their evil deeds by fasting and repentance, and without sacrifice.

Jonah 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night: [11] And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? (KJV)

2 Chronicles 6:24 And if thy people Israel be put to the worse before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee; and shall return and confess thy name, and pray and make supplication before thee in this house; [25] Then hear thou from the heavens, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest to them and to their fathers. [26] When the heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against thee; yet if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou dost afflict them; [27] Then hear thou from heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy people Israel, when thou hast taught them the good way, wherein they should walk; and send rain upon thy land, which thou hast given unto thy people for an inheritance. [28] If there be dearth in the land, if there be pestilence, if there be blasting, or mildew, locusts, or caterpillers; if their enemies besiege them in the cities of their land; whatsoever sore or whatsoever sickness there be: [29] Then what prayer or what supplication soever shall be made of any man, or of all thy people Israel, when every one shall know his own sore and his own grief, and shall spread forth his hands in this house: [30] Then hear thou from heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and render unto every man according unto all his ways, whose heart thou knowest; (for thou knowest the hearts of the children of men) [31] That they may fear thee, to walk in thy ways, so long as they live in the land which thou gavest unto our fathers. (KJV)

Since the Bible clearly states that Solomon is the wisest man to ever live, logic should tell us that he would not be in error on such a fundamental issue like sin and atonement.

2 Chronicles 6:36 If they sin against thee, (for there is no man which sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them over before their enemies, and they carry them away captives unto a land far off or near; [37] Yet if they bethink themselves in the land whither they are carried captive, and turn and pray unto thee in the land of their captivity, saying, We have sinned, we have done amiss, and have dealt wickedly; [38] If they return to thee with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their captivity, whither they have carried them captives, and pray toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, and toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house which I have built for thy name: [39] Then hear thou from the heavens, even from thy dwelling place, their prayer and their supplications, and maintain their cause, and forgive thy people which have sinned against thee. [40] Now, my G-d, let, I beseech thee, thine eyes be open, and let thine ears be attent unto the prayer that is made in this place. (KJV)

2 Chronicles 7:13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people; [14] If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (KJV)

And the Lord agreed.

Ralph said...

גילוי said...
"You are familiar with Deuteronomy 1:10, no."

I am familiar with Deut.1:10, yes.

Verse 1 of this chapter tells me:-
"Deu 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab."
(e-Sword AKJ)

"ALL ISREAL" consisting of the tribes of Ephraim, Menasseh, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Benjamin, Gad, Asher, Dan, and Naphtali. Judah, the Jews only accounted for a small proportion of the whole, still do.

also:-
"You can find this phrase numerous times, and you can see that it doesn't mean Christians just because of hte number."

I don't think I have suggested (have I?) that the 'vast numbers' of the separated tribes are wholly made up of 'Christians' although I believe many of them are.
At a previous count there were 2 billion 'Christians' worldwide out of an estimated total population of 6.6 billion.
(source: Answers.com)
A number which surely can be described like the “dust of the earth”

2 BILLION professing 'Christians', quite an impact from the teachings of one man.

2 billion as against "only 14 million Jews in the world", (source: WikiAnswers) many of whom would not subject themselves to the rule of the Rabbis.

That's 2,000,000,000 against
............14,000,000.
I think you are outnumbered and the following is not the case:
"'My sons have defeated Me, My sons have defeated Me.'"
(source: Babylonian Talmud Baba Mezi'a 59b-R.Nathan)

Almighty G-d defeated by men? Gimme a break!

(No offence meant)

גילוי said...

Ralph,

That has to be the most blatant ignoring of a point that I have seen so far on this blog.

I pointed out to you that with 600,000 males alone, the nation of Israel qualified as being as numerous as the sand on the beach and the stars of the heavens. If such was the case in the times of Moshe when it was 600,000 males, such is still the case now, when we are far more than 600,000 males above the age of 20.

Yet at the same time, Moshe told the Israelites that they would see in the land of Canaan peoples more numerous than they were. What does that mean? It means that they can fulfill the prophecy given to Avraham and still not be the biggest nation on earth.

In other words, the fact that Christians outnumber Jews is absolutely irrelevant to biblical prophecy.

Yehudi01 said...

Ralph, pleeeeze don't forget to respond to my comments. There will be no fist-pumping this time for you!

Ralph said...

גילוי said...
" Ralph,

That has to be the most blatant ignoring of a point that I have seen so far on this blog."

Sorry גילוי, I think I may have lost the thread of our debate. Easy enough for me to do when there are so many comments floating around on this blog.
I thought our original contention was relative to the prophesied increase in numbers of the house of Israel as compared to the house of Judah. It can be confusing when you keep suggesting that Judah constitutes the nation, or house, of Israel.
I must admit that I can't recall the reason why I brought in the number of Christians in the world today.
Would you care to start over 'in the beginning'
LOL.

גילוי said...

Ralph,

I will not re-hash the entire thread, you can re-read it. You stated that the Jewish nation could not possibly be a fulfillment of the prophecy of us becoming numerous as the stars of the heavens and the dust of the earth. I brought proofs to show this is ludicrous based on explicit instances of usage of those terms in the Hebrew Bible. I would appreciate a retraction from your side at this point.

Ralph said...

גילוי said...
"You stated that the Jewish nation could not possibly be a fulfillment of the prophecy of us becoming numerous as the stars of the heavens and the dust of the earth."

When did I state that?
also:-
"I would appreciate a retraction from your side at this point."

No doubt!

גילוי said...

http://moshiach-truth.blogspot.com/2008/06/leveling-playing-field-2-spiritual.html?showComment=1214384880000#c7798322254397919538

"At any time during the course of the history of Judah, could the number of Jews be described as the “dust of the earth”?"

Keli Ata said...

Ralph wrote:

"2.Do you believe that Jews can go to Heaven without believing in J-sus?"

No. I don't find scriptural evidence that suggests ANYBODY 'goes to heaven'.


Well, we don't consider the New Testament scripture and Christian interpretation of the Tanakh is horribly corrupted and inaccurate.

BTW, you can use phrases such as ruach hakodesh all you want but it's still christian.)

Ralph said...

on June 29
גילוי
said...
http://moshiach-truth.blogspot.com/2008/06/leveling-playing-field-2-spiritual.html?showComment=1214384880000#c7798322254397919538

"At any time during the course of the history of Judah, could the number of Jews be described as the “dust of the earth”?"

And thank you for that reference. I had begun to look for it but ran out of time.
However, what I stated is not the same as saying:-
“that the Jewish nation could not possibly be a fulfillment of the prophecy of us becoming numerous as the stars of the heavens and the dust of the earth."
You may care to interpret it that way but the prophecy refers to “All Israel” not just the Jews.

You asked if I was familiar with Deuteronomy 1:10 and I responded “I am familiar with Deut.1:10, yes."
Then went on to say:-

Verse 1 of this chapter tells me:-
"Deu 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto ALL ISRAEL on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab."
(e-Sword AKJ)

"ALL ISRAEL" consisting of the tribes of Ephraim, Menasseh, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Benjamin, Gad, Asher, Dan, and Naphtali. Judah, the Jews only accounted for a small proportion of the whole, still do.

You seem to have some strange notion that the Jews constitute the ‘Nation of Israel’ – “All Israel”. Tanach evidence would suggest otherwise.

On mean averaging, Judah, the Jews, would constitute 1/13 th. of ‘All Israel”. Of the 600,000 of “Exo 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.”(e-Sword AKJ), on mean averaging Judah would present 46,153. Hardly measuring up to ‘the dust of the earth’

Now I remember why I brought in the number of “Christians” in the world today. There’s a number which could equate to “the dust of the earth” When, in the course of Jewish history, did Judah, the Jews, ever attain that level of numbers, or even approach it?

Ralph said...

on June 29, 2008
Keli Ata said...

"Well, we don't consider the New Testament scripture and Christian interpretation of the Tanakh is horribly corrupted and inaccurate."

So, does the Tanakh record that people go to heaven when they die, which is what I understood to be the gist of this topic?
also:-
"BTW, you can use phrases such as ruach hakodesh all you want but it's still christian."

Sometimes I try to use phrases or words that can relate to a common understanding.
Or are you suggesting that the 'ruach hakodesh' ie. 'the Holy Spirit' is a Christian invention?

גילוי said...

Ralph,

You are blatantly ignoring what I'm saying by turning this in to an argument about your claims of massive Christian descent from from the tribes of Israel. At the same time, you repeated your ridiculous claim that the Jews have not fulfilled this prophecy.

Let's start again. You said at the end of this post that the Jewish nation, the modern nation identified as the nation of Israel, is not nearly massive enough to fulfill that prophecy:

"There’s a number which could equate to “the dust of the earth” When, in the course of Jewish history, did Judah, the Jews, ever attain that level of numbers, or even approach it?"

At the same time, I proved through quotations from the Hebrew Bible that this was already achieved in the times of the Torah through far fewer numbers than there are today (Moshe refers to this phrase when talking about 600,000 males + families). The nation today is in fact greater in size.

גילוי said...

Ralph,

The Holy Spirit is a Christian idea. Ruach HaKodesh is a Jewish idea. The Jewish idea refers to a level of heavenly inspiration in a person's words. It is said that certain rabbis, when they spoke, did not have prophecy, but they still had a level of Ruach HaKodesh. One such example, when their words seem in retrospect to be prophetic, it is called Ruach HaKodesh.

Ruach HaKodesh is not a deity or part of a deity.

Ralph said...

גילוי , on July 1, 2008 you said:-
"The Holy Spirit is a Christian idea. Ruach HaKodesh is a Jewish idea."

I understand the terms to be about the same and more than just "ideas".
also:
"The Jewish idea refers to a level of heavenly inspiration in a person's words."

Yes. I also believe it refers to a level of "heavenly" inspiration in a person's actions.
also:
"It is said that certain rabbis, when they spoke, did not have prophecy, but they still had a level of Ruach HaKodesh."

Who said that, the Rabbis?
Wait a minute, wait a minute. Are you suggesting that only the Rabbis are "inspired" by the 'Ruarch HaKodesh'?
also:
"Ruach HaKodesh is not a deity or part of a deity."

No! I don't believe it is.

I have started on your other post of July 1. It may take me a few days to decipher. Please allow for my advancing years and "thick filters" as somebody once described me as having.

גילוי said...

Ruach haKodesh is found more so among Rabbis, it is true. The great rabbis are generally those that have become more advanced in spirituality than the common person. It is not a matter of monopoly or claiming something for us because of selfishness. Torah is truth, falsehood keeps you away from Ruach HaKodesh, such as Christianity. The spiritual source for the words of the Christian Bible is definitely not Ruach haKodesh, but rather the Klipot, which are the negative forces in the world which attach themselves to holiness. That is why Christianity started with Jews. המבין יבין

Ralph said...

on July 1, 2008 7:14 AM

גילוי said...
"Ruach haKodesh is found more so among Rabbis, it is true. The great rabbis are generally those that have become more advanced in spirituality than the common person. It is not a matter of monopoly or claiming something for us because of selfishness. Torah is truth, falsehood keeps you away from Ruach HaKodesh, such as Christianity. The spiritual source for the words of the Christian Bible is definitely not Ruach haKodesh, but rather the Klipot, which are the negative forces in the world which attach themselves to holiness. That is why Christianity started with Jews. המבין יבין"

Is that what the Rabbis tell you?

גילוי said...

It is what the Torah teaches. I do not really expect you to understand, you are blinded by the falsehood of the Christian Bible.

I would like to point out something.

Some Christians write that we need to follow the law as best we can. Then when we point out Deuteronomy 17 and the commandment of following the sages of the Torah in the Sanhedrin, we hear the argument that we must only follow G-d. This is a circular argument: to listen to G-d, you must listen to the Sanhedrin, which is made up of men. So the phrase "is that what the rabbis tell you" with that sort of attitude, sounds like you want me to (in general) transgress the Torah, even if it is not necessarily relevant to this conversation.

It actually is a function of the Christian Bible itself. The idea of separation of Church and State. Spiritual must be separate from political/physical. The spirit is a personal issue, no others have a say in it. This is not the Torah's way, the Torah gives us rules for government, for courts, for Torah is an all-encompassing system.

Ralph said...

on July 2, 2008 7:04 AM
גילוי you said...
"It is what the Torah teaches."

גילוי now that I am blessed with a copy of the Tanakh, courtesy the Jewish Publication Society and via e-Sword; perhaps you could refer me to the passage where "the Torah teaches", eg."Ruach haKodesh is found more so among Rabbis, it is true." and "The spiritual source for the words of the Christian Bible is definitely not Ruach haKodesh, but rather the Klipot, which are the negative forces in the world which attach themselves to holiness."

you also said:-
"Then when we point out Deuteronomy 17 and the commandment of following the sages of the Torah in the Sanhedrin,.."
So, to what specific verse or passage do you refer to support that statement?

You suggested "sounds like you want me to (in general) transgress the Torah,.."
and I would NEVER advocate that of anyone, not in the least 'jot' or 'tittle'.

also:-
"This is not the Torah's way, the Torah gives us rules for government, for courts, for Torah is an all-encompassing system."

Yes, the Torah is, and will continue to be the basis for ALL governments of this earth. The Torah, not the Rabbis who do not "listen to Heaven" ie. the voice of God, the Ruach haKodesh, as confirmed by the Talmud.
(source: Babylonian Talmud BABA MEZI‘A 59b "Whereupon a Heavenly Voice cried out: 'Why do ye dispute with R. Eliezer, seeing that in all matters the halachah agrees with him!' But R. Joshua arose and exclaimed: 'It is not in heaven.'4 What did he mean by this? — Said R. Jeremiah: That the Torah had already been given at Mount Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heavenly Voice, because Thou hast long since written in the Torah at Mount Sinai, After the majority must one incline.5")

and where in Torah does it say that "After the majority must one incline."?
Almight G-d is the majority!

גילוי said...

If you want to know all the answers, I suggest doing as some sages did when they left Babylon, only your Babylon is Christianity. Fast dozens of fasts in order to forget what you have learned. Then read the Tanach (in Hebrew and Aramaic), not some translation) beginning to end. You will find these words from different verses in Torah and in the Prophets and in the Holy Writings.

Do you really not know where in the Torah it says you must go after majority rule?

Must it even be written? The Torah sets up a court system made up of multiple judges. Shall we always go by the minority opinion? Or shall we say that we shall go by the true opinion? But how do we judge which is true?

If you want to look in to the matter in depth, check the section after the 10 Commandments in Exodus. It's a few chapters long.

Also see in Deuteronomy chapter 30. The Law is not in Heaven. It is given over to humans. That means that whenever there is a problem, we don't rely on a voice from Heaven to tell us what the answer is.

By saying that you listen to G-d alone and not to man, you are turning Torah in to a fantasy book, which is one of the objectives of Christian theology. It is unrealistic according to the Christian world view.

If you can understand how real the Torah actually is, you would realize that it follows that this is a real system that can and is applied through human means.

Ralph said...

גילוי said...
"Do you really not know where in the Torah it says you must go after majority rule?"

No, I do not honestly know where it says that. Can you point it out to me?

Ralph said...

גילוי you also said on July 3, 2008 3:44 AM
"By saying that you listen to G-d alone and not to man, you are turning Torah in to a fantasy book,..."

I am not turning Torah in to a fantasy book. It is man who is doing that by misrepresentation and misinterpretation of what is written. It is also a common fault amongst so called 'Christian' ministers and church leaders.
also:-
"Then read the Tanach (in Hebrew and Aramaic), not some translation) beginning to end."

I do not have the aptitude to learn either Hebrew nor Aramaic. The English translation I have of the Tanakh is provided by the 'Jewish Publication Society'. Do you consider their translation to be unworthy?

ps. Where did I say I listened to G-d alone? I will categorically state that I can also learn from every man.
Which is one of the reasons I continue to log into this Blog.

גילוי said...

Ralph, read that section of Exodus again. Once you get to chapter 23, there is talk about majorities. But do not just read those verses.

I do not use translations except for obscure words, I do not know hte JPS translation that you have; the old one was a doctored King James which is obviously flawed.

You are using semantics. You learn from men, but you claim to only follow G-d, meaning you give no one else authority, even those who G-d tells us to listen to.

There are commandments that cannot be observed without the Oral Law, but even without, there are many which are open to extreme differences of interpretation. How can we decide which is right if we didn't have Deuteronomy 17 and Deuteronomy 30 (that the Torah is not in Heaven for us to need to ask Heaven to answer disputes)?

Ralph said...

גילוי on July 3, 2008 11:36 PM, you said...
".. read that section of Exodus again. Once you get to chapter 23, there is talk about majorities."

Yes there is. It reads:-"Exo 23:2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:"
"Thou shalt not follow a multitude..." or 'incline after a majority'. THOU SHALT NOT! What part of 'SHALT NOT' is it that you don't understand?
also:-
"But do not just read those verses."

What other specific verses should I read?
also:-
"You are using semantics."

Yes! I am keen on "the study of meanings" (of words) as defined in my Merriam-Webster Dictionary viz:-
"Main Entry: semantics
Pronunciation: si-*man-tiks
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Date:1893
1: the study of meanings: a: the historical and psychological study and the classification of changes in the signification of words or forms viewed as factors in linguistic development"
also:-
"meaning you give no one else authority,"

There is no greater authority than G-d Almighty.
also:-
"even those who G-d tells us to listen to."

"Watch my lips', G-d does not tell me to 'obey' the Rabbis, nor the Pope, nor the Archbishop of Canterbury for that matter, not even as to how to put my shoes on when I get out of bed in the morning.
also:-
"There are commandments that cannot be observed without the Oral Law,.."

Once again, who says so, the Rabbis?

Ralph said...

ps. When I said "G-d does not tell me to 'obey' the Rabbis, nor the Pope, nor the Archbishop of Canterbury for that matter, not even as to how to put my shoes on when I get out of bed in the morning."

I should have added:-
G-d tells me to obey Him, and He gifts me with His Holy Spirit, the Ruach haKodesh, to enable me to do so!

Ralph said...

So what is the 'Holy Spirit', the 'Ruach ha Kodesh'?
It is not some ethereal ghost or a third part of an imagined Trinity. I perceive it to be the 'heart and soul' attitude of G-d Almighty which He offers to those who are prepared to obey Him and not some earthly institution set up by men.

גילוי said...

Ralph,

Thank you for proving my point. You do not understand, even with your holy spirit, the meaning of these verses. Do not go after the masses to do evil, is referring to going after the majority in sentencing someone in a death penalty case. A simple majority does not do, it must be a clear majority of 2.

But let's say even then that you don't accept this clearly rabbinic interpretation.

We have the 5 Books of Moses which are a complete system for running the world. Where does it describe how the courts should operate according to your approach?

And how, according to your approach, do you fulfill the commandment of Deuteronomy 17?

Ralph said...

גילוי on July 6, 2008 3:15 AM you said:-
"....., is referring to going after the majority in sentencing someone in a death penalty case. A simple majority does not do, it must be a clear majority of 2."

The Torah does not say that, it simply says, and I quote "Exo 23:2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice;" full stop.
You are adding words which are not there and where was the 'justice' in the execution of Yeshua?
also:-
"But let's say even then that you don't accept this clearly rabbinic interpretation."

You are right. I do not (always) accept what you refer to as 'clearly rabbinic interpretation" I will not allow my mind to be controlled by them.
also:-
"We have the 5 Books of Moses which are a complete system for running the world."

Yes. The 'world' as it was when the nation of Israel, including the Jews, accepted the Almighty G-d as King. But Israel was not content with the authority of G-d and demanded a man as king, G-d allowed this demand and the 'government of the world' changed. G-d is currently allowing man to adjudicate legal matters of his own accord, and look at the mess he is making of it.
also:-
"And how, according to your approach, do you fulfill the commandment of Deuteronomy 17?"

Deuteronomy 17 contains several commandments. To which one do you refer?

גילוי said...

It says that if there is a disagreement that we go to the judges in the place that G-d will choose.

How does that court system work? There are more than 1 judge, how do we know who to go by? Is it a majority decision or not?

I'm referring to the part around Deuteronomy 17:11.

גילוי said...

I understand your silence.

There is a question I have against your interpretation of Exodus 23.

Why would G-d command us not to go after the masses to do evil? Shouldn't we also not go after 1 person if they are doing evil?

Rather the "evil" here is not "evil" in the sense that we use it in English, but rather it is "evil" in one of the senses used in the Torah: to cause pain or suffering. It is talking about sentencing a person to a capital punishment.

When Moshe spoke to G-d at the end of Exodus chapter 5, he asks: Why have you done evil to your nation? Did G-d do "evil" according to the modern English usage? Of course not. Did G-d cause the suffering of Israel? Yes.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 8, 2008 8:06 AM you said
"I understand your silence."

and I don't believe you do.
I will be the first to admit, regrettably, that I do not have 'total recall' as some other contributors to this blog seem to have. My response to your question about Deuteronomy 17:11 requires some repeat reading on my part which I have yet to complete.
In addition to that I do have other personal commitments to keep, I don't just sit around 'surfing the net' all day.

Please be patient, I do not like to miss any favourable opportunity.
eg.In a few minutes I'll be off to do my stint of volunteer driving at a local major hospital.

ps. Here in the land of Oz, where I live, it is now 9:03AM, Wednesday July 9 and I have a busy schedule for the day.

גילוי said...

Ralph,

To make things easier, the main relevant passages of "court law" are the section I mentioned in Exodus, the passage at Kivrot haTaavah (Graves of Desire) in Numbers, and chapter 17 of Deuteronomy.

גילוי said...

And of course you can also look at the pre-Sinai court system, taking place when Yitro arrives at the camp in Exodus.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 6, 2008 3:38 PM you asked
"How does that court system work?"
and followed that by saying, "I'm referring to the part around Deuteronomy 17:11."

I think that to view Deuteronomy 17:11 in its proper context we need to refer back to the beginning of Deuteronomy as to its time frame. viz:
Deu 1:1 These are the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel beyond the Jordan; in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab.
Deu 1:2 It is eleven days journey from Horeb unto Kadesh-barnea by the way of mount Seir.
Deu 1:3 And it came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first day of the month, that Moses spoke unto the children of Israel, according unto all that the LORD had given him in commandment unto them;
(e-Sword Tanakh – JPS)

So it was toward the conclusion of the time spent in the wilderness and Israel was about to enter the promised land.
Deuteronomy 17 is discussing the obligations of the Israelites after they enter the land and still acknowledge G-d as their King. However, G-d does foretell the future rebellion of the Israelites in verse 14.

Deuteronomy 17:8 talks about disputes between “blood and blood” ie. family squabbles, “plea and plea”, between neighbors, and other similar matters.
Such things were to be taken to a system of judges (v9), the priests, the Levites and the ‘judges’ drawn from them.
Vs.11 discusses the Israelites responsibility once judgment had been made.

Following the destruction of the Temple in CE70 there is no longer a priestly nor Levitical system in place.

If we have similar disputes today that we cannot resolve between ourselves, we can take them to a mutual friend for adjudication, if we want; or we can take them to a secular court for settlement, such is ‘the law of the land’ today. You could even take your dispute to your local rabbi if you were that way inclined. The principle of Deuteronomy 17:11 still applies to us today if we take any of the courses just described.

You asked “How does that court system work?” and I would suggest that today, it doesn’t, but will be reestablished in the coming Kingdom of G-d.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 8, 2008 8:06 AM you asked
"Why would G-d command us not to go after the masses to do evil? Shouldn't we also not go after 1 person if they are doing evil?"

The answer is a little complex and long and probably best expressed by another notable Jewish resident of Israel. Your question demands an answer so I will take the liberty of quoting part of Nehemia Gordon's discourse on the matter viz.
"What we learn from Deuteronomy 31:10-13, is that the Torah was written in such a way that it would be completely comprehensible to these ancient Israelites, by simply hearing it. When we study Scripture today we have to place ourselves in the position of those ancient Israelites as they heard the Torah read to them. Of course, we have unique challenges they did not have. We must span a gap of 3500 years of culture and language. Although Hebrew is a spoken language in modern Israel, the Hebrew of scripture is quite different and we must understand the language as it was used when the Torah was given. Once we span the cultural and linguistic gaps, we must ask ourselves: “In the time of Moses, how would the ancient Israelites have understood the Torah?” Any interpretation not obvious to an ancient Israelite shepherd listening in the public reading cannot be what is intended by Torah.
The problem is that the Rabbis interpret Scripture using what is known today as midrashic interpretation.(17) Midrashic interpretation consists of taking words out of context and reading meaning into them. A good example of this is Exodus 23:2 which says:

“Exo 23:2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice;”

What this verse means is that we should not testify that a person is guilty just because everyone else says he is guilty; this would be a perversion of justice. We must testify to truth whatever that happens to be, even if we are the lone voice of reason. The Rabbis take this same verse and derive a completely different principle from it. They arbitrarily remove words from the beginning and end of the verse, as such:
“Exo 23:2 ==== ===== === ====== = ========= == == ====, ======= ===== ==== ==== ======== == = ===== == turn aside after a multitude == ======= =======. (18)
(e-Sword Tanakh JPS)

What is left is ‘turn aside after a multitude’ or “incline after a majority”. Disembodied from their original context, these words are “interpreted” as a commandment to “go after the majority.” Whatever the majority of rabbis say is binding because Exodus 23:2 says to go after the majority. Never mind that Exodus 23:2 actually says not to go after the majority but to go after whatever is true. This does not matter because the Rabbis have the prerogative to “interpret” as they see fit. This practice of taking words out of context and twisting their meaning is typical of the Rabbinical approach to Scripture."
(And is also typical of many so called Christian ministers today)
[source: The Hebrew Yeshua vs. the Greek Jesus - Nehemia Gordon Copyright 2005 ISBN 0-9762637-0-X]

Ralph said...

in addition to that:-

"“Said R. Jeremiah: That the Torah had already been given at Mount Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heavenly Voice, because Thou hast long since written in the Torah at Mount Sinai, After the majority must one incline."5
(source: Babylonian Talmud ‘Baba Mezi'a 59b’ – under the editorship of RABBI DR I. EPSTEIN B.A., Ph.D., D. Lit.)”

“Long since written in the Torah”
Show me where, direct me to book, chapter and verse!
Do you deny the Talmud, as well as the NT?

After the majority must one incline, even if the majority is WRONG?
“To pervert justice”
I ask again, where was the justice in the execution of a Jewish prophet, namely, Jesus of Nazareth?

I put it to you that the Sanhedrin brought about His execution because he did NOT incline after the majority, and thus they, the Sanhedrin, perverted justice!
Viz.
Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, (by the Rabbis) Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;"
(e-Sword AKJ)
and:-

"And so if a prophet testifies that the Holy-One, Blessed be He, told him that the law of a certain commandment is such and such, or [even] that the reasoning of a certain sage is correct, that prophet must be executed…, as it is written, “it is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). Thus God did not permit us to learn from the prophets, only from the Rabbis who are men of logic and reason. (Maimonides, pp.27-28)

Maimonides emphasizes that a prophet who prophesies something contrary to the Oral Law, even if Scripture agrees with the prophet, that prophet must be executed:"

גילוי said...

Ralph,

You went to great lengths to not answer the questions at hand.

First you say that the court system in Deuteronomy 17 doesn't apply today, which is a sweeping statement which is only partially true, as the Mishnah and the Talmud bring down the rulings that were already given.

Then after that, is over, you no longer feel the need to actually explain how you think those court systems work. Did they / will they in the future go by majority rule or not? What does G-d command there? If the people with a dispute go to a court of Torah, then obviously there is a dispute as to what the truth is. If the minority presents the true interpretation and the majority represents a false interpretation, how are the people with the dispute supposed to side, if they themselves cannot come to an agreement?

This is the basic issue. The Torah is not a fantasy document, but a real living document, meant to be applied to real life.

When you say that it was given to Israelites in the desert, need you really be reminded that it was given for all generations, by the greatest prophet that ever existed? Did he not know that there would be later generations that would not be on the same linguistic level?

Regarding your bible and your deity: If your bible's stories are in any way accurate, theen yes he was a heretic who deserved seems to be worthy of the death penalty for at least some of what is recorded, though what he was actually tried for shows that it was not a "pharisee" Sanhedrin that tried him at all.

And if the Talmud's version of events is true, then obviously he was a heretic worthy of the death penalty for idolatry.

He was not a prophet either. At least a true prophet.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 12, 2008 11:58 PM you said:-
"You went to great lengths to not answer the questions at hand."

Well, at least you acknowledge my effort.
also:-
"First you say that the court system in Deuteronomy 17 doesn't apply today, which is a sweeping statement which is only partially true,"

So, which part is 'partially true'? Conversely, which part is not true?
also:-
"as the Mishnah and the Talmud bring down the rulings that were already given."

It would be obvious to any serious student that the 'Mishnah and the Talmud' are simply the machinations and opinions of the rabbis.
also:-
"Then after that, is over, you no longer feel the need to actually explain how you think those court systems work. Did they / will they in the future go by majority rule or not? What does G-d command there? If the people with a dispute go to a court of Torah, then obviously there is a dispute as to what the truth is. If the minority presents the true interpretation and the majority represents a false interpretation, how are the people with the dispute supposed to side, if they themselves cannot come to an agreement?"

Huh?
also:-
"The Torah is not a fantasy document, but a real living document, meant to be applied to real life."

Yes it is. As it applies to life in this current era.
also:-
"When you say that it was given to Israelites in the desert, need you really be reminded that it was given for all generations,... ?"

No, I don't think I need to be reminded.
also:-
"by the greatest prophet that ever existed?"
Yes, until that time. That 'greatest prophet' also said:-
"Deu 18:15 A prophet will the LORD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;"
and He did, in the form of Yeshua haMoshiach, the one whom you deny and to whom you will not hearken. The same could not be said of the House of Israel.
also:-
"Did he not know that there would be later generations that would not be on the same linguistic level?"

I don't know, you will have to ask him.
also:-
"though what he was actually tried for shows that it was not a "pharisee" Sanhedrin that tried him at all."

So, what kind of non "pharisee" Sanhedrin trial was it?
also:-
"And if the Talmud's version of events is true, then obviously he was a heretic worthy of the death penalty for idolatry."

Can you direct me to "the Talmud's version of events"? Other contributors to this Blog seem to indicate there is no Talmud reference to Jesus of Nazareth.
also:-
"He was not a prophet either. At least a true prophet."

So, what do you think is a 'true' prophet?
My understanding of a 'true prophet' is one whose prophecies come to pass.

You make numerous statements and express a number of opinions but hardly ever supply even one reference to back up your comments.
Why is it so?

גילוי said...

What is partially true is that today there is no working Sanhedrin for us to inquire, but that does not invalidate prior decisions which are recorded.

"The machinations and opinions of the rabbis" should be modified. A great number of the rabbis whose rulings are recorded were in the Sanhedrin.

What is your "huh" about? I asked the same question now numerous times. Imagine that you are of the tribe of Binyamin, let's say, 2700 years ago, and you go to court, as there is a business disagreement as to whether or not you owe some money. (See Deuteronomy 17:8, words of conflict, including financial matters) At the conclusion, 2 judges say you owe the money, and 1 says you don't, what do we go by? According to what you have written, we go according to the person who gives a ruling according to Torah, and we ignore the other opinion. How do you know which ruling to follow?

This is all I've been asking the last few comments here. Just answer this question.

Ralph, I really feel no theological threat from Christianity. I don't feel the need to memorize statements and references in the Talmud; these are readily available for you to find on Google. There is a story brought that Yesh"u was spoken to harshly by his teacher, and then strayed to idolatry. Another is that he took something out of the Temple and used it to do magic. The idolatry is definitely a capital offense. Your bible's account of him breaking the Sabbath is another. I don't buy the story of the trial, due to the way it is written.

Regarding prophets:

A prophet usually does have to predict some future event when he is "establishing" himself. The fulfillment of the prophecy, however, does not make him a true prophecy.

There are 2 sections in Deuteronomy that deal with this matter: Parshat Re'eh and Parshat Shoftim. (looking up chapter numbers)
Chapter 13 and chapter 18.

A false prophet also can make prophecies that are fulfilled, for Hashem gives them this power but to try us to make sure that we love Him. A true prophet is only one whose words are fulfilled and his words/message are in line with Torah. You have certainly only shown me the teachings of a false prophet with this argument regarding the Torah. Even if you could predict every headline that would appear in the newspaper from now until the end of the year, I would still not be compelled to listen to the Christian message.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 13, 2008 7:28 AM you said:-
“What is partially true is that today there is no working Sanhedrin for us to inquire,…”
then:-
“but that does not invalidate prior decisions which are recorded.”

Did I say it did? I simply said “the court system in Deuteronomy 17 doesn't apply today,..”

Also:
“The machinations and opinions of the rabbis" should be modified….”

Why? Because “A great number of the rabbis whose rulings are recorded were in the Sanhedrin”?
Are you saying that their rulings were not the outcome of their ‘machinations and opinions’? And if they weren’t, then from where were their ‘rulings’ derived?

If you say their rulings were derived from Torah then you are talking about their interpretations of Torah, their opinions of Torah, their “machinations’ on Torah, their philosophy of ‘inclining toward the majority’ and executing anyone who does not agree with them; even the prophets sent by G-d.
Witness:
“Neh 9:26 Nevertheless they were disobedient, and rebelled against Thee, and cast Thy law behind their back, AND SLEW THY PROPHETS THAT DID FOREWARN THEM TO TURN BACK UNTO THEE, and they wrought great provocations.”

As was, and still is, their wont.
Witness:
“If there are 1000 prophets, all of them of the stature of Elijah and Elisha, giving a certain interpretation, and 1001 rabbis giving the opposite interpretation, you shall “incline after the majority” (Exodus 23:2) and the law is according to the 1001 rabbis, not according to the 1000 venerable prophets. And thus our sages said , “By G-d, if we heard the matter directly from the mouth of Joshua the son of Nun, we would not obey him nor would we listen to him!” The Sages said further, “If Elijah comes and tells us, ‘The levirate obligation is cancelled through a shoe’ (see Deuteronomy 25:9), we will listen to him [because this is what the Oral Law teaches], but if he says it is cancelled through a sandal, we will not listen to him [because this is contrary to Oral Law].” …And so if a prophet testifies that the Holy-One, Blessed be He, told him that the law of a certain commandment is such and such, or [even] that the reasoning of a certain sage is correct, that prophet must be executed…, as it is written, “it is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). Thus God did not permit us to learn from the prophets, only from the Rabbis who are men of logic and reason. (Maimonides, pp.27-28)

Maimonides emphasizes that a prophet who prophesies something contrary to the Oral Law, even if Scripture agrees with the prophet , that prophet must be executed:

Also:
“What is your "huh" about?”

You then go on to recite a comprehendible, hypothetical, case of conflict which I find easier to understand than your previous rendition.
Your concluding question was:-
“How do you know which ruling to follow?”
and I offer a simple and straightforward scriptural answer:-
” Deu 17:10 And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee.”

Also:
“I don't feel the need to memorize statements and references in the Talmud; these are readily available for you to find on Google.”

I can assure you, as I have commented else where, I am not blessed with instant and total recall. I believe it is common courtesy to provide a specific reference if I am presenting what I believe to be matters of fact. I don’t expect my audience to have to go ‘chasing around’ in order to prove MY point.

Also:
“There is a story brought that Yesh"u was spoken to harshly by his teacher, and then strayed to idolatry. Another is that he took something out of the Temple and used it to do magic.”

Are these more Rabbinical myths? Yeshua, the greatest teacher who ever trod this earth, spoken to harshly by his teacher? What teacher?
Something in the temple had magical properties? Get a light!
That is, if we are discussing Jesus of Nazareth.

Also:
“The idolatry is definitely a capital offense.”
Specifically, what idolatry?

Also:
“Your bible's account of him breaking the Sabbath is another.”
You obviously mean breaking the Rabbis Sabbath, the Rabbis law of 40 less 1 ‘shalt nots’?

Also:
Regarding prophets:
Perhaps we might leave that for a later comment. I can see I've taken up more than enough of BK's Blog space.

גילוי said...

Thank you for contradicting yourself so clearly this time, and pointing out where your error comes from.

1. You admit that majority rule is the deciding factor in the court system.

2. You have a problem with following the majority when there is a minority prophetic opinion to the contrary, even though this is in line with the scriptural command regarding the role of prophets and courts, again see Deuteronomy 17 and 18, and I believe it is chapter 30. The Torah is not in Heaven (chapter 30), so therefore the court system (chapter 17) is not overridden by the prophets (chapter 18). Prophets have a very specific role.

3. You quote a verse regarding the sins during the first Temple period and then decide that (because Yesh"u was a heretic) that it is talking about the Rabbis. I understand your desire to do that, but you don't really have a scriptural source for me to discuss with you that will go in to the matter of the judges during the 2nd Temple period.

Regarding idolatry: If the Christian tale is to be held as true, and the idea of a son of god is to be taken literally when Yesh"u was on trial, and he said that yes he was, then obviously he is a heretic, an idolator, and deserved the death penalty, because such nonsensical beliefs are antithetical to the Torah.

The idea of him being the greatest teacher is based on your beliefs, not on facts, and is therefore not worth arguing.

Regarding the Sabbath laws: Let's say that someone went up to the rabbis in the court system and asked them what the laws of the Sabbath are... Then a majority of the sages gave them this list of 40 minus 1. Since the Torah does not distinguish between monetary law, "ethical law" and "ritual law" as the Christians like to differentiate, then what is a Jew required to do?

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 15, 2008 12:13 AM you said:-
"Regarding idolatry: If the Christian tale is to be held as true, and the idea of a son of god is to be taken literally when Yesh"u was on trial, and he said that yes he was, then obviously he is a heretic, an idolator, and deserved the death penalty, because such nonsensical beliefs are antithetical to the Torah."

So, are you prepared to bring an indictment against the writers of the Talmud who also claim to be "sons of G-d"?
witness:
"R. Nathan met Elijah6 and asked him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do in that hour? — He laughed [with joy], he replied, saying, 'My sons have defeated Me, My sons have defeated Me.'"
(source: Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Baba Mezi'a 59b - from - SANHEDRIN
TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH
WITH NOTES, GLOSSARY
AND INDICES
CHAPTERS I - VI
BY
JACOB SHACHTER
CHAPTERS VII - XI
BY
H. FREEDMAN, B.A., Ph.D.
UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF
RABBI DR I. EPSTEIN
B.A., Ph.D., D. Lit.
"

Ahh! It has been said "How does one reason with the unreasonable?"

גילוי said...

"So, are you prepared to bring an indictment against the writers of the Talmud who also claim to be "sons of G-d"?"

I was very precise with what I wrote, and you seem to have ignored that. I quote myself:

"If the Christian tale is to be held as true, and the idea of a son of god is to be taken literally when Yesh"u was on trial"

I really meant the Christian tale. The ideas are truly a tale not to be taken seriously. It is the Christian tale that puts forth the idea that the son of G-d is part of G-d, chas v'shalom. The idea that Israel represents the son of G-d in this world is found in the Chumash. But to put him on the level of the deity is obvious heresy and idolatry.

Therefore, if we take the Christian tale to be true, that the idea "son of god" means that the "son" is part of the deity, then yes it is heresy. However, what you quoted from the Talmud is not based on such a nonsensical idea, and is therefore not. It depends on how you define your terms. The Christian way is idolatry, the Jewish way is not.

Ralph said...

The Rabbis place themselves above G-d and declare they have defeated Him.
G-d, defeated by men?
Read that Talmud extract again and
'get a light' גילוי

Where is that indictment?

Ralph said...

ps. We are all "part of the Deity", created by G-d, except for those that you think may have been created by the Adversary who was created by G-d in the first place.
In any case, I don't think the Adversary has any such creative powers.

גילוי said...

Regarding the story in the Gemara, it is not meant to be taken literally, just to show a point regarding the Torah being now in the world and not in heaven, per Deuteronomy 30.

Regarding being part of the deity, that is pantheism. Being G-d's creation doesn't make us a "part" of G-d.

Ralph said...

גילוי
on July 15, 2008 8:55 AM you said:-
"Regarding the story in the Gemara, it is not meant to be taken literally,.."

So, you are saying it is not true.
Reminds of the story about the liar. The main problem with a liar is that you can never be sure as to when he is telling the truth.

also:-
" Being G-d's creation doesn't make us a "part" of G-d."

Do you not see yourself as a son of G-d? That you are a part of His life?
Because if that's what you think, it doesn't spell out much of a future, does it?

Ralph said...

"Regarding being part of the deity, that is pantheism."

Is it?

"Main Entry: pantheism
Pronunciation: *pan(t)-th*-*i-z*m
Function: noun
Etymology: French panth*isme, from panth*iste pantheist, from English pantheist, from pan- + Greek theos god
Date:1732
1 : a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe
2 : the worship of all gods of different creeds, cults, or peoples indifferently; also : toleration of worship of all gods (as at certain periods of the Roman empire)
–pantheist \-th*-ist\ noun
–pantheistic \*pan(t)-th*-*is-tik\ also pantheistical \-ti-k*l\ adjective
–pantheistically \-ti-k(*-)l*\ adverb"
(Merriam-Webster Dictionary software)

גילוי said...

It is not a lie. It is a Midrash. If you do not know how to interpret Midrash, don't read it. If you insist on reading Midrash, learn Hebrew, and then learn the Rambam's explanation on the Mishnah, tractate Sanhedrin, chapter 10. He explains the proper approach to Midrash.

The Torah is full of anthropomorphisms (sp?) that are not meant to be taken literally. It is not my job to come out and justify all of them to you. Deuteronomy chapter 11. It says that if we don't keep the mitzvot, G-d will be mad at us. The term for mad there means "his nostrils will flare at you". Do you take that literally as well? If so, we have nothing to discuss.

And yes it is pantheism, your beliefs seem similar to those of Spinoza by what you have written recently. Just because you don't want to be defined as a pantheist doesn't make it go away.

Ralph said...

SEEK:
“Anger and flared nostrils” at Answers.com

AND YE SHALL FIND:
“A second image balances the first one: Exodus 34:6 says, "The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth." The Hebrew word for "longsuffering" is literally "long of nose." Anger shows in flared nostrils and snorting, like enraged people with reddened noses. But God is "long of nose," meaning that it takes much longer for his wrath to kindle. The same word for "long of nose" is in Psalm 103:8: "The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love."

At: http://www.christianitytoday.com/workplace/articles
/relationships/longnoseforanger.html

LOL and LL!

גילוי said...

I'm glad you find amusement in finding the error in your ways. Thank you for pointing out another on an ever-lengthening list of contradictions in your beliefs. So you must agree that not everything is to be taken literally, and it is not saying literally that G-d has a long nose. A very selective attitude you have regarding what to assume is literal and what is not.

Once you read the Rambam there(along with Jewish history for the ever-important historical context) maybe you will understand that Midrash a bit more.

The challenge to your beliefs still stands: How can you say "I accept only the authority of G-d, not man", and still not make the Torah in to some hypothetical fantasy document? So far you've admitted that you must listen to the court system, which means accepting the authority of man. You have brought quotations from scripture regarding what happened during the 1st Temple period, which was not about the rabbis or the courts of that time, and chosen to apply that to Yesh"u because you believe that he is on a higher level than prophets, and you claimed he predicted successfully future events, confirming his role. I pointed out that Deuteronomy warns us of a false prophet, so I need not even investigate the veracity of these prophetic predictions, but only the theology being preached. Since it is not in line with Torah, I need not declare him a true prophet at all.

Ralph said...

Ahh גילוי, I had to check your own Blogsite again to assure myself you are of the male gender. (It says you are. No offence meant to any female readers)

"So you must agree that not everything is to be taken literally,..."

I don't think I have ever said otherwise. Have I?

also:-
"A very selective attitude you have regarding what to assume is literal and what is not."

I believe that G-d has given me the wisdom to be able to discern between what can be classed as 'metaphorical' and what can be taken as 'literal'. Have you ever been 'face to face' with a very, very angry person? Their nostrils 'literally' can flare.

also:-
"Once you read the Rambam there(along with Jewish history for the ever-important historical context) maybe you will understand that Midrash a bit more."

In your previous comment you said:-
"If you insist on reading Midrash, learn Hebrew, and then learn the Rambam's explanation on the Mishnah, tractate Sanhedrin, chapter 10."

Tractate Sanhedrin, chapter 10 contains 13 Folios and what appears to be thousands of words.
I do admit to a 'short attention span', especially with material I find to be uninteresting, even boring. Then:-

1. I do not have the aptitude to learn Hebrew.
2. What does it matter when the Talmud/Midrash, whatever, is translated into English under the editorship of - "RABBI DR I. EPSTEIN B.A., Ph.D., D. Lit."
whom I take as being well qualified for the task.
3. Why on earth would I want to 'study', and understand, the Talmud/Midrash, whatever, when they add absolutely no meaning to my life and faith, as an ordinary man.

It is the 'Holy Bible', including the Tanakh, which provides meaning and guidelines to my life, not the opinions and 'machinations' of the Rabbis; which some could view as an 'exclusive club', where, if you disagree with their rulings, the 'religious' rulings of men, they can claim to have you executed. Or don't you believe what Maimonides wrote?

also:-
"So far you've admitted that you must listen to the court system,.."
Yes, IF I CHOOSE. In our current society I have every right NOT TO PROSECUTE! On the other hand, if I am prosected, then I am bound by the 'law of the land'.

also:-
" and chosen to apply that to Yesh"u because you believe that he is on a higher level than prophets,.."
Yes. I believe He is on a greater level than the prophets because I believe it was He who created the prophets.
Cast off, if you can, the 'mind control' of the Rabbis and consider this scripture:-
"Gen 48:15 And he blessed Joseph, and said: 'The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God who hath been my shepherd all my life long unto this day,
Gen 48:16 the angel who hath redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named in them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.'"
I wonder if you can!

also:-
"I need not declare him a true prophet at all."
You have no "need" to declare anyone a prophet. You have every right to declare whatever you please, as we all have such a right.

A tip. If you were to conduct an 'in depth study' of the ninth chapter of the book of Daniel, free of the fetters of Rabbinic Judaism, I believe you might, just might, discover proof that Yeshua, Jesus of Nazareth, really is 'the Messiah'.

(scripture quotes from e-Sword Tanakh - JPS)

Ralph said...

"but only the theology being preached"

Does your theology preach a forthcoming attack on western nations, followed by an attack on the land of Israel by Russia and China in league with Iran?

Does your theology preach that a move is afoot to enforce worldwide 'Sunday' observance as against the true Sabbath?

Does you theology preach of the increasing frequency of earthquakes, hurricanes, other so called 'natural' disasters and disease epidemics such as AIDS?

Does your theology preach of the future time when the land of Israel will be surrounded by armies and it is time to 'get out' and flee to the mountains?

Does you theology preach of coming, even present, worldwide food shortages and consequent riots.

Just what does your theology preach?
Are you able to tell us?

גילוי said...

Yet again reading things in to my words.

I said learn Hebrew and read the Rambam's commentary to chapter 10 of Sanhedrin. I didn't say for you to learn the Talmud Tractace Sanhedrin. You would find what I am referring to, how to approach Midrashic literature, in the introduction to that chapter. Until you do, you will probably continue to misinterpret things as literal when they are not meant to be taken as such.

I have studied chapter 9 of Daniel in depth. The Christian interpretation is absolutely illogical. I do have a different approach than what you've read about the Jewish approach, but I will not go in to that, nor your beliefs about the end of days. If you want that subject, you can read my blog.

Ralph said...

"I have studied chapter 9 of Daniel in depth. The Christian interpretation is absolutely illogical."

How so?

גילוי said...

The 70 weeks are a single unit, with events given at given intervals (7 and 69, 70). It is not 69 weeks plus 1 extra week at some unknown point in history.

Ralph said...

Is that the Rabbinical point of view? The prophecy does not say that this period of years is consecutive, from beginning to end.
It is divided up into three distinct periods – 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and a final week.
A total of 70 weeks and, on the year for a day principle ( from: Ezekial 4:6), a total of 490 years.

גילוי said...

That explanation is untenable. Daniel is told all the necessary information on how to know the time of the End. By your argument, how do we know that the 62 weeks follow the 7? We can use similar logic to say that they haven't started yet.

Rather, if one understands the necessary information, which includes the starting point, the meaning of the term "weeks", he can understand when the 70th week is.

Ralph said...

"By your argument,..."

What arguement? I have simply said "The prophecy does not say that this period of years is consecutive, from beginning to end."
Or is it the 'year for a day principle' that is untenable?
Then, what do you understand by the term "weeks"?

I will ask again, is yours the Rabbinical point of view?

גילוי said...

You are presenting an argument for how the Christian view can be true, by saying the 70 weeks aren't consecutive. This is problematic because it takes Daniel 9 and strips it away from the other chapters which give signs for the beginning and end points.

Daniel is definitely referring to a number of years, not days, and a consecutive time period. That is the "standard" rabbinical explanation.

Ralph said...

"..by saying the 70 weeks aren't consecutive."

Read my lips! "The prophecy does not say that this period of years is consecutive, from beginning to end."

In any case, you said:-
"That is the "standard" rabbinical explanation."

So I presume it is also yours and you prefer to submit your mind to the Rabbis. Consequently I suggest we end this discussion right there.

גילוי said...

Wow, you really don't get it.

By saying that it is about Yeshu and that the 70th week is disconnected, you are following someone else's opinion. The only difference is that the opinion that you choose to accept actually makes no sense. Sounds like hypocrisy to me.

To review Daniel, we have multiple relatively easy-to-understand predictions.

We have Daniel 8, which mentions 2300 evening/mornings. This is from Daniel's time (as can be understood from an oddity in the text itself) and brings us to the year the State of Israel is founded.

We have chapter 12, which gives us a start time and end time, and completes in another 15 years.

(both chapters have full articles explaining the predictions on my blog)

But Daniel 9, which is far more clear than chapter 8 about having a "start-time", isn't even based on a linear time-frame? That is ridiculous.

If anything, we should stop this conversation because you are willing to submit to brain-washing on a condition that the person feeding you nonsense is not called "rabbi".

Ralph said...

I accept your invitation.