Jews, the Talmud, and Jesus

[Lapell]

Sepharad has told us the point of view from Jews in Judaism, and her own. They might have closed the door to the possibility that Jesus truly was, and is, who he claimed to be… We believe that they did it sincerely believing that they are right. But we don’t believe that in stating this they actually are… even though they don’t mean to lie, I know!

 

[Lapell]

Actually I don’t believe he ever claimed to be, and since he spent his last days paralyzed and unable to speak, he wouldn’t be able to quite his claims.

Do you follow the Qur’an or the Gospel, Isa? For in the Gospel, yes He did! Oh yes He did! Even in front of the High Priest Caiaphas, which is why the High Priest tore his garment, saying : “What need do we have of witnesses now? You just heard the blasaphemy? What do you say?” And all said Jesus had to die.

 

[reen12]

quote: Sepharad

Everything you said is based on the Christian interpretation, you see it one way, we see it another way.

Precisely.

Two examples?

• ‘original sin’ is said to be found in Psalm 51:5

Indeed I was born with iniquity, with sin my mother conceived me.
Psalm 51: 5

[note Rashi’s commentary]:

chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/16272/showrashi/true/jewish/Chapter-51.htm

---

Judaic translation of Isaiah 7:14? ‘young girl’

chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/15938/jewish/Chapter-7.htm

Christian translation of Isaiah 7:14 ?

Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.

[don’t miss footnote # 7]

nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/isaiah/isaiah7.htm#foot7

---

Of the two, it is critical that original sin be ‘found’ in the Hebrew Scriptures -
for without this ontologic ‘reality’ - no need for a savior.

The CCC testifies to the criticality of original sin: #389

**"…**we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ."

Saul of Tarsus got the ball rolling:

In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. Romans 6: 18

Critique of Saul’s efforts here:

sullivan-county.com/z/os.htm

reen12

 

[Angelos]

No, it does not. What the Jewish literature says is that the Second Temple would be destroyed due to sinat chinam (baseless hatreds) amongst Jews.

This means there was something unusual and new about Jesus’ prediction in contrast to what you previously claimed (that Jesus was not the only person to predict the destruction of the Temple).

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Do you follow the Qur’an or the Gospel, Isa? For in the Gospel, yes He did! Oh yes He did! Even in front of the High Priest Caiaphas, which is why the High Priest tore his garment, saying : “What need do we have of witnesses now? You just heard the blasaphemy? What do you say?” And all said Jesus had to die.

I was referring to the rebbe, not Christ.

As for Christ, I’ll just refer to the Jerusalem Cross tattoed on my wrist.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

quote: Sepharad

Precisely.

Two examples?

• ‘original sin’ is said to be found in Psalm 51:5

Indeed I was born with iniquity, with sin my mother conceived me.
Psalm 51: 5

[note Rashi’s commentary]:

chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/16272/showrashi/true/jewish/Chapter-51.htm

---

Judaic translation of Isaiah 7:14? ‘young girl’

chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/15938/jewish/Chapter-7.htm

Christian translation of Isaiah 7:14 ?

Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.

[don’t miss footnote # 7]

nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/isaiah/isaiah7.htm#foot7

---

Of the two, it is critical that original sin be ‘found’ in the Hebrew Scriptures -
for without this ontologic ‘reality’ - no need for a savior.

The CCC testifies to the criticality of original sin: #389

**"…**we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ."

Saul of Tarsus got the ball rolling:

In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. Romans 6: 18

Critique of Saul’s efforts here:

sullivan-county.com/z/os.htm

reen12

Problem with your translation of Isaiah was that it was translated into Greek Parthenos (which only means virgin, not making a gender distinction, btw) by a Hebrew sage from the Temple BEFORE CHRIST and was read in the synogogs throughout the world until a century or so A.D., the Jews got tired of being proved wrong with their own scripture, and changed it.

 

[Robbinson]

Problem with your translation of Isaiah was that it was translated into Greek Parthenos (which only means virgin, not making a gender distinction, btw) by a Hebrew sage from the Temple BEFORE CHRIST and was read in the synogogs throughout the world until a century or so A.D., the Jews got tired of being proved wrong with their own scripture, and changed it.

Agreed - in addition, the Hebrew world Alma, which means young woman can, in context, mean virgin and in each instance in which it used in the Old Testatement, context in fact implies virgin (thus, the reason the Jewish sages actually translated as such when translating into Greek before Christ). Furthmore, the prophecy at issue in Isaiah talked about the birth being a “sign” - not sure why a young woman giving birth is a sign - but a virgin giving birth - now that is a “sign”!

Blessings,

Brian

 

[inJESUS]

Abhodah Zarah, 22b:

“Why are the Goim unclean? Because they were not present at Mount Sinai. For when the serpent entered into Eve he infused her with uncleanness. But the Jews were cleansed from this when they stood on Mount Sinai; the Goim, however, who were not on Mount Sinaim were not cleansed.”

does anyone know what this means?

 

[reen12]

quote: Isa Almisry

Problem with your translation of Isaiah was that it was translated into Greek Parthenos (which only means virgin, not making a gender distinction, btw) by a Hebrew sage from the Temple BEFORE CHRIST and was read in the synogogs throughout the world until a century or so A.D., the Jews got tired of being proved wrong with their own scripture, and changed it.

The translator got it wrong… from the get-go.
The critical note here, is not the Greek, but the Hebrew.

As to the Greek parthenos :

outreachjudaism.org/matthew.html

It is the original Hebrew that is of critical significance:

outreachjudaism.org/alma.htm

While Isaiah used the word ‘almah’ once, he used ‘betulah’
5 times.

Isaiah 23:4; 23:12; 37:22; 47:1; 62:5.

---

The sine qua non, here, is not mastery of the Greek language, [and the errors of translators] - but, rather, mastery of Hebrew.

Happily - I can understand the English language, which makes it possible for me to seek further guidance on this issue.

[Unless it will now be said the words denote the same reality:
*almah = betulah.]

Or, of course, Isaiah 7: 14ff could be a ‘dual-prophecy.’ http://bestsmileys.com/fainting/1.gif

---

Must write a post, sometime, regarding ‘dual prophesies.’
One to accompany the hydraulic imagery - in terms of the
‘salvific’ ----> as applied ‘before’ the *main *flow of the salvific [immaculate conception]… and the ‘follow-thru’ theory -----> the ‘salvific,’ as ‘applied’ to those hapless individuals - who were born 1500 years before Christ - and who hung around, playing cards and board games… waiting for the salvific flow to start. :harp:

Grace as ‘hydraulics.’ =

Flowing baaaackwards [Immac. Concept]… before the salvific event… while salvific spigot, only opens - for those cooling their heels in the abode of the dead - over Easter weekend. http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

---

As I said earlier, the matter of the precise word for ‘virgin’ *pales *
in significance - when compared to Saul’s introducing ‘original sin.’ No wonder he was the apostle to the gentiles - where a knowledge of Torah would be unknown.

The whole Christian project has - as it’s base - the existence
of original sin.
No original sin = no need for a savior. God/man, or otherwise.

reen12

 

[reen12]

quote: Robbinson

Agreed - in addition, the Hebrew world Alma, which means young woman can, in context, mean virgin and in each instance in which it used in the Old Testatement, context in fact implies virgin (thus, the reason the Jewish sages actually translated as such when translating into Greek before Christ). Furthmore, the prophecy at issue in Isaiah talked about the birth being a “sign” - not sure why a young woman giving birth is a sign - but a virgin giving birth - now that is a “sign”!

outreachjudaism.org/alma.htm

outreachjudaism.org/matthew.html

You know - I speak not one word of Hebrew or Greek,
and know a very small amount of Latin.

If I had difficulty, understanding a word in Latin,
I would seek out an acknowledged expert in that language.

Most especially, in matters this critical to belief.

I am happy to acknowledge my absolute ignorance of both
Greek and Hebrew. Even expertise in Greek would not be
of assistance, here.

Does anyone have a knowledge of the Hebrew language?
Particularly ancient Hebrew?

I would be most grateful to know that such expertise
graced this forum.

For - lacking such expertise - it becomes a matter of
an appeal to those who do have such expertise.
Then it becomes who’s ‘expertise’ is accepted.

Such debates may continue, until the parousia -
or until the Judaic* moshiach* appears -

jewfaq.org/moshiach.htm

By that time - I’m likely to have firsthand knowledge
of which religious beliefs reflected theological reality.

reen12

 

[Sepharad]

Abhodah Zarah, 22b:

“Why are the Goim unclean? Because they were not present at Mount Sinai. For when the serpent entered into Eve he infused her with uncleanness. But the Jews were cleansed from this when they stood on Mount Sinai; the Goim, however, who were not on Mount Sinaim were not cleansed.”

does anyone know what this means?

What website did you copy that from? The reason I ask is because the misspellings are identical to the misspellings used on the white supremacist sites.

Abhodah is properly spelled Avodah. Goim is Goyim.

I assume you got that from the I B Pranatis forgery?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

What website did you copy that from? The reason I ask is because the misspellings are identical to the misspellings used on the white supremacist sites.

Abhodah is properly spelled Avodah. Goim is Goyim.

I assume you got that from the I B Pranatis forgery?

Looking this up I came across this:

According to a Jewish tradition[13], the Rabbis were very scared of early Christianity and knew that the religion would go on to become successful. In order to save future Jews from both death and definite assimilation, the Rabbis of the time sent a man to infiltrate the Christian communities and change the Christian doctrine to become so distinct from Judaism that it is proselytizing will focus on gentiles and not Jews. He was also to change the Christian doctrine to become favorable to Jews, even outlawing the murder of Jews. This man was named Saul, who later became known as Paul. Paul, who may or may not have been a student of Rabban Gamliel,[14] helped shape the Pauline doctrine that forbade Christians from killing Jews[15] and switched the Christian day of rest from Saturday to Sunday to alienate more Jews as a way of maintaining Judaism without having more Jews succumb to the Christian religion[16]. The first pope, Peter Kephas, is known as Shimon Keifa in Jewish tradition, and he was the author of the liturgical poem Nishmas Kol Chai[17]. Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid of Regensburg (1150-1217) even called[18] Peter a righteous man who had good intentions in his seeming apostasy. Others explain that he was not a secret agent of the Pharisee Rabbis in an attempt to undermine Christianity, but rather he was a total apostate and only repented on his deathbed whereupon he wrote Nishmas.

It was highly appropriate that in 2006 the National Geographic published its findings regarding the Gospel of Judas around the time of the year that NBC plays The Ten Commandments, that is, the Easter and Passover season. The Gospel of Judas (carbon-dated to circa. 200-300 A.D.) tells a story in which Judas Iscariot did not betray his supposed teacher, Jesus, but rather handed him over to the Roman authorities because his teacher told him to do so. All the anti-Semitism that the Passion play stories, especially around the Easter and Passover season, have caused throughout history were by insinuating that all Jews are betrayers of Jesus like Judas was. However, this logic does not really follow because many of Jesus’ students were Jewish, so if one betrays him that should not necessarily brand all Jews greedy, avaricious, mosers. When the French bishop Irenaeus (ca. 130-202 CE) banned the Gospel of Judas, he purposefully wanted the church to become anti-Jewish. If the Christians were only exposed to the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John they would get a bad picture of Judas and effectively apply that to all Jews. Even if this was not his intent, he at least, wanted to distinguish Christianity from Judaism for whatever reasons[11] by demonizing the Jew. The Gospel of Judas will never be given the same credit as the other gospels within the Christian communities because it would take away their justification for many acts of anti-Semitism they committed throughout history.

Rabbi Meir Kahane (1932-1990) explains[44] why only Jews are called Adam. He says that HaShem created Adam with one responsibility, namely, to worship Himself wholly. Nevertheless, after Adam sinned, he was no longer suitable for this mission, and so this role shifted from being his role to his descendant’s role. However, not all of Adam’s descendants are included in this obligation. Only a specific nation, which HaShem has specially selected for recognizing His sovereignty, is charged with the mission of spreading awareness of His existence throughout the world. That nation descends from Abraham, who was the first to recognize HaShem on his own. Moses, at his deathbed told the Jewish Nation, “HaShem only sought to desire your forefather, and He chose their offspring after them, from all the [other] nations.[45]” It was for this purpose that the Jewish Nation was chosen above all the other nations, to fulfill this mission. Just as the Messiah will be anointed with the special role of uniting Jewry and bringing world peace, so too the Jewish nation was appointed to serve as a continuation of the role of Adam by accepting HaShem as their King. In the moments preceding the infamous sin of the Forbidden Fruit, the Serpent (Nachash, commonly translated as “snake”) seduced the only living female woman and engaged in relations with her. At that moment, the snake injected a spiritual impurity into Eve, which continued to be present in all future humans. However, when the Jewish people stood at Mount Sinai after their exodus from Egypt, that impurity was removed from them; the gentiles, who never stood present at Mount Sinai, never had their impurity from then removed from them[46]. Since the Jewish people “reversed” the effects of Original Sin on themselves, it is only appropriate that they be the ones who continue the Adamic mission that Adam could not fulfill because of said sin.
[46] Yevamos 103b. Torah has the power to purify that, which is impure, so it removed the zoohama from the Jewish people at Mount Sinai.
rchaimqoton.blogspot.com/2006_08_01_archive.html

 

[Sepharad]

Looking this up I came across this:

According to a Jewish tradition[13], the Rabbis were very scared of early Christianity and knew that the religion would go on to become successful. In order to save future Jews from both death and definite assimilation, the Rabbis of the time sent a man to infiltrate the Christian communities and change the Christian doctrine to become so distinct from Judaism that it is proselytizing will focus on gentiles and not Jews. He was also to change the Christian doctrine to become favorable to Jews, even outlawing the murder of Jews. This man was named Saul, who later became known as Paul. Paul, who may or may not have been a student of Rabban Gamliel,[14] helped shape the Pauline doctrine that forbade Christians from killing Jews[15] and switched the Christian day of rest from Saturday to Sunday to alienate more Jews as a way of maintaining Judaism without having more Jews succumb to the Christian religion[16].
rchaimqoton.blogspot.com/2006_08_01_archive.html

Ho-ly cow. Wow. That is EXACTLY the theory my husband came up with many years ago…and I was so blown away by the possibility at the time that I asked him where he got the idea…and he said he just happened to think of it while he was still a Christian!

Wow…so it seems he was not the only one to see this. Geez, could it be possible? I mean, according to the NT, Saul was pretty heavyhanded when it came to the Christians…could it be that his “road to Damascus experience” was just a plan to protect Jews all along?

This is freaky. I have to give my husband that link!

 

[Robbinson]

Ho-ly cow. Wow. That is EXACTLY the theory my husband came up with many years ago…and I was so blown away by the possibility at the time that I asked him where he got the idea…and he said he just happened to think of it while he was still a Christian!

Wow…so it seems he was not the only one to see this. Geez, could it be possible? I mean, according to the NT, Saul was pretty heavyhanded when it came to the Christians…could it be that his “road to Damascus experience” was just a plan to protect Jews all along?

This is freaky. I have to give my husband that link!

Absolutely not - the NT is the inerrant word of God and Paul was a legitimate apostle of Christ. Isa Amisry, please clarify the intent of your post - were you seriously posing this as a legitimate interpretation of Paul’s teaching?

 

[Sepharad]

Absolutely not - the NT is the inerrant word of God and Paul was a legitimate apostle of Christ. Isa Amisry, please clarify the intent of your post - were you seriously posing this as a legitimate interpretation of Paul’s teaching?

I doubt seriously she posted that because she believes in it; after all she is an Orthodox Christian!

I don’t know why she posted it but I’m still wigged out because until now, I’d thought only my husband thought that!

 

[reen12]

The only one who could ‘interpret’ Saul’s teaching was Saul.

Since he distorted Torah, winged it on ‘original sin’ - only this
master wordsmith could ‘interpret’ himself. [Saul was a brilliant man,
I’ll give him that. Finest theologian Christianity has ever had.]

As to Saul being a legitimate apostle, the Christian churches
can have him, with my best wishes. :coffeeread:

As to his episode on the road to Damascus [a faith-based belief]
doing a bootlegger’s turn is not unknown to history.

First he’s a passionate Pharisee, then a passionate Christian,
who can’t seem to stay in the saddle - noting a ‘thorn in his flesh’
[maybe he got it when he fell off his horse.] http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

reen12

 

[Robbinson]

The only one who could ‘interpret’ Saul’s teaching was Saul.

Since he distorted Torah, winged it on ‘original sin’ - only this
master wordsmith could ‘interpret’ himself. [Saul was a brilliant man,
I’ll give him that. Finest theologian Christianity has ever had.]

As to Saul being a legitimate apostle, the Christian churches
can have him, with my best wishes. :coffeeread:

As to his episode on the road to Damascus [a faith-based belief]
doing a bootlegger’s turn is not unknown to history.

First he’s a passionate Pharisee, then a passionate Christian,
who can’t seem to stay in the saddle - noting a ‘thorn in his flesh’
[maybe he got it when he fell off his horse.] http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

reen12

Sadly, there isn’t much love or respect in this post. We need not all agree on this forum, but you do appreciate, I’m sure, that there are many believers in this forum. Lets keep it on the high road - I’m always up for a respectful debate.

As to Paul’s theology - I’ll respectfully disagree. As you apparently are not a Christian, have you in fact read the entire New Testament (and/or the Old Testament)? As to original sin - is there any Jew who really believes themselves righteous in the eyes of the Lord (that’s a rhetorical question - at least I’ve always throught so as Jew (though I now believe in Christ - so a Jewish Christian if you like) and if not, why not? Perhaps its a hang up with the word “original sin” - but even Jews will admit (I believe) that we live in an imperfect world and what would be the explanation for the peversity of the world and constant sin even by the most righteous nonChrisitian (I.e, Jew)? What was the need of the day of atonement without sin and why did even the high priest need atonement? (original sin, of course).

Blessings,

Brian

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Ho-ly cow. Wow. That is EXACTLY the theory my husband came up with many years ago…and I was so blown away by the possibility at the time that I asked him where he got the idea…and he said he just happened to think of it while he was still a Christian!

Wow…so it seems he was not the only one to see this. Geez, could it be possible? I mean, according to the NT, Saul was pretty heavyhanded when it came to the Christians…could it be that his “road to Damascus experience” was just a plan to protect Jews all along?

This is freaky. I have to give my husband that link!

That’s nice (I reply later).

What website did you copy that from? The reason I ask is because the misspellings are identical to the misspellings used on the white supremacist sites.

Abhodah is properly spelled Avodah. Goim is Goyim.

I assume you got that from the I B Pranatis forgery?

bh=v. The spelling of “asperated” beghadhkephath letters was very common until very recently. In Hebrew its spelled gwym (as below), so the “mispelling” comes the loss of dagesh forte (as Classical Hebraists called it), not mention some Yiddish pronunciation.

Care to translate?

דף כב,ב גמרא ורמינהי לוקחין מהן בהמה לקרבן ואין חוששין לא משום רובע ולא משום נרבע ולא משום מוקצה ולא משום נעבד בשלמא מוקצה ונעבד אם איתא דאקצייה ואם איתא דפלחיה לא הוה מזבין ליה אלא רובע ונרבע לחוש אמר רב תחליפא אמר רב שילא בר אבינא משמיה דרב <עובד כוכבים> {גוי} חס על בהמתו שלא תעקר התינח נקבות זכרים מאי איכא למימר אמר רב כהנא הואיל ומכחישין בבשר אלא הא דתניא לוקחין בהמה מרועה שלהן ליחוש דלמא רבעה לה רועה שלהן מתיירא משום הפסד שכר אלא הא דתניא אין מוסרין בהמה לרועה שלהן לימא רועה שלהן מתיירא משום הפסד שכרו אינהו דידעי בהדדי מרתתי אנן דלא ידעינן בהו לא מרתתי אמר רבה היינו דאמרי אינשי מכתבא גללא בזע רגלא בחבריה ידע אי הכי זכרים מנקבות לא ניזבון דחיישינן דלמא מרבעא ליה עילוה כיון דמיגרי בה מרתתא אלא הא דתני רב יוסף ארמלתא לא תרבי כלבא ולא תשרי בר בי רב באושפיזא בשלמא בר בי רב צניע לה אלא כלבא כיון דמיגרה בה מרתתא כיון דכי שדיא ליה אומצא ומסריך אבתרה מימר אמרי אינשי האי דמסריך אבתרה משום אומצא דקא מסריך נקבות אצל נקבות מאי טעמא לא מייחדינן אמר מר עוקבא בר חמא מפני <שהעובדי כוכבים> {שהגוים} מצויין אצל נשי חבריהן ופעמים שאינו מוצאה ומוצא את הבהמה ורובעה ואיבעית אימא אפילו מוצאה נמי רובעה דאמר מר חביבה עליהן בהמתן של ישראל יותר מנשותיהן דא"ר יוחנן בשעה שבא נחש על חוה הטיל בה זוהמא אי הכי ישראל נמי ישראל שעמדו על הר סיני פסקה זוהמתן <עובדי כוכבים> {גוים} שלא עמדו על הר סיני לא פסקה זוהמתן איבעיא להו עופות מאי תא שמע דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום רבי חנינא אני ראיתי <עובד כוכבים> {גוי} שלקח אווז מן השוק רבעה חנקה צלאה ואכלה וא"ר ירמיה מדיפתי אני ראיתי ערבי אחד שלקח ירך מן השוק וחקק בה כדי רביעה רבעה צלאה ואכלה
mechon-mamre.org/b/l/l4702.htm

Sorry I can’t highlight, it screws up the text, its the least 7 lines or so that I am looking at. Hope they spelled it right.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

That’s nice (I reply later).

bh=v. The spelling of “asperated” beghadhkephath letters was very common until very recently. In Hebrew its spelled gwym (as below), so the “mispelling” comes the loss of dagesh forte (as Classical Hebraists called it, dagesh Hazaq if you prefer), not mention some Yiddish pronunciation.

Care to translate?

דף כב,ב גמרא ורמינהי לוקחין מהן בהמה לקרבן ואין חוששין לא משום רובע ולא משום נרבע ולא משום מוקצה ולא משום נעבד בשלמא מוקצה ונעבד אם איתא דאקצייה ואם איתא דפלחיה לא הוה מזבין ליה אלא רובע ונרבע לחוש אמר רב תחליפא אמר רב שילא בר אבינא משמיה דרב <עובד כוכבים> {גוי} חס על בהמתו שלא תעקר התינח נקבות זכרים מאי איכא למימר אמר רב כהנא הואיל ומכחישין בבשר אלא הא דתניא לוקחין בהמה מרועה שלהן ליחוש דלמא רבעה לה רועה שלהן מתיירא משום הפסד שכר אלא הא דתניא אין מוסרין בהמה לרועה שלהן לימא רועה שלהן מתיירא משום הפסד שכרו אינהו דידעי בהדדי מרתתי אנן דלא ידעינן בהו לא מרתתי אמר רבה היינו דאמרי אינשי מכתבא גללא בזע רגלא בחבריה ידע אי הכי זכרים מנקבות לא ניזבון דחיישינן דלמא מרבעא ליה עילוה כיון דמיגרי בה מרתתא אלא הא דתני רב יוסף ארמלתא לא תרבי כלבא ולא תשרי בר בי רב באושפיזא בשלמא בר בי רב צניע לה אלא כלבא כיון דמיגרה בה מרתתא כיון דכי שדיא ליה אומצא ומסריך אבתרה מימר אמרי אינשי האי דמסריך אבתרה משום אומצא דקא מסריך נקבות אצל נקבות מאי טעמא לא מייחדינן אמר מר עוקבא בר חמא מפני <שהעובדי כוכבים> {שהגוים} מצויין אצל נשי חבריהן ופעמים שאינו מוצאה ומוצא את הבהמה ורובעה ואיבעית אימא אפילו מוצאה נמי רובעה דאמר מר חביבה עליהן בהמתן של ישראל יותר מנשותיהן דא"ר יוחנן בשעה שבא נחש על חוה הטיל בה זוהמא אי הכי ישראל נמי ישראל שעמדו על הר סיני פסקה זוהמתן <עובדי כוכבים> {גוים} שלא עמדו על הר סיני לא פסקה זוהמתן איבעיא להו עופות מאי תא שמע דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום רבי חנינא אני ראיתי <עובד כוכבים> {גוי} שלקח אווז מן השוק רבעה חנקה צלאה ואכלה וא"ר ירמיה מדיפתי אני ראיתי ערבי אחד שלקח ירך מן השוק וחקק בה כדי רביעה רבעה צלאה ואכלה
mechon-mamre.org/b/l/l4702.htm

Sorry I can’t highlight, it screws up the text, its the least 7 lines or so that I am looking at. Hope they spelled it right.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Absolutely not - the NT is the inerrant word of God and Paul was a legitimate apostle of Christ. Isa Amisry, please clarify the intent of your post - were you seriously posing this as a legitimate interpretation of Paul’s teaching?

Absolutely not. The Talmud lies about Christ, the Virgin Theotokos, St. Joseph (there’s the story that Christ’s father was Panthera (<Grk. parthenosvirgin, remember this was a word the rabbis really wanted changed), the Apostles, the Passion, the Holy Spirit, God…why not St. Paul?

Sepharad, on the basis of a misspelling (which I’ve explained above: they are the way since the days of Gesensius (the “rabbi” of European Hebraists) transliterated Hebrew) accused the poster of white supremacist spots.

I don’t support white supremacists (for one thing, they wouldn’t want me), but Jewish tradition is not as, how shall I say, goy friendly as she would like us to believe. What I’ve posted is quite tame to other things I’ve seen.

All this whining about Christians disturbing services, proselytizing etc. The pride that the rabbis put the amidah curse against the Judeo-Chrisitans in the synagog service (it’s still there, in the centrual prayer of the Jewish liturgy: btw, its called Shmona Esre “the 18 Beatitudes” Esre being the word the LXX translates as makarios, the word used in the Sermon of the Mount. There’s 19 actually, the 19th (though 12 in the series) being the curse on the Judeo-Christians). Observant Jews (so I’m thinking Sepharad and her husband) say this prayer (and its curse) three times a day, every day. “It worked” she says. All the boasting that the majority of Jews “know” that Jesus isn’t the messiah.

And so I post this, and she rejoices.

Rejoices in what?

1. The rabbis are terrified that Christianity is going to succeed. Why, if the Jews were so certain that He was not the messiah? Note, the fear was about the JEWS converting, not the gentiles, so they come up with the scheme of changing the religion so it would go to the Gentiles. Remember, this is the Jewish rabbis speaking.
2. All this complaining about the Christians just exercising their right to preach (like any other Hebrew/Jew) and here we have them claiming, and Sepharad chorttling, that the rabbis infiltrating the Church to undermine it? Why, if the Church’s basis on the OT was so baseless? Note, the claim they had to change the religion so JEWS would not "succumb, and would attract ONLY Gentiles. Rember, this is the Jewish rabbis speaking.
   3.All this pride in the synagog curse. Why? If ‘changing’ the religion worked, why did they still have to stick in the curse so the Judeo-Christians would not take over the synagog? Note, the curse was inserted after the fall of the Temple, so evidently Gamaliel II, the Head of the Jews feared that now that the Temple was destroyed (as Christ foretold) the Church would triumph AMONG THE JEWS. Remember, this is the Jewish rabbis speaking.
3. The insistence that Christianity is totally a different religion which has taken the “Jews” heritage. Why? Maybe the differences aren’t as “off the wall” as Sepharad claims: the rabbis in the quote hit on the idea that changing the Sabbath to Sunday (bw, another early witness to this, 7th Day Adventists and others) perhaps the most distinctive and initmate Jewish practice (after all, how often did you go to Jerusalem, but Sabbath was with you every week, no matter where you are). And yet it didn’t work: St. Ignatius of Antioch around 105 (i.e. after the insertion of the curse and the “sabbath change”) writes about how the JEWS were abandoning the Sabbath and celebrating the Lord’s Day (Sunday) instead. Remember, what the rabbis say confirms St. Ignatius’ words.

So legitimate interpretation of St. Paul’s teaching? YES:

Didn’t St. Paul say that the Jewish authorites conspired against the Gospel? Did he say that they were misguided and jealous? Didn’t he say he was moved to convert the gentiles to move them to envy? Remember the words on the posts are those of the rabbis. So yes it is a legitimate interpretation of St. Paul’s teaching: the gnashing of teeth at it.

It strikes me as rather sad that they would take Judas as a hero.

The final paragraph, besides the mention of original sin (I thought that was one of those innovations of Christianity, as reem prattles on, “not in Judaism”) it has the text that Sepharad seems to dismiss as a white supremacist forgery. The post with all the Hebrew writing is the same story. I don’t know if Sepharad will take up my offer and translate it for us.

St. Paul pray for us!

Through the prayers of Thy chosen and called Apostle St. Paul, O Christ Our God, grant the inclusion of Thy Chosen People! (Romans 11:12)