K
Kathleen18
Guest
Are you sure that was intended for me?
- Status
po18guy
Well-known member
I shall ponder this. We could engage in a lively exchange of point and counter-point until one of us dropped dead. Then the survivor (almost certainly you) would be the de facto victor. Ultimately, that would be satisfying, but was the fullness of truth arrived at? Understanding of the truth in its completeness, which is the L-rd Himself, will always and everywhere lie beyond our grasp. We can only accept what we can process and seek a fuller understanding of that which the Almighty has revealed to us.
In all such discussions, as it is with Protestantism, we must ask that the Protestant glasses be removed so that a fresh, dare I say clearer vision of revealed truth might be recognized? As long as one thinks like a Protestant, Catholicism will make little sense.
To ask a Hebrew to remove his Jewish glasses seems almost to go beyond the pale. Yet, we ask not that you deny or negate anything. Standing firmly on your rock solid foundation, dialog is then a worthy goal, as mutual understanding serves peace and leads to a fuller understanding of revealed truth.
I admit that the Mosaic Law is a major hurdle, as to even consider something which proceeds beyond seems almost a denial of G-d’s goodness. Yet, that is not necessarily so, as the L-rd’s goodness is infinite. The Law was instituted to discipline a people who had become unruly, chasing after false gods. Here, I think that we are left with a dichotomy in that obedience to much of the Law is no longer possible, as the Temple is gone. Where has the guidance in this unsettling period gone? Where shall it come from? We are not orphans.
As lamentable as the loss of the Temple was and is, G-d does not leave us orphans. We know that He has great compassion upon the widows and orphans, and has acted innumerable times in human history to show that. I ask only that one ponder why the loss of the Temple came to pass. The destruction of the Temple being one of the most shocking of Yeshua’s prophesies. Yet, neither the Temple nor the Law is to be disparaged in any way, shape or form. Again, heaven forbid! The L-rd Himself commanded both Temple and Law.
What greater poverty than sheep without a shepherd? Surely the L-rd will provide - but just as the Law was shocking when first heard, so is that which lies beyond the Law (never forgetting the Law!) also shocking to the senses and the intellect. I ask, what aspect of G-d is not shocking, or again, what aspect of Him does not lie beyond our senses and intellect?
The Hebrew nation was well established before the Law was given - a notable point. The Mosaic Law did not define the Hebrew up to that point, as difficult as this may be to grasp in our age. it has been the Hebrew’s rule of life for millennia - but it could not have been observed before it was delivered. Without the law, there is no sin (remembering the Decalogue, of course).
(cont., as I tend to run on)
In all such discussions, as it is with Protestantism, we must ask that the Protestant glasses be removed so that a fresh, dare I say clearer vision of revealed truth might be recognized? As long as one thinks like a Protestant, Catholicism will make little sense.
To ask a Hebrew to remove his Jewish glasses seems almost to go beyond the pale. Yet, we ask not that you deny or negate anything. Standing firmly on your rock solid foundation, dialog is then a worthy goal, as mutual understanding serves peace and leads to a fuller understanding of revealed truth.
I admit that the Mosaic Law is a major hurdle, as to even consider something which proceeds beyond seems almost a denial of G-d’s goodness. Yet, that is not necessarily so, as the L-rd’s goodness is infinite. The Law was instituted to discipline a people who had become unruly, chasing after false gods. Here, I think that we are left with a dichotomy in that obedience to much of the Law is no longer possible, as the Temple is gone. Where has the guidance in this unsettling period gone? Where shall it come from? We are not orphans.
As lamentable as the loss of the Temple was and is, G-d does not leave us orphans. We know that He has great compassion upon the widows and orphans, and has acted innumerable times in human history to show that. I ask only that one ponder why the loss of the Temple came to pass. The destruction of the Temple being one of the most shocking of Yeshua’s prophesies. Yet, neither the Temple nor the Law is to be disparaged in any way, shape or form. Again, heaven forbid! The L-rd Himself commanded both Temple and Law.
What greater poverty than sheep without a shepherd? Surely the L-rd will provide - but just as the Law was shocking when first heard, so is that which lies beyond the Law (never forgetting the Law!) also shocking to the senses and the intellect. I ask, what aspect of G-d is not shocking, or again, what aspect of Him does not lie beyond our senses and intellect?
The Hebrew nation was well established before the Law was given - a notable point. The Mosaic Law did not define the Hebrew up to that point, as difficult as this may be to grasp in our age. it has been the Hebrew’s rule of life for millennia - but it could not have been observed before it was delivered. Without the law, there is no sin (remembering the Decalogue, of course).
(cont., as I tend to run on)
po18guy
Well-known member
(cont.)
Another shocking testimony of Yeshua is that the Law was fulfilled in Him. Who can accept that hard teaching? Once one’s spirit (and blood pressure!) has reclaimed a degree of calm after hearing this seemingly outrageous claim, there remains His further teaching that the Mosaic Law, as Divinely sourced as it was (and is), has been not replaced, but furthered if you will, by an even higher standard - that of love.
And that is where we stand - the rule of love. It runs counter to our very nature, as once again, its source is the Almighty Himself.
Another shocking testimony of Yeshua is that the Law was fulfilled in Him. Who can accept that hard teaching? Once one’s spirit (and blood pressure!) has reclaimed a degree of calm after hearing this seemingly outrageous claim, there remains His further teaching that the Mosaic Law, as Divinely sourced as it was (and is), has been not replaced, but furthered if you will, by an even higher standard - that of love.
And that is where we stand - the rule of love. It runs counter to our very nature, as once again, its source is the Almighty Himself.
R
Rabbi
Guest
Which side is Jewish, if it’s your mother’s, you should be on an Orthodox Jewish forum, lol!
R
Rabbi
Guest
wonderfully said, allow me some time to respond concerning the law.
R
Rabbi
Guest
I’ve ran out of praises, my friend. Your destiny is to seriously write, you’re like a scholar. So many online rarely no proper grammar!
R
Rabbi
Guest
Maybe me and you should have this discussion, as others merely want to rant on how awful Talmud is without thinking.
K
Kathleen18
Guest
This part in that video doesn’t seem to be way off about Jesus, to you?
This is the example I am talking about. The speakers in this video are not really correct about Jesus. They are also not really correct on Judaism with that logic either.
K
Kathleen18
Guest
I have no intention of ranting about how awful the Talmud is. 
I regard the Talmud as an important part of Jewish History, and should be treated with respect.
Pope Francis (I think), has reminded us Catholics that the Jewish people are our older brothers and sisters. So to speak.
I regard the Talmud as an important part of Jewish History, and should be treated with respect.
Pope Francis (I think), has reminded us Catholics that the Jewish people are our older brothers and sisters. So to speak.
Last edited:
G
Gab123
Guest
P
Psalms62
Guest
So, when you noted the Sefer ha-zohar , (Hebrew: “Book of Splendour”) how is this comparable to Sufi-inspired Jewish work, written in *Judeo-Arabic in 11th-century Saragossa, is *Baḥya ibn Paquda’s “The Duties of the Heart” ( Ḥovot ha-Levavot )?
In Egypt, Sufism was highly regarded by the Pietist Circle of the Egyptian ḥasidim and their masters, in particular R. Abraham *Maimonides and his descendants, who saw in Sufi practices the continuation of biblical prophetic traditions.
What is the difference that you see between Islamic mysticism and Jewish? Did Islamic mysticism have an influence on Jewish Kabbalists?
Last edited:
P
Psalms62
Guest
Still working on the Moses ben Shem Tov de León was a Spanish rabbi and Kabbalist …
Are most of these Rabbi - Kabbalist coming from the Arab territories going into Spain - from Fez or Morocco area. Much to ask on this subject before I get into Ethiopia Jewry.
Last edited:
P
Psalms62
Guest
What’s interesting is that the sofer applied to those bearing the title from the First Temple period. If anyone is interested in reading more on this, “The scribe (sofer) in the second Temple Period.
R
Rabbi
Guest
Moshe de Leon was a rabbi. Enough said there. We don’t think he authored the Zohar, there are countless reasons. The old secular claims that Zohar was inspired by Christian Gnostic myths is far-flung and unsupported. Clearly, the Zohar is of divine origin.
On Sufi mysticism, it is well known about Rambam’s son, though I don’t see how this in any way pollutes Jewish mysticism. I don’t see how Avraham could’ve been wrong on that count, as Islam was mostly inspired BY Judaism, and adopted our history and theology - to one degree or another - so why not our mysticism?
On Sufi mysticism, it is well known about Rambam’s son, though I don’t see how this in any way pollutes Jewish mysticism. I don’t see how Avraham could’ve been wrong on that count, as Islam was mostly inspired BY Judaism, and adopted our history and theology - to one degree or another - so why not our mysticism?
R
Rabbi
Guest
To say anything less would be an oxymoron.
R
Rabbi
Guest
Understand well that Josephus believed in our holy mesorah.
P
Psalms62
Guest
The area in which the Jewish people lived. If, in Morocco - four royal cities – Casablanca, Rabat, Fez and Marrakech. MOROCCO and, VISITING JEWISH MOROCCO
G
Gab123
Guest
Not according to the Talmud, which does not paint Jesus as great guy. But the prophecies said that He would be rejected by His own people.
The
Well at least you’re conceding; nobody said 24/7, but as Schäfer’s book describes, it is scattered throughout the Talmudic stories makeing fun of Jesus’ birth from a virgin, fervently contest his claim to be the Messiah and Son of God, and maintain that he was rightfully executed as a blasphemer and idolater. Again, just concede the point and move on. I there are Rabbis in Israel on YouTube claiming as much using the Talmud as their source. You have to understand, the Talmud is a vast collection of volumes written over many centuries by many rabbis…
The tragedy is that it has become an industry for some for political purposes.
Nobody can possibly say that they feel their pain and suffering unless they have been in their shoes. And why you would say that I would joke about it is an incomprehensible statement.
Finklestein is not suggesting Israel should not be a modern state, but rather he exposes the terrible injustices and even atrocities the state of Israel has perpetrated against Palestinian families, their property and their lands. There are plenty of documentaries about all the injustices that most people never hear about. Here is a good documentary by Israeli citizen Anna Baltzer that I encourage everyone here to watch:
Last edited:
- Status