L
Lapell
Guest
Lapell: -This term, “non-Jewish behaviour”, certainly needs be defined!!!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
**Behaviour not according to Halacha or Jewish Law. **Lapell: -This term, “non-Jewish behaviour”, certainly needs be defined!!!
L
Lapell
Guest
…And to the Bible (Tanakh) too, I hope?**Behaviour not according to Halacha or Jewish Law. **
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
That’s the same.…And to the Bible (Tanakh) too, I hope?
L
Lapell
Guest
Prodigal Son1;5161062:
Something is striking me now, Ben. How do you understand “all the crowdS”, rather than “the whole crowd” without the “s” for a plural?**You haven’t explained anything. When Jesus went up to that mountain to deliver that speech of his, all the crowds sat down the mountainside to listen to him, and he delivers his speech in the ears of the disciples? Makes no sense to me. **
L
Lapell
Guest
Well, not exactly, Ben. For the commentaries on the passages are derived from those passages. They are not the passages themselves. And there is a possibility that some of the commentaries ( I am speaking theoretically here only) might actually deviate from what the sacred author had meant when writing a certain passage, is there not?That’s the same.
L
Lapell
Guest
This being said, there might be a way that such passage could have been meant by God to mean also what the commentator in my example found it to mean, might there not?
L
Lapell
Guest
Does it mean that only Jews would be allowed to understand what a so-called “Jewish behaviour” would or should mean, Ben?**Behaviour not according to Halacha or Jewish Law. **
Must not the Gentiles too be made aware of what makes a behaviour a Jewish one? How for instance should a “Jewish” behaviour differ so much from any God-fearing behaviour? Would some of the behaviours not be common to both, while some other behaviours could only be specific to Jews?
L
Lapell
Guest
Also, what is so un-Jewish in the behaviour of the Jesus of the Gospels and of the rest of the New Testament? Is it something so indefinite and vague that you can’t tell us anything except that it’s not according to the Halakha or the Jewish Law without even explaining us exactly how?
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Ben Masada;5161574:
**What’s the matter Lapell, now you are watching for a mistake in order to have something to say? Yes, it was a mistake. I meant all that crowd of Jews. **Something is striking me now, Ben. How do you understand “all the crowdS”, rather than “the whole crowd” without the “s” for a plural?
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Sorry, but you are being a little too hypothetical.Well, not exactly, Ben. For the commentaries on the passages are derived from those passages. They are not the passages themselves. And there is a possibility that some of the commentaries ( I am speaking theoretically here only) might actually deviate from what the sacred author had meant when writing a certain passage, is there not?
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
It’s only natural and does stand the reason, that a Jewish understand of a Jewish behavior has much more credibility than a Gentile understand of a Jewish behavior. Being the opposite also true of course.Does it mean that only Jews would be allowed to understand what a so-called “Jewish behaviour” would or should mean, Ben?
Must not the Gentiles too be made aware of what makes a behaviour a Jewish one? How for instance should a “Jewish” behaviour differ so much from any God-fearing behaviour? Would some of the behaviours not be common to both, while some other behaviours could only be specific to Jews?
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Paul and the gospel writers paint a Jesus so typical of a Greek Gentile that perhaps not even 20 percent can be said of being Jewish in him.Also, what is so un-Jewish in the behaviour of the Jesus of the Gospels and of the rest of the New Testament? Is it something so indefinite and vague that you can’t tell us anything except that it’s not according to the Halakha or the Jewish Law without even explaining us exactly how?
L
Lapell
Guest
Lapell;5206286:
Yeah, but in the Gospels at times there ARE references to Jesus speaking to “the crowds”… you never noticed this? How would you understand this to mean, or to imply?**What’s the matter Lapell, now you are watching for a mistake in order to have something to say? Yes, it was a mistake. I meant all that crowd of Jews. **
And to think that Jews are supposed to be masters in hair-splitting matters… or maybe it’s just their scholars? I am disappointed!
L
Lapell
Guest
Again, where do you find how such thing here is so typically Jewish, nothing else, and that thing there so typically Greek Gentile? What are your sources to affirm a thing like that so positively, without even an hesitation?Paul and the gospel writers paint a Jesus so typical of a Greek Gentile that perhaps not even 20 percent can be said of being Jewish in him.
L
Lapell
Guest
To affirm something so positively, you must be able, I take it, to define your terms quite precisely, must you not?
L
Lapell
Guest
Lapell;5164411:
Hum… you might be right on this one verse… but he also says the same thing to his own disciples, when Jesus’ teachings have brought their share of opposition… He also said: “I am the light of the world”. And the way he said that, I doubt all Jews would have agreed with him then!Great! Jesus climbs up the Mount, a crowd of Jews accommodate themselves throughout the mountainside to listen to him and he delivers his sermon in the ears of the disciples. You should register your patent on this one.
L
Lapell
Guest
If the whole of the Jewish people indifferently is accused of having killed Jesus, then yes. If the accusation is restricted to those who shouted “Crucify him! Crucify him!” and more specifically to those who stirred them to do so, then why should I think it to be specifically antisemite, eh? And the one(s?) who wrote The Protocol of the Sages of Zion has (have?) much to be credited for much of all the mob reactions against the Jewish people as a whole. Why do you keep condemning the whole of the Catholic Church, sir?Tell me Lapell, before we leave this subject for good and return to the thread, to accuse the Jews with having killed Jesus, when we all know that the Romans did it, is it Antisemitism or not? Just yes or no?
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Ben Masada;5224252:
You are going to have to quote the passage to me, so that I am able to tell you where the “hair-splitting” can be effected.Yeah, but in the Gospels at times there ARE references to Jesus speaking to “the crowds”… you never noticed this? How would you understand this to mean, or to imply?
And to think that Jews are supposed to be masters in hair-splitting matters… or maybe it’s just their scholars? I am disappointed!
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
**The NT is my number one source. And Judaism is also another source. Since we are dealing about Jewish culture, laws and customs, you can’t insert the tenets of another religion into Judaism. About 80 percent of the NT is Hellenistic.Again, where do you find how such thing here is so typically Jewish, nothing else, and that thing there so typically Greek Gentile? What are your sources to affirm a thing like that so positively, without even an hesitation?
Nothing to do with Judaism. **
- Status
- Not open for further replies.