By Ted Belman
From now on comments on every post must relate to the content of the post.
Comments that don’t relate to the post must go here.
Any person who contravenes this demand will be put on moderation. Also their offending comment will be trashed.
The reason for this demand is so that people who want to read comments which pertain to the post, don’t have to wade through the chatter.
Everyone will be happier.
yamit82 Said:
This list is wrong.
If only because the concept of mesora transmission is misunderstood within the rabbinic conceptualisation since Rav Ashi
In fact the mesora begins with Avraham Avinu, and the reason he was selected by God for the ten (maybe more) mitzvot he performed without prompting. This was extreme insight of nevua that God had been waiting for to emerge since Noah.
HaZa’L has a clear confirmation of this in that Avraham is said to havehad a larger masekhet Avodat Zara than the current version
Other elements of Avraham’s life confirm this also
Perhaps Tu b’Shvat was originally the commemoration of the eshel tree planting 🙂
But, its not just that.
The structure of the ‘havruta’ system is misunderstood and under-appreciated. This system broke down, just like the shadhanut system, and was recorded as a ‘story’ with the “four captives”, but not understood
Consequently the entire modern havruta system of learning as practised in the yeshivot is bitul zman, and the worst of it is the Daf Yomi ‘movement’
dweller Said:
What is your source for your ability to interpret God’s actions? 🙂
I.e. how can you prove that punishment P1 is for sin S1?
@ yamit82:
Not so. Some of the promises WERE provisional.
Not, however, the one to which I alluded:
“All the land which you see I will give to you & your seed forever.”
Gen 13:15.
— There is no ‘if you do this, I will do that.’ There is only “I WILL.”
Now, all you have to do is prove that He said that.
Of course, you’ll also have to prove that He’s self-existent & everlasting as well; otherwise how could He keep such a promise, even if He were so inclined? — and assuming you could ALSO establish that He has sufficient integrity to keep His word when there’s nothing outside of Himself that could hold Him to it . . . .
Until you can provide external corroboration for such things, I owe you no more than what I’ve already given you in the way of Jewish attestation to the gospel narratives:
“And he that saw it bore record, and his record is true: and he knows that he said true, that you might believe.” John 19:35
“This is the disciple who bears witness concerning these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his witness is true.” John 21:24.
I don’t what?
But we’ve already covered this before, some years ago. I told you:Digging up scripture passages isn’t going to help here. I know what they are, but it doesn’t help to know what they are if you don’t know what they MEAN. You’ve posted them at least once a month for the past 5 yrs, but you’re clueless as to their import. You’ve got the same tone as a televangelist (the lyrics are different, but the music is the same), and I’ve had a bellyful.
Typically, a person with impaired hearing doesn’t have a volume problem (altho people often mistakenly assume this); more often, such a person has a problem with maintaining auditory continuity . So he misses syllables; say, every 4th, 5th & 8th syllable is lost to him. Consequently, he gets only part of the story, and often misinterprets the part he DOES get because he missed its auditory context.
The Jews have only part of the story of Moshiach and they mistake the part they do have because of the part they’ve missed or overlooked. It’s the same for those who identify as Christians, only they miss a different SET of ‘syllables’ from the set missed by the Jews; the character of the problem, however, is the same.
So what? This is irrelevant intellectual diddling.
“‘Solid principles,” as defined by you, right?
yamit82 Said:
a more miraculous story than Dwellers sotons and hobgoblins…. those foks are always tied up with exorcisms and spinning heads and demons.
after his so called nitris big mission, the net result of the big sting was ZERO, nothing changed.
yamit82 Said:
impressive, I remember you posted a video on this subject wrt past present and future statements of the event
@ bernard ross:
Accuracy of The Torah Text
The great success of Jewish tradition is the meticulous transmission of the Torah text. But actually how accurate is it?
How do we know that the Torah we have today is the same text given on Mount Sinai?
The Torah was originally dictated from God to Moses, letter for letter. From there, the Midrash (Devarim Rabba 9:4) tells us:
Before his death, Moses wrote 13 Torah Scrolls. Twelve of these were distributed to each of the 12 Tribes. The 13th was placed in the Ark of the Covenant (with the Tablets). If anyone would come and attempt to rewrite or falsify the Torah, the one in the Ark would “testify” against him. (Likewise, if he had access to the scroll in the Ark and tried to falsify it, the distributed copies would “testify” against him.)
Read more
Compare with NT where there are over 240,000 errors contradictions and inconsistencies over 50 which change the whole meaning of the NT. A slam dunk in favor of Torah!!!
bernard ross Said:
I thought you knew what Petitio Principii (begging the question) was. it is the most basic of fallacies taught in the first introductory class of Logic and Language 101. I gave you some examples of what you did and thought that even you could admit to or see the absurdity of your (LOL) citation of quoting John in the NT as evidence of Jewish attestation and support that the NT is factual. I am afraid that the Joke is lost on you.
You should google petitio principii to learn more but in the meantime allow me to help you with some more illustrations to show you what you did:
you did the equivalent of this:
Quoting Little Red riding Hood as attestion that the talking wolf in the fairy tale is factual
or this:
citing supermans narration of his origins on Krypton as attestation and support for the existence of kryton and Jor-el
or this:
posting a quote of the Tin Man as attestation that there really is a land of Oz with a wizard
or perhaps you prefer this:
quoting Frodo as support that the Hobitts and their disciples actually existed.
or:
retelling the brilliants sayings of Alice and her experiences in Wonderland as attestation for your assertion that the mad hatter and queen of hearts played croquet using ostriches as their mallets.
or maybe this:
……………………..
are you getting this yet or do you need more examples to help you understand the absurdity of your citation?
the only thing left to say is:
😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛
@ bernard ross:
Comments being moderated again check this link and stick it to him. Don’t know when and if my comments will make daylight
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/mesora/
bernard ross Said:
There are in fact hundreds of chains of transmission of the Sinai event all being the same and each chain can be verified as accurate.
Here is one
He lost another one…. But he is a truth seeker isn’t he?
He is more of a primitive cave dweller than a seeker after truth. What an schmuck.
One Of The Many Chains Of Torah Transmission
dweller Said:
I believe not because I choose to but because there was not one persons claim or a few peoples clam, and they passed on to the next generation after generation. If it was a lie no other alternative narrative has come down in history to debunk the Jewish acct.
There are in fact hundreds of chains of transmission of the Sinai event all being the same and each chain can be verified as accurate.
Here is one
One Of The Many Chains Of Torah Transmission
You lose AH (christian)
Bernard Ross Said:
here is where it led you:
bernard ross Said:
KISS…………. 😛
dweller Said:
the hearsay of 3 million Jews who have passed their Jewish culture down through the rabbis for generations as opposed to those who have spent 2000 years swindling libeling, torturing and slaughtering jews.
HMMMMM? I can see why you would equate those with a vested interest in the defamation of Judasim VS the Jew,s when it comes to Jewish events….. CA had similar leanings with his troublesome equations. I wonder whom you would choose as the more credible witnesses of Jewish events????????
bernard ross Said:
you never answered this, I think the forum would be interested in how far you go with you mission story, you say you do not beleive in his divinity but where do you stop? how about filling in the posters here on the rest of your purported “jewish” narrative, you did say that you write for them, so fill them in….
It appears to me that the whole story was concocted to “establish” his divinity through whom one is “saved”, you got to resurrection and a second coming, and the whole sin story so I would think you would not just end there?
Bernard Ross Said:
😛 😛 😛 😛
as these were your words they should meet with your approval as one of many specualtions. Perhaps you do not like that it is devoid of your usual embellishment, trying to make it into a cosmic event?
I can understand your reticence in approving these bare boned simple renditions of your ridiculous cosmic fairy tale, without which there is no Christianity (LOL):
bernard ross Said:
although I cant understand what your problem is with the word “UNION” as it was not a problem to you when I first paraphrased your cosmic tale in its simple state with no frills.
dweller Said:
No need to twist your meaning as you usually paint meaningless pictures that cannot be pinned down. I simply take your ridiulous narratives and rephrase them into simple speech in order to show everyone what you are really saying behind your mountains of obfuscation. Rephrasing your words simply shows haow absurd your stories are. yamit had the best version of the mamzer story. it made common sense and explained a series of events using the occams razor principle.
yamit82 Said:
dweller Said:
DUH???? on the one hand we have a roman explaining the story of a woman showing up with a child with no apparent father and he explains it with NATURAL CAUSES on the other hand we have your story for the same events which to simple folk sounds like this:
yamit Said:
a girl with a mamzer today could never expect anyone to buy that story. Celsus story makes sense, no need to invent cosmic stings, devils, etc. Occams razor as opposed to a fantastical fairy tale about the habits and lives of Jews that to this day the jews have ignored and rejected as factual, after 2000 years, nada, zilch, zero, bubkiss,…. the Christians bought it though but then anyone could tell them anything about the Jews and they would believe it, so we are still left with this:
bernard ross Said:
😛 😛 😛 😛
perhaps you can find another mythical character in your NT fairy tale who, like John, can serve as a Jewish attestation to the veracity of the Book in which he resides
😛 😛 😛 😛
apparently you can only find fictional Jewish characters in that fairy tale who are willing to say that the NT is factual
HMMMMM??? 2000 years and you have been unable to find one.
bernard ross Said:
😛 😛 😛 😛
dweller Said:
Always conditional yet in perpetuity because we know the ending in our future or our history before it takes place.
You don’t 😛
Because I don’t think you know and if you do you have discarded the Jewish for the pagan.
Postualates:
The Tanach can be true and the NT false.
But
The NT cannot be true and the Tanach false
If you can’t base your theology on solid principles in Tanach then the postulates above kick in.
@ yamit82:
That may be acceptable to the generation which personally, physically witnessed it.
For everybody else, however, it’s HEARSAY — and, absent external corroboration, is neither compelling nor conclusive. All the annual pronouncements & recitals from the Haggadah for the past 34 centuries cannot render the assertions probative.
The hearsay of three million or three hundred million — just as the hearsay of three — remains hearsay. Not proof.
In the end, if you believe it, you do so for the same reason I do
— because you’ve chosen to believe it.
@ yamit82:
So, in your view, Job is the only one whose sins He punishes?
He’s CONSTANTLY punishing everybody’s sins, all the time, yahnkele — including yours. You just haven’t been paying attention.
That would make Him a most perverse Master indeed.
Perhaps I’m your punishment for your OWN sins. . . .
Not without t’shuvah from you, Huff’n’puff — and the one or two others who make up the “our” in your remark.
dweller Said:
Here it is anyway idiot!!!
“There is only one categorically unique claim in mankind’s religious history: only the Torah claims that a large, easily identifiable group heard God speak and survived to tell about it.”
“The Torah is aware of its uniqueness and unabashedly offers this challenge to every Jew who has lived since Sinai:”
@ yamit82:
It was NOT your challenge to me. The words — as I reminded you, above (but you continue to ignore them anyway) — were Slime Bucket BR’s, not yours, and his claim was that there was no “Jewish attestation or support” of the gospel narrrative as fact. When I challenged his line, he asked to “see it” — so I showed it to him. If you want more testimonials, I want something from you: evidence of the “factual” assertions to which I alluded. The principle is the same, and if you can demand it be followed for the one, then it can be likewise demanded for the other.
Of course you don’t. The patriarchal narratives provide no potential for a demagogue’s control over his fellow man. But Sinai — with its mishpatim, chukkim, & eidot — is tailor-made for one who hungers for the power of the thought police.
Nonetheless, WITHOUT “a real Avraham etc,” there are no promises of the Almighty to the Jews of Eretz Yisrael in perpetuity, nor (by implication) an eternal existence for Am Yisrael.
You can’t lift Sinai out of its historical context, much as you might like to.
Sinai is derived from the Egyptian sojourn & couldn’t have happened without it; Sinai didn’t materialize from the ether. And the Egyptian experience is, in turn, disseverable from the patriarchical history.
The Pentateuch was written by the hand of a man who had received his formal education (including his patterns of thought and writing skills) in the pharaonic court. In fact, it is the only piece of arguably Egyptian literature (other than museum exhibits & scattered arcana) to survive into the modern era, where it is consulted daily by massive numbers of people in hundreds of different languages.
What’s more, if you think any people other than a slave people could’ve been gathered that way together in one place, and would’ve answered, as one, “na’aseh v’nishma,” then you’re crazy as a bedbug.
You’re trying to cast Judaism in an RCC mold.
There’s no Jewish magisterium; no Jewish catechism
— very little that is doctrinally obligatory; very little that is doctrinally verboten.
dweller Said:
Now you are playing the role of Job????
Letting you still live and commenting here is punishing us for your sins. Time for him to lower the guillotine on you and end our miseries.
@ yamit82:
No, those are YOUR words, not mine; you just like to put words in my mouth. Nitwits always do. (Your tag-teammate slime bucket is a case-in-point, even more notoriously so than yourself in that dept.)
I told you that I figured it out based on the gospels, the letters, and the earliest of the creeds, and using the analytical & intuitive faculties that are every man’s birthright from his creator. And that is NOT about ‘making it up.’
You wouldn’t recognize the Jewish basis for something if it was printed with a hechsher on your foreskin.
I just don’t let you lead me around with a ring in my nose. You call it “obfuscation,” but that’s just your left-handed way of admitting that I’m hip to your tricks. “Paraphrasing,” you call this? As I showed above, you love to ‘paraphrase.’ This time you’ve done it so you can ‘equate’ two thoroughly dissimilar patterns.
Don’t need to dissemble. Unlike you shmendricks, I’m happy with the structure of Objective Reality as it is; don’t need to fake it, as I know its Source, and I trust it.
Nobody who posts on this blogsite is more prone to circular reasoning & begging the question than the two of you. ABSOLUTELY NOBODY.
“Basic logic,” you??? he??? — Get real.
I’ve given him half-a-dozen opportunities to tell me whether he considers independent, non-church affiliated scholars who specialize in NT studies as a “Christian source.” He conspicuously fails to answer. I wonder why. . . .
It most certainly was NOT an apples & oranges response. You deliberately took my remark out of its context — which I have now restored, above — so you could claim it was an apples & oranges response. What I wrote was not about miracles, but about external corroboration for establishing the factual nature of scriptural assertion — because THAT was the context in which the matter arose.
The rest of your post is irrelevant to the matter you referenced to post. For you to tack it on reduces David Elazar’s essay to pedantic poppycock. Both he and it deserve better.
@ mrg3105:
Didn’t say that.
I said the proof is that “He punishes my sins.”
dweller Said:
So in your words you made it all up!!!! You created a fairy tale from previous fairy tales and that’s your source or sources???? A Fabulist to the end aren’t you?????
No Jewish basis for your fictional narrative!!! No Jewish scriptural basis for your fictional concoction!!!!
The Big Lie!!! The Big Fiction!!! Big BS!!! Big Liar!!!!
dweller Said:
‘First show us what you got then I;ll let you know what I think’??? I’m paraphrasing one of you stock obfuscation replies when you can’t respond in fact or truth.
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
Apples vs oranges respnse!!
Judaism does not predicate itself on miracles even from that of our prophets. Jews do not revere their prophets for their miracles whether in truth they actually occurred or not, it not relevant and just your stinking slimy way of avoiding my challenge to you…I don’t care if there ever was a real Abraham etc. Judaism is what is derived from the revelation of Sinai and the giving and acceptance by the Israelites of the Torah (including the oral laws). Jewish doctrines are derived solely from the commandments not from story narratives in the Bible, not from midrash’m or agadot.
Only the five books of Moses (The Torah) and the oral law have authority in Halacha.
The G-d of the Jews is the G-d of History. He is; He exists; He dominates and controls. He shapes the present and decrees the future. “In the beginning, G-d created the heavens and the earth…” Thus the Torah begins its message to the Jew to let him know that the Jewish G-d exists as a real entity and not some intellectual plaything. He created the past and He controls the present and He wills the future. The Jewish G-d is the G-d of creation, the G-d of History past and future.
I will bring you to the wilderness of the peoples and there will I plead with you face to face. Just as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord God I will cause you to pass under the rod and will bring you into the tradition [bond] of the covenant. (Ezekiel 20: 35-37)
http://www.jcpa.org/dje/books/kincon-ch1.htm
yamit82 Said:
I have read God in Search of Man a very long time ago. Its a toss up between Kierkegaard and the Kotzker Rebbe 🙂
@dwellr, your sins are your proof?!
yeh, take that Richard Dawkins 🙂
@ bernard ross:
Actually, it appears that you are branching out from calling only a few things “fairy tales” to calling lots of things “fairy tales.”
Aside from the fact that you’re hearing them for the first time via YoursTruly, the things which your labelings share are your invincible ignorance, crippled reasoning capabilities, and insufferable arrogance. Sitting on your brains, it’ll do it every time. . . .
No, it doesn’t; it isn’t what I said. I’m clear on what it was NOT:
“This was not about Adonoi ‘breeding’ Himself to a woman…”
I speculated, however, on how it likely had happened:
— “probably something more on the order of catalyzing a process of development in the womb.”
The real question is, why is it necessary for you to paraphrase what I say, if not to afford yourself the opportunity to deliberately twist my meaning?
— It’s not as if you didn’t realize you were doing it.
No more than a man on the order of Adam before his fall — big difference between that and “no more than a man.” And, unlike Adam, he never yielded to temptation, so he RETAINED that bright nature which Adam had had and lost.
Adonoi Elohim created JC because He does not abandon His existing creation. Instead, He made possible the redemption of His creation by working THRU that existing creation. God is not only Creator, He is also Redeemer; loves His creation, cares about what becomes of it.
He’s not merely omnipotent, but also omnibenevolent.
No idea what ‘thirst’ you’re talking about. I’ve never had any ‘thirst’ for anything except to know the truth. When that’s what moves you, you follow wherever it leads.
Repeat: WHEREVER it leads.
@ bernard ross:
Takes more than one or two references to something to constitute an obsession.
If I made a couple dozen such references within a relatively brief span of time (like your myriad allusions, over the course of a few weeks, to the mother of Christ “pooping” him out), then you could call it an obsession.
Metaphorically speaking, an “uncircumcized” individual is one lacking in discipline or in honor. That covers you in both departments.
But then, as a Jew from Duluth named Zimmerman once noted, one’s imagery speaks for itself. If it has to be explained, its value is lost, alas.
@ bernard ross:
Only when they insist on talking with me (or about me) at the time.
@ yamit82:
They’re idolaters. They view Y’shua as ‘God.’ No way I’d have any use for that.
If they don’t see the Jewish content in the narrative, they’re not at all ‘ahead’ of me; quite the contrary, they have yet to come to first base.
@ yamit82:
Where did I say I didn’t know who wrote it? We may or may not know his name; that doesn’t mean we don’t know who he was.
Show me the texts to which you allude — and tell me WHY you assume them to be the work of the author RATHER than that of the compilers.
He MAY have had two sisters: Martha & Mary. . . .
The REAL daddy?
For really real?
Well, since you put it THAT way:
— the real daddy of Y’shua was The Most High, Master of the Universe, the Almighty God, etc.
God never admitted to being the father? —hunh???
And whom would “those who did write about him” consist of?
Surely you don’t mean Celsus, who was no contemporary of JC — Celsus wrote in 177, nearly 150 years after J’shua’s death & resurrection.
So if you DON’T mean him, then whom do you mean?
“God has chosen those things the world considers foolish in order to shame and confound those who think themselves wise.”
You didn’t say jack spit, jack snit, jack slit, jack split, or jack shit. The above was an exchange I’d originally had with Slime Bucket Ross [pg 27, post #34]. There was no talk specifying ANY scriptures at the time. (And the testimony in John is actually quite good, Huff-Puff, notwithstanding your blustering.)
If you want something else, then suppose you FIRST show me some external corroboration for the assertion that Eliyahu in the midst of a drought poured spring water profusely on the offering on his altar and that it was promptly consumed by fire.
Or, alternatively, you can FIRST show me external corroboration for the proposition that the one true sovereign Lord of the universe promised Eretz Cana’an to the Jews — and moreover promised it to them unconditionally and in perpetuity.
And I asked you why.
@ yamit82:
Not ‘many’ times, you arrogant, loudmouthed jerk. Only ONE time did you ask it with any clarity or continuity to the thread. (Check the history.)
Whereupon I answered your question. What I said was in no way a ‘refusal.’ I gave you all there was to give you. If you don’t like it, you can go pound sand.
I suspect this as a political “assasination” from the dem side because it comes before the dem primary. My question is who does Soros want as the dem nominee, obviusly not hillary?
Dweller Said:
Do you always spend so much time in discussion with “drunks holding each other up as they stagger home”.
yamit82 Said:
Perhaps someone should give her a hanky to dry her whiny tears.
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
Did you intentionally leave off the end of my sentence or do you have ADD? I said that jews have attested to narratives later considered to be heresies but in the case of your nitri I have heard nor read of ANY jewish attestation to NT as fact over 2000 years. There is no Jewish attestation of the NT as factual whether it was judged heretical or not. Over 2000 years one expects something from the jews but it appears to have been thrown in the garbage from the moment it hit the ground, except according to the christians who have embraced the pagan narratives with an enthusiasm suggesting a compatability of values. I would have expected a major percentage of Jews to be followers of Jesus today after 2000 years if this narrative had compatability with Jews and Judaism.
@ dweller:
I used one part of that article becuse it lent points related to the discussion and interchange with mrg3105.
The site and article belongs to a christian Hebrew Roots cult and I didn’t want to publicize the pagans only use what is partially relevant to the points discussed. My disclaimers were in fact honest and if pressed can demonstrate as factual. They as all christians have built a case on a Humungous lie and fairy tale matter of fact a whole mountain of them but have already pointed out most of them in our interchanges. They are as valid ijn debunking the content of that site and cult as well. Surprised you haven’t locked into them sooner. At least they unlike you realize that the whole geezits narrative is devoid of Jewish content and thinking. You are still all pagan Greek in thinking…. They are way ahead of you in the fact and truth dept even though they worship an idol and false messiah…
dweller Said:
It appears you are branching out from repeating the fairy tales of others and are inspired to write your own now.
bernard ross Said:
Does this paraphrasing meet with your approval, it comes from your own words? I suspect that when seeing it written objectively it may lose the lustre with which you endowed it.
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
and similarly He had no need of a woman to be able to create any man whether on a special mission or not… he created adam so why go through all those gymnastics to create your nitri who according to you was no more than a man. So much trouble just to satisfy the thirst for pagan solutions.
dweller Said:
Is your obsession with my circumcision a physical corporeal one or is it spiritual?
@ mrg3105:
@ yamit82:
The reason for his frenetic disclaimers here has perhaps a little something to do with remarks like this, the final sentence in the piece:
“To truly grasp what it means to be a follower of Yeshua, one must return to the Hebrew roots of his movement, and of the documents we now refer to as ‘The New Testament’…”
dweller Said:
Playing messiah ain’t enough for you now you are playing a PETULANT PROPHET????
Your stupid implausible (Fairy) 😛 Tale; so we expect you to defend it… Psychobabble don’t fit into this discussion. Just the facts but since you are a psycho in denial I don’t expect much truth or facts and intellectual honesty from you. You are being pilloried on your own petard!!!
Man up Fegele, Oh sorry for using the word man.
yamit82 Said:
Thats the key, these ridiculous narratives of gods fathering jewish messiahs, virgin births, tempting satan, …Jews have too much common sense for all these pagan ideas. The jews prophets are real people but these pagans have to create pagan myths to endow their absurd narratives with some aura of divinity. certainly the mamzer narrative is more logical than gods begetting with women. Like you said, you have to first believe in these as possible, like exorcisms, demons etc. Everything of christianity is wound up in this one fairy tale which gives it a link to the hebrew bible.
@ yamit82:
Yes, it’s an open forum, and yes anybody can comment. But this was a special situation. No amount of commenting on your part would’ve been responsive to my question, because I didn’t ask for a general definition of the phrase. If I had, anybody could’ve provided it.
What I’d asked for was specifically HIS understanding of it as HE uses it.
dweller Said:
and what did that “accomplishment” achieve? what happened next?
dweller Said:
You claim your johhny boy was a jewboy but if you don’t know who wrote it hoe do you know that??
Kida stupid argument isn’t it??? If you don’t know the author then you know nothing who composed it where when etc.
Kinda stupid wouldn’t ya say dweller????
How many Jews of that time wrote such hate and viterole against his fellow Jews???? That alone should be the tell to his identity Greek or Roman but not Jewish. Who was his mommy, daddy? Any siblings? Who was the real daddy of yeshu?
You don’t know he never admitted to being the father and no DNA or paternity tests in those days but those who did write about him said his daddy was a Roman soldier in Jerusalem mammy was a hair dresser who got knocked up. That is a more plausible story that getting knocked up buy a god and that goes for any god…. To believes such silly nonsense you first have to be open to it possibility and that puts you in the stupid brain dead class of humans and I use that term with reservation when applied to you Fegele.
Still waiting for an answer to my questions:
John don’t cut it!!! I said Jewish scriptures like the Tanach.
I asked you to supply your understanding of what you believe constitutes a Jewish messiah with attribution from same Jewish scriptures or even without them let’s hear it from your own lips so to speak and quit playing wordy symantics dancing around your May pole.
Put up or kop a hike AH!!!
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
So, what happened to your soton after your god got him to “defeat” himself in a cosmic sting and how did this affect the world and jews? The only thing the Jews noticed was persecution and death. Is your soton dead?
What happened to your nitri after he was resurrected, was he resurrected in spirit only or did he tour the world and die in an unknown place?
Since you believe that the Hebrew G_D begot a Jewish messiah son with a woman in a virgin birth and that he died and was resurrected and he is coming back later, do you also believe that your nitzri died for the sins of all people and that salvation can only come through him?
Bernard Ross Said:
😛 😛 😛 😛
Dweller cites the actual document in question, for which there is no jewish support or attestation, to being factual as evidence of “Jewish attestation”.
He cites a fictitious character from a fictitious book as an example of Jewish attestation.??????
We might as well ask baby bear if the story of the 3 talking bears is factual…..
or
perhaps master yoda can attest to the factual nature of the events and characters of star wars?
or
maybe spock can be a witness for the veracity of the vulcan mind meld
or
cinderella can file a report on the events of the pumpkin carriage and the footmen mice
😛 😛 😛 😛
I think dweller is dissembling. He is so enamored in adoration of his fairy tale that he can no longer grasp basic logic and the most simple of fallacies:
I googled far and wide for a Jewish bible containing the cited material but I was only able to get the info in an NT from christian sources
this was the quote cited by Dweller as his Jewish attestation of the facts of the NT
😛 😛 😛 😛 😛
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
Still waiting for you to post those here.. 2000 years and the only Jewish attestation you could cite was the questionable document itself….. 2000 years hence and you show no rabbis or synagogues promoting that tall tale of gods begetting jewish messiahs with women. A tale about Jews and Judaism that the Jews have consistently rejected for 2000 years since the tale was first told. A world of billions of christians accept and embrace this story about Jews……. but the Jews reject it as fiction. Surely you should be able to show hundreds of thousands of Jews buying into their G_D having already begot the Jewish messiah after 2000 years? What’s taking them so long 🙂
@ yamit82:
It’ll do for now.
Then you should have offered them to him so I wouldn’t have to. His claim was stupid, and you could’ve set him straight promptly.
No need to wonder. It was all the time I could spare for his request, and those two cites were readily available right off the top of my head.
What do you mean by “who”? If you’re asking the author’s NAME, who gives a rolling buffalo chip? If I told you his ‘name’ was Bill Porter, what would that do for you?
Don’t recall ever making any comment about the “outcomes of Nicaea.” No reason I would have, as there’s no reason I would care.
The damange was already done in 136, when the movement’s “Syria-Palaestina” HQ (along w/ everything else in Yerushalayim) were put off-limits to Jews, and a whole new /em> version of the movement grew up there which was cut clear of its Jewish roots, despite that it was situated in the Jewish homeland.
At that point, Nicaea — its “outcomes” & all the other abominations that ultimately became Xty — was a foregone conclusion, IMABHO.
Whoever wrote John’s gospel WAS a real person (what else would he be? an orangutan?)
— and WAS Jewish.
The compilers of John’s gospel may WELL have been Jew haters. The author was not.
You don’t know that. The absence of evidence is not the equivalent of the “evidence of absence.”
Make your case. (I don’t think you can, but if you try, I’ll look at it.)
You’re nutty. There’s no ‘tactic’ here, nor am I the least bit interested in wearing anybody down. (Maybe that’s the way you feel, worn down; but that’s your own doing.)
You can’t be so witless as to not see that the sophistry and circular reasoning are strictly HIS. If you genuinely cannot see that, it’s because you’re so invested in this little ‘struggle’ that you simply don’t WANT to see it.
That’s wishful thinking on your part (and his, I daresay).
So am I.
He’s too stupefied by his own vile hatred to know just HOW ignorant & dense he IS.
Newsflash, yahnkele: nobody but YOU is watching. His posts on Chit Chat have become even MORE obnoxious than yours on the page.
And as for the ‘fun’ you derive from watching?
You’d have ‘fun’ watching him pick his nose
— if he included the obligatory obeisances toward your validation of his ‘Jewishness’; he craves it like a smackhead craves his fix, and you are most assuredly his pusher, his connection.
But the truth is, you’re every bit as insecure in YOUR ‘Jewishness’ as HE is in his.
What I’ve said before, I say again: You’re nothing more than a pair of drunks holding each other up as they stagger home after last call.
The archives, however, aren’t going away, and someday, further down the road (don’t know when or how far, but at some point), you’ll have occasion to view this thread in the archives after you’ve been away from it for some time. And when you DO see it in that light, and read his crank comments from the perspective of distance, your acute embarrassment that those posts are still accessible will be a serious thorn in your side
— not least because of the enthusiastic endorsement of them expressed in your OWN posts. So laugh your ass off now, while you can — while the blood is still taking its time making its way back to your brain.
yamit82 Said:
dweller Said:
You still have not explained the source of your theological hypothesis and narratives. SOURCE pls.
I have asked you to name your specific sources for your inane screed many times and you refuse!! 😉 Is it because there is none and you can’t?? 🙂 Made it up out of whole cloth in your sicko mind?? 🙂
Still waiting dweller but I am a patient person willing to let you have enough rope to hang yourself hopefully for real 🙂
dweller Said:
Put up or shut up liar!!!!