Abrahamic Only: Who is Jehovah?

[nothead]

while it is true that the Jews considered Gentiles as dogs in the 1st century, one must take note the Jesus softened the description. And he was refusing on account that his assignment was not to preach to the Gentiles, Jesus and his followers only preached to Jews and Samaritans till 36 C.E.

At Matthew 15:26 and Mark 7:27, Jesus called them 'little dogs' or as we would call them 'puppies.' Perhaps he used this softened version to provide her a reason to persist?

Yes he was testing her, and her faith persevered. And he weren't too nice about it, as Christians like to think they themselves are...how nice is letting the Holocaust slide by with no opposition? How nice was the common general populace, who turned a blind eye? What religion WAS Germany then, Hindu or Buddhist? How nice are we, when facing bankruptcy or poverty?

 

[rosends]

I am a dude, ma'am. I assume you are a female, since no man calls himself "rosebuds."

So then if the Torah is true, you WOULD stone me for picking up sticks on the sabbath, as Numbers 23 would imply?

You assume incorrectly, and foolishly for 2 reasons: 1, I do not call myself "rosebuds" and 2, the symbol next to my name is the symbol for a man. I note you have a question mark.

And since the torah IS true, I would NOT stone you for a couple of reasons: A. you aren't Jewish so you aren't bound by the sabbath laws and B. we don't have a religious court system established to enforce the laws and the death penalty even when it IS called for.

 

[nothead]

You assume incorrectly, and foolishly for 2 reasons: 1, I do not call myself "rosebuds" and 2, the symbol next to my name is the symbol for a man. I note you have a question mark.

And since the torah IS true, I would NOT stone you for a couple of reasons: A. you aren't Jewish so you aren't bound by the sabbath laws and B. we don't have a religious court system established to enforce the laws and the death penalty even when it IS called for.

THEY had a court system? Wasn't it the rabbis involved with the minions whom had a rock in their hand?
You don't have rabbis anymore, sir? Sorry I'm slow with the rosebudsends.

So then the question is, would you stone a JEW for picking up sticks on the sabbath? Aren't they 'round about you?

 

[rosends]

THEY had a court system? Wasn't it the rabbis involved with the minions whom had a rock in their hand?
You don't have rabbis anymore, sir? Sorry I'm slow with the rosebudsends.

So then the question is, would you stone a JEW for picking up sticks on the sabbath? Aren't they 'round about you?

"They" had a court system, yes. And we do have rabbis. I know because I am one of them. We don't have a religious court system as required to enforce Jewish criminal law. So, no, no one would stone a Jew for picking up sticks on the sabbath. There is clearly much more to Jewish law than you know.

 

[nothead]

"They" had a court system, yes. And we do have rabbis. I know because I am one of them. We don't have a religious court system as required to enforce Jewish criminal law. So, no, no one would stone a Jew for picking up sticks on the sabbath. There is clearly much more to Jewish law than you know.

So then common sense would obviate stonings now? NOT the Torah, which has an example made, and God's will affirming?

How does common sense tell us this is no longer true? Has the Law in fact CHANGED according to the Age of Mercy and Grace? Objectively, and for the whole world, INCLUDING within the Jewish faith?

You know where this leads, sir. And by the way, please mention any of the 613 which are IN Deuteronomy besides the Ten and the Shema.

 

[rosends]

So then common sense would obviate stonings now? NOT the Torah, which has an example made, and God's will affirming?

How does common sense tell us this is no longer true? Has the Law in fact CHANGED according to the Age of Mercy and Grace? Objectively, and for the whole world, INCLUDING within the Jewish faith?

You know where this leads, sir. And by the way, please mention any of the 613 which are IN Deuteronomy besides the Ten and the Shema.

First, here is a list. Many are from Deuteronomy (and the decalogue was also in Exodus). Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

Next, realize that your understanding of Jewish law is frozen by your limiting things to the written text. Jewish law, the one developed via the torah, is based on the oral law as well. So when the written text says in deut 13:15 that one must "seek out, investigate and inquire" Jewish law understands that to be establishing a method for a court system to operate. And when we lack that court system because of exile and the lack of a temple, we cannot enforce those laws as written. You should read this Capital Punishment | Jewish Virtual Library before you ask anything else.

 

[RabbiO]

while it is true that the Jews considered Gentiles as dogs in the 1st century.....

Oversimplifications, like generalizations, tend to be false at worst and meaningless at best.

 

[nothead]

First, here is a list. Many are from Deuteronomy (and the decalogue was also in Exodus). Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

Next, realize that your understanding of Jewish law is frozen by your limiting things to the written text. Jewish law, the one developed via the torah, is based on the oral law as well. So when the written text says in deut 13:15 that one must "seek out, investigate and inquire" Jewish law understands that to be establishing a method for a court system to operate. And when we lack that court system because of exile and the lack of a temple, we cannot enforce those laws as written. You should read this Capital Punishment | Jewish Virtual Library before you ask anything else.

Lacking a viable court system is no excuse, as it was the same conditions in exhile that they had while wandering the desert, sir. Some were designated enforcers, leaders and tribal lords. You have these same today, although not exactly in the same manner. Your rabbis serve as arbitrators of Law. Enforcing Law would be the same thing as explaining and arbitrating, in AUTHORITY ideally speaking. In fact it is easily seen that you are denying one of the original requirements of Law, by saying you have no COURT of Law. Neither did the Jews from Egypt although they had real prophets, which are not exactly extant in either of our religions now.

Scanning the 613 or rather the first 25 or so, some are interpretations of Deut 6:4 and some self-evident. To know God exists? If scripture speaks at ALL about YHWH Elohim, does He not exist? Like saying you or I exist, do we not presuppose this without it needing to be said? Is not this law not only self-evident, but moot in letter because only Greek thinkers would say such a thing, that you exist or I exist? As precept or tenet? To TEACH the Ten and the Shema (not the whole Torah, rather the sayings in Deut themselves is also odd to SAY. Deut already says it, we don't need it itemized. The tefillim and exact shape of the tallit and writing style of the tzittzit...these are obviously a traditional understanding, not necessarily THE OBJECTIVE manifestation of Law, only a version which was in obedience to it.

To think like a lawyer in the modern day smudges these things, the mundane, the traditional and the culture as manifest, and makes them absolutely the ONLY way Law can have obedience. That is why I stick to the basics. Yes, to Fear God is to do the 613, but I actually never knew it WAS a specific Law of the 613. However it was the first fundamental law for the original Gentile God-fearers, that is why they were called such. And Deut 31 said to say this law, to fear God was even for children, whom knew this God as one identity and one being.

I mean, none of these are obnoxious to me, but neither do I see any which seem binding or required OF me, which is not already in the OT. At least 25 down the list your fathers made. I have the Shema on my forehead and next to the One True God is His beloved Son. I never abrogated Shema as trinitarians do. Jesus is NEXT to Shema as Messiah. Shema is never broken or displaced.

 

[rosends]

Lacking a viable court system is no excuse, as it was the same conditions in exhile that they had while wandering the desert, sir. Some were designated enforcers, leaders and tribal lords. You have these same today, although not exactly in the same manner. Your rabbis serve as arbitrators of Law. Enforcing Law would be the same thing as explaining and arbitrating, in AUTHORITY ideally speaking. In fact it is easily seen that you are denying one of the original requirements of Law, by saying you have no COURT of Law. Neither did the Jews from Egypt although they had real prophets, which are not exactly extant in either of our religions now.

Scanning the 613 or rather the first 25 or so, some are interpretations of Deut 6:4 and some self-evident. To know God exists? If scripture speaks at ALL about YHWH Elohim, does He not exist? Like saying you or I exist, do we not presuppose this without it needing to be said? Is not this law not only self-evident, but moot in letter because only Greek thinkers would say such a thing, that you exist or I exist? As precept or tenet? To TEACH the Ten and the Shema (not the whole Torah, rather the sayings in Deut themselves is also odd to SAY. Deut already says it, we don't need it itemized. The tefillim and exact shape of the tallit and writing style of the tzittzit...these are obviously a traditional understanding, not necessarily THE OBJECTIVE manifestation of Law, only a version which was in obedience to it.

To think like a lawyer in the modern day smudges these things, the mundane, the traditional and the culture as manifest, and makes them absolutely the ONLY way Law can have obedience. That is why I stick to the basics. Yes, to Fear God is to do the 613, but I actually never knew it WAS a specific Law of the 613. However it was the first fundamental law for the original Gentile God-fearers, that is why they were called such. And Deut 31 said to say this law, to fear God was even for children, whom knew this God as one identity and one being.

I mean, none of these are obnoxious to me, but neither do I see any which seem binding or required OF me, which is not already in the OT. At least 25 down the list your fathers made. I have the Shema on my forehead and next to the One True God is His beloved Son. I never abrogated Shema as trinitarians do. Jesus is NEXT to Shema as Messiah. Shema is never broken or displaced.

Lacking a viable court system is the ultimate explanation. We do NOT have the same conditions as we did in the desert - we lack the Tent of Meeting on which God's presence rested, we lack the priestly breastplate and sacrificial system, and we lack a prophet like Moses. How are conditions the same exactly? Reducing it to "enforcers etc" just means you don't understand the system because you rely on archetypes not on people. Authority is not a matter of having a title. You admit we have no "real prophets" and yet you say that we have the proper authority. You are simply wrong and it isn't your legal system to decide what is required. You can't claim that a system you don't understand has to exist because you, in your ignorance, say it does.

You scan some of the 613 which I posted because you asked for proof that some of them are sourced in Deuteronomy. So I proved my case. Now you look at them and decide that some shouldn't count as part of the 613. Funny thing...you don't get to make that decision. You want to create categories based on the conclusion you want to reach. Feel free. It is a waste of everyone's time. It might be useful in your religion, but not in Judaism. You don't get to walk into Judaism at say that your personal sense of how things should be trumps the religion that has been established for thousands of years. You say to "think like a lawyer" and yet you only use that process to rationalize your disdain for black letter law. You stick to the basics, but only to things that YOU decide are the basics, ignoring anything you don't like and finding a way to discount it. That's not a lawyer thinking -- that's someone who doesn't respect the entire legal code and picks and chooses.

As to what is binding or required of you, all of them aren't. You aren't Jewish. Judaism knows that Jesus is irrelevant (if nonexistent) and your personal affection for one of the many, many commandments is simply adorable. Just adorable. However, it is also irrelevant.

 

[Levite]

Lacking a viable court system is the ultimate explanation. We do NOT have the same conditions as we did in the desert - we lack the Tent of Meeting on which God's presence rested, we lack the priestly breastplate and sacrificial system, and we lack a prophet like Moses. How are conditions the same exactly? Reducing it to "enforcers etc" just means you don't understand the system because you rely on archetypes not on people. Authority is not a matter of having a title. You admit we have no "real prophets" and yet you say that we have the proper authority. You are simply wrong and it isn't your legal system to decide what is required. You can't claim that a system you don't understand has to exist because you, in your ignorance, say it does.

You scan some of the 613 which I posted because you asked for proof that some of them are sourced in Deuteronomy. So I proved my case. Now you look at them and decide that some shouldn't count as part of the 613. Funny thing...you don't get to make that decision. You want to create categories based on the conclusion you want to reach. Feel free. It is a waste of everyone's time. It might be useful in your religion, but not in Judaism. You don't get to walk into Judaism at say that your personal sense of how things should be trumps the religion that has been established for thousands of years. You say to "think like a lawyer" and yet you only use that process to rationalize your disdain for black letter law. You stick to the basics, but only to things that YOU decide are the basics, ignoring anything you don't like and finding a way to discount it. That's not a lawyer thinking -- that's someone who doesn't respect the entire legal code and picks and chooses.

As to what is binding or required of you, all of them aren't. You aren't Jewish. Judaism knows that Jesus is irrelevant (if nonexistent) and your personal affection for one of the many, many commandments is simply adorable. Just adorable. However, it is also irrelevant.

I would like this several times if I could.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

As to what is binding or required of you, all of them aren't. You aren't Jewish. Judaism knows that Jesus is irrelevant (if nonexistent) and your personal affection for one of the many, many commandments is simply adorable. Just adorable. However, it is also irrelevant.

^ Perfect.

 

[nothead]

Lacking a viable court system is the ultimate explanation. We do NOT have the same conditions as we did in the desert - we lack the Tent of Meeting on which God's presence rested, we lack the priestly breastplate and sacrificial system, and we lack a prophet like Moses. How are conditions the same exactly? Reducing it to "enforcers etc" just means you don't understand the system because you rely on archetypes not on people. Authority is not a matter of having a title. You admit we have no "real prophets" and yet you say that we have the proper authority. You are simply wrong and it isn't your legal system to decide what is required. You can't claim that a system you don't understand has to exist because you, in your ignorance, say it does.

You scan some of the 613 which I posted because you asked for proof that some of them are sourced in Deuteronomy. So I proved my case. Now you look at them and decide that some shouldn't count as part of the 613. Funny thing...you don't get to make that decision. You want to create categories based on the conclusion you want to reach. Feel free. It is a waste of everyone's time. It might be useful in your religion, but not in Judaism. You don't get to walk into Judaism at say that your personal sense of how things should be trumps the religion that has been established for thousands of years. You say to "think like a lawyer" and yet you only use that process to rationalize your disdain for black letter law. You stick to the basics, but only to things that YOU decide are the basics, ignoring anything you don't like and finding a way to discount it. That's not a lawyer thinking -- that's someone who doesn't respect the entire legal code and picks and chooses.

As to what is binding or required of you, all of them aren't. You aren't Jewish. Judaism knows that Jesus is irrelevant (if nonexistent) and your personal affection for one of the many, many commandments is simply adorable. Just adorable. However, it is also irrelevant.

Whatever my objective stance is regarding Judaisim, my subjective stance is that I am grafted-in as a Christian.

Breastplates were never necessary to enforce the Law. A tent of meeting was not, and The Temple was not. You seem to be prioritizing the most odd or oddball things which precipitate ENFORCEMENT, which is only historically only stemming from primarily the Word of God come unto men or a man. If God TELLS you to bean this one or kill that one, what's a tribal leader or prophet to do? The Pharisees and Sadducees world view was that the Word WRITTEN allowed them access and by the way compunction to repeat the stoning laws of old. Not a court as we know it today or the U.S. judicial system.

This basic concept was true from Abraham to Jesus. They took the adulterous woman to Jesus to see what he would say, KNOWING already he was gonna contradict their normal judicial punishment.

But the way he DID IT, was key and the reason why no man could speak against him. He said for the man without sin to throw the first stone. This was never a requirement in Torah or any of yours mentioned. But in the New realm of Covenant, this would be now true. The Law has fundamentally changed, and a stone for a sexual betrayal was no longer required.

As for my adorable adherence to the Law...
And my adherence, sir, to the Ten if done in Germany would have stopped the Holocaust in it's tracks. The Ten is not only for the Jew but for every man born of a woman, and his wife and anklebiters. A spiritual man of ANY religion knows these in his heart, and possibly in letter. Thou shalt not covet or steal. Thou shalt not murder. And the Ten was encapsulated by the SIMPLE Golden Rule from Jesus' mouth. Proclaimed by more than one guru, or sifu, or pastor, or imam.

Hint: However much you say I'm not a bona fide Jew, my God is your God, and I love this God very much, AND follow His Commands, the 613 being those extracted, from men. Call it adorable, I consider it life and death. FEAR of God is not one of the ten, rather a direct implication of all the Ten, just as the first command unto a man, Adam implied fear to break it.
It is not a basic Command since it is the beginning of Law and LOVE is the mechanism which turns all Law in adherance to God, OVER fear. And THIS God is not like your mommy or your daddy who might could overlook your sins. He is the Almighty and fearful to behold, even unto your own destiny being a thirsty one, by which you are so very regretful you did not love Him more. To love THIS God, is to fear how tenuous this relationship in Covenant really is.

So then what is the First Law, you know it already. Shema, to love God with all. The 613 insisted upon may actually degrade the First Law since Love, not fear will rule among the remnant. Knowing God exists is really moot, and only for the Greek philosopher. And on...and on.

 

[nothead]

^ Perfect.

Thank you for your support. I never got this concept from you, sir. This: do you love YHWH? Your liberal stances always seem to degrade the things of God, not adherence.

 

[nothead]

The topic of this thread is problematic for Jews to discuss. Especially since an even closer pronunciation follows in replies (still wrong thankfully but dangerously closer). We Jews do not use this name lightly. We use alternatives such as HaShem (the name) and Adonai (Lord) even in prayer. Even substitute names get substitutes, like 'G-d' and 'Kel-Shakkai' and 'Adoshem'. Written scripture with The Name in Hebrew must be buried, like a deceased human body, when no longer usable.

Understand the power of The Name.

When the Temple stood, this name was said out loud by human lips but once a year. The high priest, after a long and intense preparation, said the name at the culmination of the High Holy Days, inside the Holy of Holies. A rope was tied to his leg to extract him should his soul leave him and he perish during this ultimate risky act. When this name was uttered, the priests gave a signal to the throngs waiting outside the Temple. Everyone had to know when this service occurred. The uttering of The Name in the Holy of Holies negated time and space. The throngs in the courtyard, though they were jammed shoulder to shoulder, fell prostrate on the ground without touching the persons nearby. Boulders split asunder. The very Host of Heaven, the Angels, bowed trembling to the Throne, for even the Angels are judged.

Thus my Rabbi taught us.

So, you will understand why few Jews are likely to participate in threads like this.

The Jew still reads the ancient scriptures, yeah, SUBSTITUTING a name for the sacred one?
He can still affirm the PRIMACY of "YHWH" without denying his own faith, yeah innit?

Not saying it out loud even in his own bean, YET proclaiming this name above all others, even to the nations.
Just as you did, old son. How can WE say this name out loud, even in our own beans, if we don't know the vowel points, for sure, for sure?

 

[rosends]

Whatever my objective stance is regarding Judaisim, my subjective stance is that I am grafted-in as a Christian.

Breastplates were never necessary to enforce the Law. A tent of meeting was not, and The Temple was not. You seem to be prioritizing the most odd or oddball things which precipitate ENFORCEMENT, which is only historically only stemming from primarily the Word of God come unto men or a man. If God TELLS you to bean this one or kill that one, what's a tribal leader or prophet to do? The Pharisees and Sadducees world view was that the Word WRITTEN allowed them access and by the way compunction to repeat the stoning laws of old. Not a court as we know it today or the U.S. judicial system.

This basic concept was true from Abraham to Jesus. They took the adulterous woman to Jesus to see what he would say, KNOWING already he was gonna contradict their normal judicial punishment.

But the way he DID IT, was key and the reason why no man could speak against him. He said for the man without sin to throw the first stone. This was never a requirement in Torah or any of yours mentioned. But in the New realm of Covenant, this would be now true. The Law has fundamentally changed, and a stone for a sexual betrayal was no longer required.

As for my adorable adherence to the Law...
And my adherence, sir, to the Ten if done in Germany would have stopped the Holocaust in it's tracks. The Ten is not only for the Jew but for every man born of a woman, and his wife and anklebiters. A spiritual man of ANY religion knows these in his heart, and possibly in letter. Thou shalt not covet or steal. Thou shalt not murder. And the Ten was encapsulated by the SIMPLE Golden Rule from Jesus' mouth. Proclaimed by more than one guru, or sifu, or pastor, or imam.

Hint: However much you say I'm not a bona fide Jew, my God is your God, and I love this God very much, AND follow His Commands, the 613 being those extracted, from men. Call it adorable, I consider it life and death. FEAR of God is not one of the ten, rather a direct implication of all the Ten, just as the first command unto a man, Adam implied fear to break it.
It is not a basic Command since it is the beginning of Law and LOVE is the mechanism which turns all Law in adherance to God, OVER fear. And THIS God is not like your mommy or your daddy who might could overlook your sins. He is the Almighty and fearful to behold, even unto your own destiny being a thirsty one, by which you are so very regretful you did not love Him more. To love THIS God, is to fear how tenuous this relationship in Covenant really is.

So then what is the First Law, you know it already. Shema, to love God with all. The 613 insisted upon may actually degrade the First Law since Love, not fear will rule among the remnant. Knowing God exists is really moot, and only for the Greek philosopher. And on...and on.

And I am grafted in as a citizen of Germany. Forget that I don't live there or follow its laws or even know anything about it. I have a piece of paper in my house which says that I can be grafted in by choice so I am -- I should be receiving all the benefits of being a German citizen. Of course, I only choose to follow a single law from Germany because I say that there is a single, important law. That makes as much sense as what you insist. If you insist that I can't simply make that claim, I'll say that citizenship is based only on the literal wording of a document (in a language I can't read) - it says "men" and I'm a man, so it must apply to me. You say no, but then you are focused on too many other oddball things. Any other laws are no longer needed.

Your point about love and fear is anticipated by the text. Deut 6:13 reads "You shall fear the Lord, your God, worship Him, and swear by His name." and 6:5 reads, "And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means." Both are necessary. Check the book. Jesus decides that one matters and the other doesn't? Fine -- I decide that German law only now means a single Administrative law. All the criminal stuff is unnecessary.

And sure, I can see how observing the Sabbath would have stopped the Holocaust. Makes perfect sense. I can see how not taking God's name in vain is encapsulated by the Talmudic golden rule (yes, Jesus coopted it from the talmud). And as for the "first law" that would be the New Moon. If Germans had adhered to what was binding -- the 7 Noachide laws, then maybe things wouldn't have gone so poorly.

 

[nothead]

And I am grafted in as a citizen of Germany. Forget that I don't live there or follow its laws or even know anything about it. I have a piece of paper in my house which says that I can be grafted in by choice so I am -- I should be receiving all the benefits of being a German citizen. Of course, I only choose to follow a single law from Germany because I say that there is a single, important law. That makes as much sense as what you insist. If you insist that I can't simply make that claim, I'll say that citizenship is based only on the literal wording of a document (in a language I can't read) - it says "men" and I'm a man, so it must apply to me. You say no, but then you are focused on too many other oddball things. Any other laws are no longer needed.

Your point about love and fear is anticipated by the text. Deut 6:13 reads "You shall fear the Lord, your God, worship Him, and swear by His name." and 6:5 reads, "And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means." Both are necessary. Check the book. Jesus decides that one matters and the other doesn't? Fine -- I decide that German law only now means a single Administrative law. All the criminal stuff is unnecessary.

And sure, I can see how observing the Sabbath would have stopped the Holocaust. Makes perfect sense. I can see how not taking God's name in vain is encapsulated by the Talmudic golden rule (yes, Jesus coopted it from the talmud). And as for the "first law" that would be the New Moon. If Germans had adhered to what was binding -- the 7 Noachide laws, then maybe things wouldn't have gone so poorly.

It seems you do not know how to weigh the greater laws from the lesser ones...The Shema is first to love God. No atheist, or pagan or dog or pig will adhere to this one, not knowing the Only True God of the Jews, sir. Fear is yes, necessary but not MADE a basic and prioritized law SINCE it precedes all Law in repentance and not the actual DOING and BELIEVING of Law, required in order to love God by doing His Commands, and the First ones first, of course of course...

So then we love God first, and this will mitigate alllll other law. All law follows after this Law, since all law is the obedience and adhering or CLEAVING unto God. And fear comes when you don't do it, or have not done it, the First Law. Thank you very much, tithes at the foyer.

I am not sure where you are going with administrative Law of the German government, except to say it is held in obeisance. I am sure you know that historically administrative law under the Third Reich was not God-lawful. In order to never make the same mistake again...adherence to God's Law first would yes, be necessary in the minds of men, our leaders and politicians and prophets in the world. Jesus made a sharp distinction between civil law and Judaic Law, and so should you, since it simply makes God-sense. Jesus said to pay your taxes, but to give unto Caesar his due, and God His due. Which comes first? You have to know, being a rabbi and such...Shema tells you, sir.

Yes Deuteronomy does have FEAR as a basic command of faith. But it is not a whatchamacallit, NOAHIDE law or MOSESHIDE law which is first required although the first thing said of the God-fearer in the Temple Court (outer). It is in fact UNDER Shema, the Law of Agape Love. That which God gave you, glorify Him back with. Just as the Land of Plenty was given, then the Shema required of.

Finally, observing Sabbath has much littler to do with proper German attitudes, in relation to the resultant Holocaust as picking up sticks has...did I not mention the first and basic breaking of Law in Germany? Thou shalt not covet (the nice homes and money the Jews had, some of them). Thou shalt not STEAL, (take over their homes and settle into them/put their money into YOUR Swiss bank accounts). And finally the biggy: thou shalt not murder. If you cannot see as the German Lutheran or Catholic did not, that these are the most basic and requisite laws of all...then I'm not sure ifn I WAS a Jew I would follow the rabbinical themes of your heart.

 

[rosends]

It seems you do not know how to weigh the greater laws from the lesser ones...The Shema is first to love God. No atheist, or pagan or dog or pig will adhere to this one, not knowing the Only True God of the Jews, sir. Fear is yes, necessary but not MADE a basic and prioritized law SINCE it precedes all Law in repentance and not the actual DOING and BELIEVING of Law, required in order to love God by doing His Commands, and the First ones first, of course of course...

So then we love God first, and this will mitigate alllll other law. All law follows after this Law, since all law is the obedience and adhering or CLEAVING unto God. And fear comes when you don't do it, or have not done it, the First Law. Thank you very much, tithes at the foyer.

I am not sure where you are going with administrative Law of the German government, except to say it is held in obeisance. I am sure you know that historically administrative law under the Third Reich was not God-lawful. In order to never make the same mistake again...adherence to God's Law first would yes, be necessary in the minds of men, our leaders and politicians and prophets in the world. Jesus made a sharp distinction between civil law and Judaic Law, and so should you, since it simply makes God-sense. Jesus said to pay your taxes, but to give unto Caesar his due, and God His due. Which comes first? You have to know, being a rabbi and such...Shema tells you, sir.

Yes Deuteronomy does have FEAR as a basic command of faith. But it is not a whatchamacallit, NOAHIDE law or MOSESHIDE law which is first required although the first thing said of the God-fearer in the Temple Court (outer). It is in fact UNDER Shema, the Law of Agape Love. That which God gave you, glorify Him back with. Just as the Land of Plenty was given, then the Shema required of.

Finally, observing Sabbath has much littler to do with proper German attitudes, in relation to the resultant Holocaust as picking up sticks has...did I not mention the first and basic breaking of Law in Germany? Thou shalt not covet (the nice homes and money the Jews had, some of them). Thou shalt not STEAL, (take over their homes and settle into them/put their money into YOUR Swiss bank accounts). And finally the biggy: thou shalt not murder. If you cannot see as the German Lutheran or Catholic did not, that these are the most basic and requisite laws of all...then I'm not sure ifn I WAS a Jew I would follow the rabbinical themes of your heart.

You are simply making things up now. You create this category of Moseshide Law so that you can exclude the black letter law which I cite. Feel free to do that but it is as valid as my saying that "the only law that counts is to drink wine". You insist that German law was not God-lawful, and I say to you that the Gospels are not either, so whatever you cite from them is as meaningless.

You know that you have to give God his due, which is obedience -- you have to obey all God's laws...and fear is listed as one of them, and I gave you a verse. You can't let someone else later on tell you that the text is wrong or no longer applicable. You also can't have some later text create this fiction of "grafting in".

So now you say that the sabbath DOESN"T have to do with preventing the Holocaust, and yet you said " the Ten if done in Germany would have stopped the Holocaust in it's tracks." That would be a contradiction in your words.

For some reason you have decided that certain aspects of the shma are the only things that matter to you. That has no precedent nor any validity but you are entitled to a wrong position.

 

[nothead]

You are simply making things up now. You create this category of Moseshide Law so that you can exclude the black letter law which I cite. Feel free to do that but it is as valid as my saying that "the only law that counts is to drink wine". You insist that German law was not God-lawful, and I say to you that the Gospels are not either, so whatever you cite from them is as meaningless.

You know that you have to give God his due, which is obedience -- you have to obey all God's laws...and fear is listed as one of them, and I gave you a verse. You can't let someone else later on tell you that the text is wrong or no longer applicable. You also can't have some later text create this fiction of "grafting in".

So now you say that the sabbath DOESN"T have to do with preventing the Holocaust, and yet you said " the Ten if done in Germany would have stopped the Holocaust in it's tracks." That would be a contradiction in your words.

For some reason you have decided that certain aspects of the shma are the only things that matter to you. That has no precedent nor any validity but you are entitled to a wrong position.

1) of course you decided like your fathers the Shema has subcategories, and extensions not mentioned in Deut 6...this is because commentaries and margins are JUST as important to you as the pristine text...
...the SAME mistake our own RCC has made, wherein evolutionary "revelation" is considered just as valid as the original revelation Moses had. Messiah would come to relegate and weigh the Law for us, and in fact he has. The Simon Bar Kokhba revolt shows this man had more authority than both high priest and king. But then alas, he led you to ruin. NOW do you consider Simon Bar Kokhba the Messiah?

2) Yes even the Ten were later decided to be canonical and primal, which was not even done in Jesus' day. But HE knew the priority of Law, and this is it: Shema in two parts the first IDENTIFYING God and secondly to LOVE this God with all. All extensions and additions are those of men, not God. The second Command of Jesus was an encapsulation of all Law pertaining to neighbors family and society. Golden Rule, secondly primal.

How do we know the Shema is most primal? WHAT OTHER LAW was said to put on your porch and door, forehead and hand, recited twice a day and to teach your children? Even ORTHODOX Jews know more than you, expert on the law.

3) And if you don't know that FEAR even falls under LOVE then maybe your wisdom needs an overhaul. Thank you.

 

[rosends]

1) of course you decided like your fathers the Shema has subcategories, and extensions not mentioned in Deut 6...this is because commentaries and margins are JUST as important to you as the pristine text...
...the SAME mistake our own RCC has made, wherein evolutionary "revelation" is considered just as valid as the original revelation Moses had. Messiah would come to relegate and weigh the Law for us, and in fact he has. The Simon Bar Kokhba revolt shows this man had more authority than both high priest and king. But then alas, he led you to ruin. NOW do you consider Simon Bar Kokhba the Messiah?

2) Yes even the Ten were later decided to be canonical and primal, which was not even done in Jesus' day. But HE knew the priority of Law, and this is it: Shema in two parts the first IDENTIFYING God and secondly to LOVE this God with all. All extensions and additions are those of men, not God. The second Command of Jesus was an encapsulation of all Law pertaining to neighbors family and society. Golden Rule, secondly primal.

How do we know the Shema is most primal? WHAT OTHER LAW was said to put on your porch and door, forehead and hand, recited twice a day and to teach your children? Even ORTHODOX Jews know more than you, expert on the law.

3) And if you don't know that FEAR even falls under LOVE then maybe your wisdom needs an overhaul. Thank you.

Who decided that it has "subcategories"? You decided that the rest of the text is immaterial and you ignore every other passage which is strange because it is all divine and who are you to decide that only 1 part matters? This fiction you espouse about extensions and additions has been repeatedly deflated by the citing of black letter law in the torah but you simply ignore stuff that refutes your schema. That's willful ignorance and it is sad to watch.

At least Bar Kochva had the right idea about what a messiah does.

You say that the shma is "primal" because we put it on our doors? We put 4 different passages on our heads and arms every day in the tefillin (that's a law required in the body of the shma...you knew that, right?) so ALL 4 must be primal...also, please remember, the text of the shma indicates a mass of laws that we are bound to. If there is only 1, then the text is lying when it uses the plural. Oh wait, are you ignoring that what we are obligated to put on our doorposts and repeat everyday is more than just 1 verse. Time for you to revise your argument again to ignore the facts as they actually exist.

 

[nothead]

Who decided that it has "subcategories"? You decided that the rest of the text is immaterial and you ignore every other passage which is strange because it is all divine and who are you to decide that only 1 part matters? This fiction you espouse about extensions and additions has been repeatedly deflated by the citing of black letter law in the torah but you simply ignore stuff that refutes your schema. That's willful ignorance and it is sad to watch.

Waddya mean, MY Shema? You don't even know YOUR OWN Shema. Two parts and two parts only, Deut 6:4-5. NO add on apps, NO scintillating commentaries needed.

At least Bar Kochva had the right idea about what a messiah does.

Start an ill-advised war with the Romans? Are you in your right mind? Or your usual wrong mind?

You say that the shma is "primal" because we put it on our doors? We put 4 different passages on our heads and arms every day in the tefillin (that's a law required in the body of the shma...you knew that, right?) so ALL 4 must be primal...also, please remember, the text of the shma indicates a mass of laws that we are bound to. If there is only 1, then the text is lying when it uses the plural. Oh wait, are you ignoring that what we are obligated to put on our doorposts and repeat everyday is more than just 1 verse. Time for you to revise your argument again to ignore the facts as they actually exist.

If you don't even know your FIRST LAW, then what do you know, oh sage? Listen up, I'm not the only one saying this, that the Great Law is the First one...what do you think most orthodox Jews want to say WITH THEIR VERY LAST BREATH? Are you one of them liberal Jews? SECULAR ones? Where you come from, the same country as Latka Gravas, in Taxi?[/QUOTE]

Why are the Ten emphasized over any other of the 613? Because they were written "with the finger of God," Ex 31:18. Because they were written exclusively on Moses' stone tablets, and placed in the Ark. Ex 25:21. And why is the Shema even over these? Since again this Law is emphasized to:

6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.

9 And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

What is the Core Shema?

4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

And what did wayward Jews do but add onto it with their own well-intended but lawyerish additions, being the thought that the more the merrier? Hint: the Shema was given when God deemed the Israelites could stand it, the most ABSTRACT and seemingly nonsensical Law up until this time. (To love God is not abstract or irrational, but to love God WITH ALL is). HE who no one heard his audible voice, or even seen His exact and thus abstract, but TERRIBLE form.