The Jewish Jehovah's Witness.

[John D. Brey]

The mezuzah is an "ornament" עדי. -----Two letters in its scroll are enlarged, the ayin ע and the dalet ד. ---Together they spell "witness" עד. In Greek the word "witness" is "martyria" from the root "martyr." The martyr is a witness of the highest order. His blood signifies the seriousness of his witness.

The word "mezuzah" means "doorposts." Blood was placed on the doorposts on Passover such that since good Jewish scripture claims two bloods were mingled on the mezuzah on Passover, circumcision blood, and the blood of the lamb (both of which are martyr-ial witnesses to sacrificial death), it's fair to say that the mezuzah is a martyr-ial witness of one sort or another.

Rabbis like Ginsburgh, Munk, et. al., tell us the ayin ע symbolizes "vision" or "seeing," i.e., the "eyes." Rabbi Hirsch tells us די is what's seen at the sacrifice that occurs on the eighth day. Rabbi Hirsch literally says that the letters dalet-yod די are engraved in the sacrificial flesh.

That would make the mezuzah the "ornament" par excellent, since the very name "ornament" ע–די is a pictogram of the "eyes" ע spying the mark of circumcision די dalet-yod.

At least that's what the Rabbis imply to anyone who wants to be implicated in the witnessing of the ornament that's on, or is, the mezuzah.


John

 

[Poisonshady313]

since good Jewish scripture claims two bloods were mingled on the mezuzah on Passover, circumcision blood, and the blood of the lamb

I'd like to see some support for that.

 

[Tumah]

I'd like to see some support for that.

Please don't get him started!
Pleeaaassee!!!

 

[John D. Brey]

I'd like to see some support for that.

The Israelites took the blood of the covenant of circumcision, and they put (it) upon the lintel of their houses, and when the Holy One, blessed be He, passed over to plague the Egyptians, He saw the blood of the covenant of circumcision upon the lintel of their houses and the blood of the Paschal lamb, He was filled with compassion on Israel, as it is said, “And when I passed by thee, and saw thee weltering in thy (twofold) blood, I said unto the, In they (two fold) blood, live” (Ezek. xvi.6). “In they blood” is not written here, but in “they (twofold) blood,” with twofold blood, the blood of the covenant of circumcision and the blood of the Paschal lamb; therefore it is said, “I said unto thee, In thy (twofold) blood, live; yea, I said unto thee, In they (twofold) blood, live” (ibid.).

Pirke De Rabbi Eliezer, p. 210.

Why did God protect them through blood? So that He should remember in their favour the blood of Abraham's circumcision. On account of two kinds of blood were Israel redeemed from Egypt---the blood of the Passover [lamb] and the blood of circumcision, as it says, And I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live; yea, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live (Ezek. xvi, 6)---viz. AND STRIKE THE LINTEL---through the merit of Abraham, AND THE TWO SIDE--POSTS . . ..

Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, Bo, XVII, 3.

It is written: Take a bundle of hyssop and dip it in the blood that is in the basin and touch [some of the blood that is in the basin] to the lintel and to the two doorposts (Exodus 12:22). Why a bundle of hyssop? In order to exterminate the impure spirit and to display on their doors, in these three places, complete faith---one here, one there, and the one between them. Therefore, YHVH will pass over the entrance and will not allow the Destroyer to enter your houses to strike (ibid., 23)---because he sees the Holy Name marked on the door. . . There were two bloods: one of circumcision and one of the Paschal Lamb.

The Zohar, Bo, 2:36a.

Another interpretation: Because of Thy righteous ordinances, because of the judgments which Thou didst bring upon the Egyptians and the righteousness which Thou wroughtest with our forefathers in Egypt, for they possessed no virtues or good deeds to justify their redemption, but Thou didst give them two commandments with which they should occupy themselves and be redeemed, and these are the blood of the Paschal lamb and the blood of circumcision. R. Levi said: In that night the two bloods mingled, as it is said, And when I passed by thee, and saw thee wallowing in thy blood, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live; yea, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live (Ezek. xvi, 6).

Midrash Rabbah, Ruth, VI, 1.​

This small sampling of Jewish midrashim establishes the idea (understood throughout all serious Jewish teaching) that two bloods are mingled at Passover (lamb and limb). To a Christian unfamiliar with the precision and care that goes into exegesis such as is found in the quotations above, the idea that there were two bloods mingled on the doorposts seems unbiblical, and or, farcical. Christians unfamiliar with the care and precision that goes into Jewish exegesis would be surprised to find that the idea (of the two bloods) is in fact biblical. It's hidden in the text (but it's nonetheless there, if you know where to find it). As Rabbi Hirsch points out, throughout the Tanakh we find statements, and decrees, given (like the one on Passover) that assume the target audience for the decree, or commandment, have already been "verbally" coached on the finer points of the decree or commandment. Rabbi Hirsch gives some excellent examples of places where a commandment is given to the people (in the written text) without them even receiving the details of the commandment that's only incompletely set out in the written text. But even in the written text, the people subsequently show that they already knew, were already verbally enlightened, about the things incompletely addressed in the written text.

It would start a new thread (of thought), but a person could fairly easily be shown that the "two-bloods" ---on the mezuzah ----at Passover---- is biblical through-and-through.



John

 

[2ndpillar]

The Israelites took the blood of the covenant of circumcision, and they put (it) upon the lintel of their houses, and when the Holy One, blessed be He, passed over to plague the Egyptians, He saw the blood of the covenant of circumcision upon the lintel of their houses and the blood of the Paschal lamb, He was filled with compassion on Israel, as it is said, “And when I passed by thee, and saw thee weltering in thy (twofold) blood, I said unto the, In they (two fold) blood, live” (Ezek. xvi.6). “In they blood” is not written here, but in “they (twofold) blood,” with twofold blood, the blood of the covenant of circumcision and the blood of the Paschal lamb; therefore it is said, “I said unto thee, In thy (twofold) blood, live; yea, I said unto thee, In they (twofold) blood, live” (ibid.).

Pirke De Rabbi Eliezer, p. 210.

Why did God protect them through blood? So that He should remember in their favour the blood of Abraham's circumcision. On account of two kinds of blood were Israel redeemed from Egypt---the blood of the Passover [lamb] and the blood of circumcision, as it says, And I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live; yea, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live (Ezek. xvi, 6)---viz. AND STRIKE THE LINTEL---through the merit of Abraham, AND THE TWO SIDE--POSTS . . ..

Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, Bo, XVII, 3.

It is written: Take a bundle of hyssop and dip it in the blood that is in the basin and touch [some of the blood that is in the basin] to the lintel and to the two doorposts (Exodus 12:22). Why a bundle of hyssop? In order to exterminate the impure spirit and to display on their doors, in these three places, complete faith---one here, one there, and the one between them. Therefore, YHVH will pass over the entrance and will not allow the Destroyer to enter your houses to strike (ibid., 23)---because he sees the Holy Name marked on the door. . . There were two bloods: one of circumcision and one of the Paschal Lamb.

The Zohar, Bo, 2:36a.

Another interpretation: Because of Thy righteous ordinances, because of the judgments which Thou didst bring upon the Egyptians and the righteousness which Thou wroughtest with our forefathers in Egypt, for they possessed no virtues or good deeds to justify their redemption, but Thou didst give them two commandments with which they should occupy themselves and be redeemed, and these are the blood of the Paschal lamb and the blood of circumcision. R. Levi said: In that night the two bloods mingled, as it is said, And when I passed by thee, and saw thee wallowing in thy blood, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live; yea, I said unto thee: In thy bloods, live (Ezek. xvi, 6).

Midrash Rabbah, Ruth, VI, 1.​

This small sampling of Jewish midrashim establishes the idea (understood throughout all serious Jewish teaching) that two bloods are mingled at Passover (lamb and limb). To a Christian unfamiliar with the precision and care that goes into exegesis such as is found in the quotations above, the idea that there were two bloods mingled on the doorposts seems unbiblical, and or, farcical. Christians unfamiliar with the care and precision that goes into Jewish exegesis would be surprised to find that the idea (of the two bloods) is in fact biblical. It's hidden in the text (but it's nonetheless there, if you know where to find it). As Rabbi Hirsch points out, throughout the Tanakh we find statements, and decrees, given (like the one on Passover) that assume the target audience for the decree, or commandment, have already been "verbally" coached on the finer points of the decree or commandment. Rabbi Hirsch gives some excellent examples of places where a commandment is given to the people (in the written text) without them even receiving the details of the commandment that's only incompletely set out in the written text. But even in the written text, the people subsequently show that they already knew, were already verbally enlightened, about the things incompletely addressed in the written text.

It would start a new thread (of thought), but a person could fairly easily be shown that the "two-bloods" ---on the mezuzah ----at Passover---- is biblical through-and-through.

John

Dear brey,
Ez 16:4-6 is about "the day you were born". Circumcision does not happen on the "day you were born", but on the 8th day.

 

[Desert Snake]

JW's require circumcision? I'm not sure what the thread title is referring to.

 

[John D. Brey]

Dear brey,
Ez 16:4-6 is about "the day you were born". Circumcision does not happen on the "day you were born", but on the 8th day.

As I've pointed out in other threads in this forum, and here, in Judaism, circumcision represents being "born-again" on the eighth day. The first birth is conceived at night, through the passions of the flesh, by means of the fleshly serpent. ------On the other hand, Jewish rebirth, the conception of the new man, occurs not at night (it's against the law to circumcise at night . . . even as it's against the law [Niddah 16b] to conceive the old man, the flesh, during the day), but in the bright light of the eighth day.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

JW's require circumcision? I'm not sure what the thread title is referring to.

The mezuzah, like the circumcision scar, are Jehovah's greatest witnesses.



John

 

[2ndpillar]

As I've pointed out in other threads in this forum, and here, in Judaism, circumcision represents being "born-again" on the eighth day. The first birth is conceived at night, through the passions of the flesh, by means of the fleshly serpent. ------On the other hand, Jewish rebirth, the conception of the new man, occurs not at night (it's against the law to circumcise at night . . . even as it's against the law [Niddah 16b] to conceive the old man, the flesh, during the day), but in the bright light of the eighth day.

John

Dear brey,
"Born again" in what sense? Was the blood shooing away the angel of death, the blood of the "fleshly serpent", or the blood of the circumcision? Not that I buy your story, but it seems to be inconsistent.

 

[Deeje]

JW's require circumcision? I'm not sure what the thread title is referring to.

Please note...this thread has nothing to do with Jehovah's Witnesses as in the organized body of Christians that are preaching all over the world.

The person who started this thread is apparently using the term very broadly for the promotion of his own beliefs.

 

[Desert Snake]

Please note...this thread has nothing to do with Jehovah's Witnesses as in the organized body of Christians that are preaching all over the world.

The person who started this thread is apparently using the term very broadly for the promotion of his own beliefs.

Ok...I'm not buying into the symbolism /theory/, here, anyway.

 

[Desert Snake]

The mezuzah, like the circumcision scar, are Jehovah's greatest witnesses.



John

I'm not against symbolism, so forth, but I'm simply not buying this... it doesn't match up to other Scripture. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you... however the NT is pretty clear that the circumcision of Xian's, or Jesu adherents, is not physical. As such, bearing relation to the physical circumcision, does not follow logic, ...it would not be a 'parallel' , in symbolism.

 

[Tumah]

Dear brey,
"Born again" in what sense? Was the blood shooing away the angel of death, the blood of the "fleshly serpent", or the blood of the circumcision? Not that I buy your story, but it seems to be inconsistent.

Please note the poster is not Jewish and is not accurately quoting Jewish belief, only his own interpretation.

 

[Deeje]

@John D. Brey Brey

Can you please tell me what body of faith you adhere to? Your beliefs seem to be an odd form of Judaism.....just nothing like anyone has ever heard before...

Are these your personal views or do you have a body of fellow believers with whom you worship? Who are your teachers?

 

[John D. Brey]

@John D. Brey Brey

Can you please tell me what body of faith you adhere to? Your beliefs seem to be an odd form of Judaism.....just nothing like anyone has ever heard before... Are these your person views or do you have a body of fellow believers with whom you worship? Who are your teachers?

I've been stating facts that don't really require a viewpoint. The sages claim two bloods are mingled on the doorpost (mezuzah) on Passover. I'm not saying two bloods are mingled on the mezuzah; the sages are. . . Likewise, it's factual that in the modern mezuzah, there are two majuscules (enlarged letters) on the scroll. In point of fact, the two enlarged letters are the ayin ע and the dalet ד which together spell "witness." ---- The mezuzah is a Jewish Jehovah witness.

What part of Australia are you from?


John

 

[John D. Brey]

I'm not against symbolism, so forth, but I'm simply not buying this... it doesn't match up to other Scripture. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you... however the NT is pretty clear that the circumcision of Xian's, or Jesu adherents, is not physical. As such, bearing relation to the physical circumcision, does not follow logic, ...it would not be a 'parallel' , in symbolism.

If the NT person is called the "circumcision" it stands to reason that there's some symbolic relationship between the word as it was used by Jews, and the word as it applies to the NT person?



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Dear brey,
"Born again" in what sense? Was the blood shooing away the angel of death, the blood of the "fleshly serpent", or the blood of the circumcision? Not that I buy your story, but it seems to be inconsistent.

Someone knowledgeable concerning Christian dogma would know that original sin is passed down through the biological serpent. That flesh is the biological, fleshly, analogue to the angel of death. Therefore, the blood of that organ, sacred in Judaism, is the blood (which as a symbol represents death) of death itself. The death of death is the birth of everlasting life since if there's no death, if death is dead, then all that's left is life, everlasting.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Please note the poster is not Jewish and is not accurately quoting Jewish belief, only his own interpretation.

It's interesting that you're statement is disjointed --almost like a Freudian slip of the tongue, related to the fact that on some conscious or subconscious level you seem to know you're statement is errant since I've not quoted a single Jewish belief. ------I've quoted Jewish sages explicating Jewish facts.


John

 

[rosends]

It's interesting that you're statement is disjointed --almost like a Freudian slip of the tongue, related to the fact that on some conscious or subconscious level you seem to know you're statement is errant since I've not quoted a single Jewish belief. ------I've quoted Jewish sages explicating Jewish facts.


John

so this wasn't a statement of Jewish belief "even as it's against the law [Niddah 16b] to conceive the old man, the flesh, during the day)"?

I mean, it is wrong, but are you saying that you aren't presenting the Jewish theological position (the Jewish belief)?

 

[Desert Snake]

If the NT person is called the "circumcision" it stands to reason that there's some symbolic relationship between the word as it was used by Jews, and the word as it applies to the NT person?



John

Sure, however, the type of symbolism that that will indicate, would not follow one ''type'' of circumcision, ie, in this instance, the purely physical outcome of the /a/ , circumcision. The meaning of the Xian circumcision, or rather it's nature, is not physical at all. So, it seems as if this overtly physical symbolism, is meant to imply a..symbiosis/?/, then it is lopsided, in nature, or expression. One might expect something non-physical, in the outward expression,/symbolically/, thusly. That being said, with this, there may not be a way to 'prove' your theory incorrect; in fact, I am not even intending to. But, this of course will , /in my opinion/, reflect on other ideas/theories, about circumcision, as demonstrated by other things you have written pertaining, to. I am of the position, that this ..ritual, what have you, is actually not /physically mystical, but merely a cultural designation, //for the time/, and thus is of the category of any other ''differential,, intent. One could argue, that like some other 'signs', or instructions, meant thusly, in this category, it is one of the things that would be first to be examined for superflouosity...