Jesus, Judaism, and Christianity

[John D. Brey]

Yes. There came a day when the Rabbis did some housekeeping, and kicked out of the synagogues a bunch of the different groups they considered heretical. Among these were the Nazarenes. This happened about 85 CE.

Jeremiah prophesies (Jeremiah 4:16) that these same Nazarenes, or Nazarim נצרים, will eventually return from their exile at the hands of the rabbis and condemn the cities of Judaism ערי יהודה for the action you note .

Isaiah (1:8-9) implies these Nazarim will be the faithful remnant of Israel directly associated with the city of Nazareth עיר נצורה.



John

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Jeremiah prophesies (Jeremiah 4:16) that these same Nazarenes, or Nazarim נצרים, will eventually return from their exile at the hands of the rabbis and condemn the cities of Judaism ערי יהודה for the action you note .

Isaiah (1:8-9) implies these Nazarim will be the faithful remnant of Israel directly associated with the city of Nazareth עיר נצורה.



John

Nothing in the Tanakh prophecies a doggone thing about the Nazarenes.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I heard it costs too much.

 

[Colt]

if jesus was jewish, why didn't people become jewish vs becoming christian?

Because the original, pre-cross Gospel of Jesus was a new religion; salvation from self and liberation from evolved religion. We were supposed to become like little children, start over fresh and trust the Gospel of the Kingdom which was the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of ALL mankind, not a specially chosen few. After Jesus returned to heaven his Jewish followers tried to justify leaving their religion to join the Jesus movement by creating a theological bridge. In doing so they disastrously exploited the Jewish prophets by forcing Jesus into scriptures that are NOT about him. His followers tried to make Jesus the Jewish Messiah when he wasn't/isn't.

Christianity is a mere overly complicated shadow of the originally, simple Gospel of Jesus.

 

[John D. Brey]

Nothing in the Tanakh prophecies a doggone thing about the Nazarenes.

How do you interpret the word נצרים in the context of Jeremiah 4:16-17? The Talmud calls the followers of Jesus נוצרי (which is a version of נוצרים ,נצורים).

For a voice declareth from Dan, And publisheth affliction from Ephraim. Tell the nations; behold, publish against Jerusalem, that Nazarenes (or Nosri) נצרים or נוצרי are coming from a far off Gentile land to declareth against the cities of Judah. As keepers of the vineyard of God, i.e., the name Shaddai שדי, they [the Nazarenes] are against Judah round about; because she hath been rebellious against me and my covenant saith the Lord.​

Here I am. A Nazarene (by Talmudic reckoning), a guardian of the covenant, publishing, correcting, the Masoretic rebelliousness toward the Tanakh text. Who will be rebellious against the Lord and his word be it written, published, or proclaimed; be the proclamation from one of the goyim נוצרי or the Nazarene himself? I dwell in the סכה of his wounds my very body becoming the new city of Nazareth where we, me and he, live in exile from the holy land (Isaiah 1:8). I wear an emblem of his blood around my neck as the mezuzah hanging on the gates into the heart of Zion (1 John 4:16).

John

 

[rosends]

The word Notzrim in Jeremiah is from a root meaning "watcher" or even "besieger". It does not mean Nazarenes. The connection to Nazarenes is purely post biblical Hebrew. Here is Klein's explanation

נצרᴵ to watch, guard, keep, to put on the safety catch (in a weapon).
— Qal - נָצַר 1 he watched, guarded, kept; 2 he guarded from danger, preserved; 3 he observed; 4 he kept secret; 5 he kept close, blockaded. NH 6 he put on the safety catch (in a weapon).
— Niph. - נִנְצַר MH 1 was watched, was guarded, was kept; NH 2 was kept close, was blockaded. [Aram.-Syr. נְטַר (= he watched, guarded, kept), Arab. naẓara (= he looked at, considered, examined; but Arab. natur, ‘overseer’, is an Aram. loan word), Ethiop. naṣara (= he looked at, observed), Akka. naṣāru (= to watch over, protect). cp. the collateral form נטר, cp. also נָדִיר ᴵᴵ.] Derivatives: נָצוּר, נִצְרָה, נוֹצֵר, נְצִירָה.

 

[John D. Brey]

The word Notzrim in Jeremiah is from a root meaning "watcher" or even "besieger". It does not mean Nazarenes. The connection to Nazarenes is purely post biblical Hebrew.

God's knowledge of the present and future is identical to his knowledge of the past. Therefore, the divine inspiration of a prophet (lent from God's omniscience) is likewise asymmetrical: a prophetic narrative can speak to all times.

Although the Torah can be read by the simplest individual, one must delve beneath its surface meaning if one is to discover its true treasures. . . The Torah can be understood according to its simple meaning, or according to more complex exegesis.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, p. 143.​

Here is Klein's explanation

נצרᴵ to watch, guard, keep, to put on the safety catch (in a weapon).
— Qal - נָצַר 1 he watched, guarded, kept; 2 he guarded from danger, preserved; 3 he observed; 4 he kept secret; 5 he kept close . . ..​

Jeremiah 4:17 speaks of "watchers" or "guardians" of שדי (Shaddai). But in verse 17 he doesn't use the consonants נצר (nun-tzaddi-reish) to speak of the watchers or guardians of Shaddai. He uses the consonants שמר (shin-mem-reish).

Why is that important? Because in Genesis chapter 17, God establishes a covenant with Abraham with the command that Abraham and his offspring must become "watchers," or "guardians" of the covenant. The word God uses for the commandment to watch, or guard, the covenant, is שמר (shin-mem-reish). Furthermore, in the very first verse of this seminal chapter (Genesis 17) God reveals his name שדי (Shaddai) for the first time in scripture.

Genesis 17:1 is the first time שדי (Shaddai) is found in the Tanakh. And it's found when God tells Israel to "watch" or "guard" שמר the covenant . . . watch, or guard, Shaddai שדי (Genesis 17:7). Jeremiah 4:17 is the first (and only) time the consonants (שדי) are found in Jeremiah.

Surprisingly, startlingly, Jeremiah actually parallels the word "Nazarenes" (nazarim נצרים) with the word found in the genesis of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:10), i.e., "guard" (shamar שמר). That is, in the context of Jeremiah chapter 4, he use these two words, nazarim נצרים and shamari שמרי interchangeably to speak of the "watchers" or "guardians" of a covenant that is, according Jeremiah chapter 4, being defrauded by those who live in the cities of Judah.

Jeremiah clearly appears to be implying that Judah-ism has a wicked heart such that she can't be "saved" until she gives up her wicked ways (Jeremiah 4:14 and Jeremiah 4:18). So God reveals a "secret" or "hidden" נצרות (Isaiah 48:6) reading of the covenant that's formerly been veiled from Israel's sight (Isaiah 48:6). Though they've broken the covenant, God has seeded it through a new nazar נצר, a new Branch, from Nazar-eth. These new covenant peoples will be called the remnant according to grace and be directly associated with the name of the city given in Isaiah 1:8, the city of Nazareth עיר נצורה. The receivers of the new covenant will be called "Nazarenes" (Nosri נצר–ים ---in the Talmud) by the people who break the original covenant.

Oh Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved. How long shall thy vain thoughts lodge within thee? . . . Tell the nations; behold, publish against Jerusalem, that Nazarenes (or Nosri) נצרים or נוצרי are coming from a far off Gentile land to speak against the cities of Judah. As watchers and guardians of the vineyard of God, i.e., of the name Shaddai שדי, they [the Nazarenes] form a circle to guard the covenant from Judah because she hath been rebellious against me and my covenant saith the Lord.

Jeremiah 4:14-17.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Genesis 17:1 is the first time שדי (Shaddai) is found in the Tanakh. And it's found when God tells Israel to "watch" or "guard" שמר the covenant . . . watch, or guard, Shaddai שדי (Genesis 17:7).

17. field---Heb. שדי---(Rashi) Accordingly, the "yod" is a substitute for the "he" of שדה.

Judaica Books of the Prophets, Jeremiah 4:17.​

Jeremiah speaks of the watchers or guardians of Hashem: Shaddai שדי. But that would lend itself to the exegesis being done here so that Rashi implies that the word isn't Hashem---Shaddai שדי, but the root שדי of the word for a "field" שדה (the difference being the yod versus the heh).

We can forgive Rashi for not necessarily knowing (after all they didn't have computer Bible software in his day) that Jeremiah uses the word for "field" שדה twenty-five times in his book but only uses the consonants שדי (Shaddai) one time: verse 17 of chapter 4. If the prophet was speaking of a "field" then we have twenty-five reasons to believe he would have used שדה rather than שדי, with apologies, of course, to Rashi, and his traditional Jewish rendering.

Because the Torah reveals God's will to man, it was given letter by letter to avoid any misinterpretations. Therefore, even the most seemingly trivial passages and variations in the Torah can teach many lessons to the person who is willing to explore its depths.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, p. 143.​

John

 

[rosends]

God's knowledge of the present and future is identical to his knowledge of the past. Therefore, the divine inspiration of a prophet (lent from God's omniscience) is likewise asymmetrical: a prophetic narrative can speak to all times.

That's silly balderdash. The prophet speaking of the future is therefore also speaking of the past? And if it is identical, how is it asymmetrical?

The Kaplan quote is actually alluding to a specific dictum אֵין מִקְרָא יוֹצֵא מִידֵי פְּשׁוּטוֹ

Jeremiah 4:17 speaks of "watchers" or "guardians" of שדי (Shaddai). But in verse 17 he doesn't use the consonants נצר (nun-tzaddi-reish) to speak of the watchers or guardians of Shaddai. He uses the consonants שמר (shin-mem-reish).

Why is that important? Because in Genesis chapter 17, God establishes a covenant with Abraham with the command that Abraham and his offspring must become "watchers," or "guardians" of the covenant. The word God uses for the commandment to watch, or guard, the covenant, is שמר (shin-mem-reish). Furthermore, in the very first verse of this seminal chapter (Genesis 17) God reveals his name שדי (Shaddai) for the first time in scripture.

Genesis 17:1 is the first time שדי (Shaddai) is found in the Tanakh. And it's found when God tells Israel to "watch" or "guard" שמר the covenant . . . watch, or guard, Shaddai שדי (Genesis 17:7). Jeremiah 4:17 is the first (and only) time the consonants (שדי) are found in Jeremiah.

To find this significant you would have to ignore exactly who the watchers are in Jeremiah. Have fun with that.

Surprisingly, startlingly, Jeremiah actually parallels the word "Nazarenes" (nazarim נצרים) with the word found in the genesis of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:10), i.e., "guard" (shamar שמר). That is, in the context of Jeremiah chapter 4, he use these two words, nazarim נצרים and shamari שמרי interchangeably to speak of the "watchers" or "guardians" of a covenant that is, according the Jeremiah chapter 4, being defrauded by those who live in the cities of Judah.

Except that's not the meaning of the word in Jeremiah. You want to have it both ways -- the root meaning "watchers" and yet meaning "Nazarenes". But it doesn't. So the conclusions you invent about what you think the meaning of the section on the whole is are just flat out wrong. Your attempts then to connect whatever words and meanings you want by virtue of overlapping consonants in the roots is doomed to failure.

Jeremiah speaks of an invasion by those who will do physical damage and harm to the land and its inhabitants. If you want to take this as a reference to Christians then maybe Jeremiah is actually prophesying of the horrid and evil actions of invading Christians who murdered and destroyed. At least that would be accurate to the history of Christianity...

 

[rational experiences]

The Judas.

Egyptian countries origin family all the same family on continent.

Used their own family members as slaves to serve fake royalty brother who stole most beautiful sister to be queen.... not natural human parents.

Enslaved murdered pretended they were gods. As civilisation technology owner.

Nukes their own country. Temple pyramid history.

Slave humanity now free Inherited a new sacrificed DNA. Became wandering humanity.

Sex by tribal family formed separated clans who fought in trade for supremacy to be rich. Formed and re owned king lines like Egyptian family had.

Lots of different DNA family yet in same country continent.

Rome wanted technology of Egypt rebuilt. Owned a huge trade agreement gained by trade in rich human support.

Judaism...Judas. Was family of royal king supremacy previously Egyptian now poor in comparison as lord of trade. Ignored his own families history life slavery and mutated attacked. Abused.

Agreed to help build restart technology in Jerusalem. Rebuilt science temple. Egypt rebuilt pyramids. Rome forced England to own Stonehenge.

Historic human in England had been using stone monuments to regain lost crop health growth by rock minerals.

Rome thought they could use that idea about grounds magnetism.

Stonehenge he said would not blow up. It did.... so did new rebuilt temples pyramid collapsed life was again badly sacrificed. Four day earth rendering earthquake.

Nuclear science outlawed.

Previous new born babies born badly mutated proof for a new Jewish Christian movement petitioned Rome to stop. Old testimonials their proof. Judas Judaic teachings ignored own heritage advice why life was sacrificed.

How Egyptians greedy Jewish Judas and Rome had murdered sacrificed humanity again by man's rich greedy temple science.

Just as what was stated its own people previously life sacrificed ignored its owned old teachings.

Theme only a small group of greedy lord Judaic traders in society made the choice.

Blame was on Rome for empire takeover.

Acting like Egyptians had before them.

Reason they all owned the same forefather in that continent.

Now meet again at NASA. All in one place just like before. Egyptian belief Jewish and Roman. Technology builders.

 

[rosends]

17. field---Heb. שדי---(Rashi) Accordingly, the "yod" is a substitute for the "he" of שדה.

Judaica Books of the Prophets, Jeremiah 4:17.​

Jeremiah speaks of the watchers or guardians of Hashem: Shaddai שדי. But that would lend itself to the exegesis being done here so that Rashi implies that the word isn't Hashem---Shaddai שדי, but the root שדי of the word for a "field" שדה (the difference being the yod versus the heh).

We can forgive Rashi for not necessarily knowing (after all they didn't have computer Bible software in his day) that Jeremiah uses the word for "field" שדה twenty-five times in his book but only uses the consonants שדי (Shaddai) one time: verse 17 of chapter 4. If the prophet was speaking of a "field" then we have twenty-five reasons to believe he would have used שדה rather than שדי, with apologies, of course, to Rashi, and his traditional Jewish rendering.

Because the Torah reveals God's will to man, it was given letter by letter to avoid any misinterpretations. Therefore, even the most seemingly trivial passages and variations in the Torah can teach many lessons to the person who is willing to explore its depths.

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, p. 143.​

John

You should probably check the Radak and the linguistic explanation why the 25 other uses set up a linguistically precedented form of the plural word "fields" in this verse (both in theoretical construction and in actual use -- Yoel 2:22 for example). The fact that the prophet never uses these letters to represent God is pretty reasonable proof that he isn't doing so here. (did you notice how Ezekiel uses the exact same letters? That should add some interesting twisting to your interpretations...)

 

[rational experiences]

Human men lie. Behaviour innate.

Lists get life destroyed. Behaviour I murder threaten murder if you don't do as I say the tactic. Behaviour. Behaviour says you're wrong before you even begin.

Did it anyway machine technology. Behaviour tactic mind I already murder hence care less if you family die. Behaviour.

Humans in England implemented healthy crop healing returned farming techniques. By stone placed magnetism. Spread rock dusts for fertile land healing. Increased crop yields.

Advised natural.

Man of science the liar said it proved stone technology cannot harm biology. Lied. Said it caused biology to be enhanced lying.

As he used metal machines too.

He reasoned the star had done it. Attacked sacrificed life not technology. Now it was passing by earth. Proof he lied.

He's not wrong he said lying.

Star did it first to earths mass as sin hole from sun to earth when no life existed is his lie.

He tried to copy the advice of English farming techniques. Lying.

Is why life was sacrificed once again by men of human science innate liars.

 

[rational experiences]

Another proof when falling star returned Muslim Egyptian man wanted temple science rebuilt.

Baha'i man of no science terms said be reminded of Jesus teachings.

Why men went to war to stop technology building. Mind was changed just as first man of science mind had been.

Was the exact human proof.

Star returns Russia hit...nuclear chosen again. True realisation human behaviour by conscious possession...science.

 

[John D. Brey]

God's knowledge of the present and future is identical to his knowledge of the past. Therefore, the divine inspiration of a prophet (lent from God's omniscience) is likewise asymmetrical: a prophetic narrative can speak to all times.​

That's silly balderdash. The prophet speaking of the future is therefore also speaking of the past? And if it is identical, how is it asymmetrical?

The idea is that God's knowledge of the past, present, and future, is identically complete not that the past is identical to the future.

And the prophet can be speaking of his contemporaries and be prophetically telling things about Israel in the future too.

You want to have it both ways -- the root meaning "watchers" and yet meaning "Nazarenes". But it doesn't.

I. נָצַר fut. יִצֹּר, more rarely יִנְצֹר—(1) i.q. נָטַר TO WATCH, TO KEEP (Arab. نَطَرَ to keep, e.g. a vineyard; comp. cogn. نَظَرَ to look at, to watch over, like the Lat. tueri and intueri, and نصر to defend, to free); e.g. used of a vineyard, Job 27:18. מִגְדַּל נֹצְרִים a watch-tower

Gesenius.​

The root word for "Nazarenes" means to guard or watch over something or one. But ironically, its also the word for a branch, or sprout:

נֵצֶר m.—(1) a sprout, a shoot, so called from being verdant, see the root No. II., Isa. 60:21. Metaph. used of offspring, Isa. 11:1; Dan. 11:7.
(2) a branch, Isa. 14:19.

Gesenius.​

In a fit of oracular inspiration Zechariah calls Messiah a Branch. Or more specifically, he channels the fact that part of Messiah's name will be associated with a Hebrew word for a branch or shoot:

Tell him this is what the Lord Almighty says: "Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place."

Zechariah 6:12.​

His place is Nazareth. And Nazareth branches out to the ends of the earth by means of the Nazarenes born of the Branch.

Jeremiah speaks of an invasion by those who will do physical damage and harm to the land and its inhabitants. If you want to take this as a reference to Christians then maybe Jeremiah is actually prophesying of the horrid and evil actions of invading Christians who murdered and destroyed. At least that would be accurate to the history of Christianity...

It's accurate history, and it's precisely part and parcel of what Jeremiah is saying. Rome was the first non-Jewish home of Christianity. It was Rome who displaced the Jews from the holy land to start the longest exile any people have ever endured. Christianity then sprouted in Rome. The Nazarenes sprouted throughout the Roman empire.

But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and stopped up their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the Lord Almighty had sent by his spirit through the earlier prophets. . . So I scattered them with a whirlwind among all the nations, where they were strangers. The land was left desolate behind them that no one could come or go. This is how they made the pleasant land desolate.

Zechariah 7:11-13.​

According to Zechariah God blames Israel, and not the invading hoard, for the desolation and the exile of the holy land. Just as God signed off on Israel's judgment of their enemies, so too, when Israel becomes God's enemy, he signs off on, he uses, the Nazarenes to proclaim judgement, and even to judge Israel (Jeremiah 4:14-17). In judging wayward Israel the Nazarenes are guarding the covenant just as Israel once guarded it by wiping out the goyim in the holy land. For a time God has become Israel's enemy. And it will be that way until Israel blesses all and any who come in the name of the Lord.



John

 

[rational experiences]

When our lying science satanic man with my god machine attacked life.

His thesis always includes why his invention machine is involved in bio lifes creation.

Stonehenge lying thesis..... magnetism stones placed for paramagnetic causes increased yield for seed crop growths as the minerals were gone out of the earth's base from ancient land old nuckear attack.

Where historic life died from arsenic poisoning of earths ground state could live but died. Just mutated survival 40 years bio age about highest life span. Old nuclear caused event.

Not from lack of food. Ground state.

Why theists lied about Stonehenge being safe as ability to cause crops yield to be higher in growth. Just like he lies claiming life or electricity is carbon.

He has to invent to give a machine life from a carbon base. He pretends how carbon reacts by itself. Yet carbon remains fixed a carbon constant.

He however cons by his words. Land fall shows crops flattened. Once they were burnt out.

The four day active human life sacrificed. Vacuum void womb stopped the attack. Man image in cloud mass emerged. Reason it's now above. Isn't any scientific theory.

Nuclear fallout from above like Russia opened up swirling active lightning strikes by increased fall in ofsun mass...how to invent electricity by God says men today by their law machine. Huge tornado hurricanes tsunamis...cities under water.

Life died as burning our gas body cold removed it. As gas burning was once only then nuclear dust mass the fuel remained voiding. Gases cold held on our side only.

Otherwise we'd have no atmosphere at all. Our spirit heavens body. Why life was so tortured. Pressure changes horrendous by loss of gas heavens.

Water became scarce. Humans had to search for underground water wells. Humans did take refuge in caves or underground taking cattle with them.

Had to wander to re establish a place to rebuild. Nuclear event.

Like Chernobyl Jerusalem was abandoned for several years. Humanity however plagued with scurvy type diseases plagues as blood had altered it's iron consistency...by heavens transmitter causes.

How blacks became white. As even dying humans still manage to have sex.

 

[John D. Brey]

The fact that the prophet never uses these letters to represent God is pretty reasonable proof that he isn't doing so here. (did you notice how Ezekiel uses the exact same letters? That should add some interesting twisting to your interpretations...)

I'm ok with Jeremiah intending to speak of a field. It doesn't really affect the overall exegesis of the text (although reading Shaddai works and adds an interesting gloss).

I believe divine inspiration can cause a prophet to be thinking of a field, and use שדי instead of שדה not by accident, or even of his own accord, but because God is speaking through the prophet to a far future audience.

Rabbi Samson Hirsch would be the first to concede that the name Shaddai being spelled the same as "field" can't be a quirk of no import. Every linguistic nuance like that has import. In some sense, Shaddai is the God of the field. Perhaps a beast of the field. Perhaps, as noted here in a thread long ago, he's Shaddai the Lamb of God. Perhaps that's why he's confused with one of the beast of the field whose blood is placed on the wood to delimit the power of death such that he too gets his blood all over the wooden spit he's lifted on prior to his roasted flesh being ingested by the Nazarenes at the Last Supper before the archetype Passover (Luke 22:19; John 6:53)?



John

 

[rosends]

I'm ok with Jeremiah intending to speak of a field. It doesn't really affect the overall exegesis of the text (although reading Shaddai works and adds an interesting gloss).

I believe divine inspiration can cause a prophet to be thinking of a field, and use שדי instead of שדה not by accident, or even of his own accord, but because God is speaking through the prophet to a far future audience.

Rabbi Samson Hirsch would be the first to concede that the name Shaddai being spelled the same as "field" can't be a quirk of of no import. Every linguistic nuance like that has import. In some sense, Shaddai is the God of the field. Perhaps a beast of the field. Perhaps, as noted here in a thread long ago, he's Shaddai the Lamb of God. Perhaps that's why he's confused with one of the beast of the field whose blood is placed on the wood to delimit the power of death such that he too gets his blood all over on the wooden spit he's lifted on prior to his roasted flesh being ingested by the Nazarenes at the Last Supper before the archetype Passover (Luke 22:19; John 6:53)?


John

Deciding what Hirsch would concede is more than a little arrogant. Find a commentator who draws that conclusion.

And now saying that the ou are OK with the word being fields undercuts your earlier criticism of Rashi, but again, you want to have it both ways.

So keep applying pbh meaning to the text if it makes you happy. It is, of course, intellectually dishonest but that seems par for the course.
-----------------edit----------------
I just realized -- do you hold like the Ramchal in every way, or just in your applying it to Hirsch? Though even the Ramchal writes, "וגם ישתנה לטבע לשונו ודרך דיבורו"

 

[John D. Brey]

Deciding what Hirsch would concede is more than a little arrogant. Find a commentator who draws that conclusion. . . do you hold like the Ramchal in every way, or just in your applying it to Hirsch? Though even the Ramchal writes, "וגם ישתנה לטבע לשונו ודרך דיבורו"

Luzzatto isn't the only one who points out that, uh, the Masoretic points, are neither canonical, nor will they codify the new reading(s) of the same old consonants once Messiah arrives. For me he has. So I like to think I'm ahead of the game.

The Hebrew language to Samson Raphael Hirsch is God's language and its nuances of meaning go to the very heart of understanding Torah and Mitzvot. Since God's Torah must be studied in order to understand the details and minutiae of Mitzvot, the language in which God gave the Torah must first be analyzed and fully understood. Hirsch reasoned that there must also be an internal integrity and wholeness to the language of the Torah. Furthermore, a Divine language, cannot be haphazard or inconsistent but, almost by definition, must be systematic, orderly, and logical.

Intro to Rabbi Hirsch's Etymological Dictionary.​

According to Samson Hirsch, part of the systematic and orderly nature of the divine language is the fact that words that are spelled the same, or even similar, or that sound the same (or similar), have an exegetical relationship that can be plumbed. The Hebrew of the scripture has no accidentally nuanced relationships since it was designed by God.

Because Sampson Hirsch held this to be true, he'd be forced to take seriously the idea that "Shaddai" שדי is the name of God that's associated with the fact of God's being a beast of the field שדי.

Surely the fact that the Nazarenes throughout the world, to the very ends of the earth (billions of them), consider Shaddai שדי a lamb, a beast of the field שדי, would be of some historical and etymological interest if Jews interested themselves in anything outside their own circumscribed worldview, i.e., if they listened to the proclamation of the Nazarenes (Jeremiah 4:14-17) God sends to them to proclaim that it's time for Jews to break with the testemony stones they've come to cherish to the point of idolatry and receive a new word order etched into their very hearts (Jeremiah 31:31).

It's almost like God is telling the Nazarenes to tell Israel that Abraham only placed the knife there, only marked the problematic flesh (attached to the two stones of testemony). It's up to you to put a little more pressure there to finish the deed. Abraham pointed the way. And Moses symbolically broke them (revealing their origin) without getting himself killed for it. But you've got to finish the deed in order to end the aeon Professor Wolfson labeled the reign of the phallus. The Nazarenes are already partwise into the rain of the heart.





John

 

[rosends]

Luzzatto isn't the only one who points out that, uh, the Masoretic points, are neither canonical, nor will they codify the new reading(s) of the same old consonants once Messiah arrives. For me he has. So I like to think I'm ahead of the game.

Oooh, swing and a miss. But nice try.

The Hebrew language to Samson Raphael Hirsch is God's language and its nuances of meaning go to the very heart of understanding Torah and Mitzvot. Since God's Torah must be studied in order to understand the details and minutiae of Mitzvot, the language in which God gave the Torah must first be analyzed and fully understood. Hirsch reasoned that there must also be an internal integrity and wholeness to the language of the Torah. Furthermore, a Divine language, cannot be haphazard or inconsistent but, almost by definition, must be systematic, orderly, and logical.

Intro to Rabbi Hirsch's Etymological Dictionary.
​

​

Are you relying on Clark? Oof.

Because Sampson Hirsch held this to be true, he'd be forced to take seriously the idea that "Shaddai" שדי is the name of God that's associated with the fact of God's being a beast of the field שדי.

No, he wouldn't say that (unless you think he takes the Ramchal's position and ignores the nuances of it -- are you saying that? Or maybe you just don't know what the Ramchals' position is...) According to your understanding, Hirsch would have a real problem with certain verses in Hoshea, Yo'el and Yechezkel.

Surely the fact that the Nazarenes throughout the world, to the very ends of the earth (billions of them), consider Shaddai שדי a lamb, a beast of the field שדי, would be of some historical and etymological interest if Jews interested themselves in anything outside their own circumscribed worldview, i.e., if they listened to the proclamation of the Nazarenes (Jeremiah 4:14-17) God sends to them to proclaim that it's time for Jews to break with the testemony stones they've come to cherish to the point of idolatry and receive a new word order etched into their very hearts (Jeremiah 31:31).

So you mean, "surely the erronoeous and self-serving word misinterpretations of billions of people would be of significance if Jews just abandoned the actual knowledge of the text." or maybe "Surely the self-identification with historical murderers in the text by billions should have significance to the people they historically murder." For the second one, read the משמיע ישועה, המבשר הרביעי

Great points...