Genocide in 1st Samuel 15:2-3

[gwk230]

No, it makes no sense whatsoever.
A Mincha is brought with every Qorban Tamid (daily offering) and Qorban Mussaf (extra offerings for holidays), as well as other times.

　
And this proves what? That it is also qorban? I have already agreed with this. It does not prove that it is given for a specific personal purpose like a sin or peace sacrifice.
　

It isn't about the function of the offering (vows, tribute, atonement, thanksgiving, etc.), but of what it serves.

　
Now you’ve lost me. It’s all about the function because it is the function that defines the service. Minchah is either offered as a vow, tribute, homage, praise or just to show love to Yah or it is used as seasonings and breading to a burnt offering to give it a sweet savor unto Yah. It’s additional and given with no personal expectation.
　

I may not be a walking, talking concordinance, but I HAVE learned quite a bit about the regular sacrifices (I'm using this word generically), because I made it my business to recite the passages daily, painstakingly reciting every word. It is part of the Jewish morning service, the extra service for holidays, and (for Sephardic and Israeli Jews) the afternoon service.

　
Hey, good for you.
　

What works better than someone who actually knows what the Qorbanot WERE, because I've studied them. It is more helpful than a simple definition. It helps to know the context of such things.

　
As so I. The study of Torah is not unique unto you. And like me, you do not have all the answers. You are correct in stating about the correct context of words used. This is why I disagree with the incorrect concept of a present being a sacrifice or rather a minchah being a zebach.
　

And just because Strong has been accepted by CHRISTIANS for centuries doesn't mean that Jews who are knowledgeable in Torah particularly care.

　
I also agree with this as myself being one who does not follow after the man made religions of both christianity nor judaism. But Strong’s as well as Brown-Driver-Brigs are accepted by many in judaism as well and is used. Just because you may not accept them doesn’t mean you speak for the whole of any group. You speak only for yourself at this point.
　

Exactly. Like someone who has studied Torah law, including the general circumstances of how Qorbanot were brought.

　
Wrong. Just because one studies something doesn’t mean they have a clear and correct understanding of it. They could have studied under one that was taught lies themselves. I rather see it for my own eyes as to make up my own decision for my own sake and not put my trust in man with all of his thoughts and feelings. Not to mention with so many of mankind we would have to add their agenda’s as well whether they be for good or for evil.
　

I might not have every last detail about how the animals were slaughtered, but I DO actually pay attention to what I read come every Biblical Jewish holiday (Purim excepted, because it didn't find its origin in the Five Books of Moses).

　
Again, good for you. I do have to say I like your bit on this man made holiday, and notice I didn’t state Holyday, of purim.
　

Instead of focusing on Zebach, and Mincha, it is more helpful to understand the function of a Qorban when it is referred to as an Olah, a Chatat, a Todah, a Chagiga, a Tamid, a Mussaf, a Pesach, a Nedava. These are all words that define the function of a Qorban.

　
I have studied these as well and yes they all have their own functions but none of them are offered by ones own free will for just the purpose of reverence or homage. My statements are on the differences between sacrifices for a personal level as opposed to a freely given minchah as Abel gave.
　

Zebach merely refers to the fact that it is an animal being brought.

　
Yes it is an animal being brought for a specific personal purpose. Like a sin or peace offering.
　

A Mincha (from Leviticus onward) refers to the fact that it is brought from grain. In Genesis, the word Mincha referred to an offering of an important nature. That was what Abel's sacrifice was called. That is what Jacob's offering to Esav was (when Esav came after him with 400 men).

　
O.k. for the sake of argument. It is first defined as a “offering of an important nature”. Are not all offerings important to the one who offers it? This concept you have offered does not make sense. Minchah is a present and not to be confused with the same purpose of a sacrifice for sin etc. etc. etc.
　
I believe the confusion may be where I used the word “offering” when I made my statement as there being a difference between “Offerings” and “Sacrifices”. I used it because it was used in Bere**** 4:4 to represent “Minchah” so I understand that a “sacrifice” can be “offered” as well as how a offering can be a sacrifice interchangeably. I do not see or accept, unless otherwise shown with real, actual, factual evidential proof to the contrary, which no one has presented to this point, where a present can be a sacrifice. What does one sacrifice if he freely gives? There is no sacrifice.
　

Believe what you will. However, many years in Yeshiva and actually learning of the sacrifices, and mentioning them daily, weekly, and whenever holidays pop up, I've learned a thing or two.

　
I’m not impressed. If you have it wrong then this only means your spreading lie’s.
　

Maybe you won't be convinced. That is your right. However, it is one thing to put one's faith in scholarship that has no background in the application of Jewish law. It is entirely different to put one's faith in scholarship that makes use of the regular application of Jewish law, even when the actual practice of said sacrifices is currently on hold.

　
Again, If you have it wrong then you have put your faith in a lie. Just because it is practiced by what men have gave through their own thoughts and feelings doesn’t make it correct.

Just be forewarned that I do not accept those things that are outside of the Tanach or berit hadashah. Mans so called “scholarship” is not to good of a ruler when it comes to understanding Yah. Even worse is the acceptance and obedience the Yahudites to Yah’s Torah. Much less the tinkering and mumblings of the so called rabbinates, of the man made religion of judaism, through their talmud, mishnah, kabbala and zohar etc. etc. etc. To me they are no better than the ones with the alpha-bets at the end of their name who, as christians, do the same exact thing.
　
Instead of bringing what you think of yourself, and what you claim that you have done, why don’t you bring facts as pertaining to the statement I made and not a bunch of he said she said dreamed up nonsense.

 

[Poisonshady313]

　which no one has presented to this point, where a present can be a sacrifice. What does one sacrifice if he freely gives? There is no sacrifice.

The loss of an animal that could otherwise have been either a beast of burden, or the source of milk, and eventually a source of meat.

Even if it's given freely.

The most appropriate application of the word "sacrifice" in the context of Qorbanot is as a synonym for slaughter.

And when you realize that animals were slaughtered for all kinds of reasons... even for voluntary offerings of thanksgiving, you realize that there is no distinction between "sacrifice" and "offering". They both may be freely given, at the expense of the giver.

And if you don't believe "sacrifices" can be given freely... consider this.

If you go to a store and buy a present for someone (nobody ordered you or commanded you to do this).... that money you spent could have gone to fuel your car, feed your family, pay your credit card bill, etc. You've just sacrificed while freely giving.

 

[Poisonshady313]

　
I rather see it for my own eyes as to make up my own decision for my own sake and not put my trust in man with all of his thoughts and feelings.

Because YOUR thoughts and feelings are authoritative? Who the hell are you?

Deuteronomy 17:8-11

If a matter of judgment is hidden from you, between blood and blood, between verdict and verdict, between plague and plague, matters of dispute in your cities - you shall rise up and ascend to the place that the Lord, your God, shall choose. You shall come to the Kohanim, the Levites, and to the judge who will be in those days; you shall inquire and they will tell you the word of judgment. You shall do according to the word that they will tell you from that place that the Lord will choose, and you shall be careful to do according to everything that they will teach you. According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment that they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word that they will tell you, right or left.[/quote]

This is just one example, of many, where the Torah makes it clear that teaching and learning is an important value... as opposed to simply making it up as you go along.

If the Torah is there to conform to your personal whims, then it is meaningless.

If it is to be God's standard, then you would have to rely on those who came before you and followed the way their elders were instructed, in an unbroken tradition back to God explaining to Moses on Sinai how to carry out the written law.

 

[gwk230]

The loss of an animal that could otherwise have been either a beast of burden, or the source of milk, and eventually a source of meat.
Even if it's given freely.

　
A loss? Ummmm. Well that might be the way you think and feel about it but I don’t look at a gift or present I give to Yah as a burden of sacrifice. It is of no burden at all.
　

The most appropriate application of the word "sacrifice" in the context of Qorbanot is as a synonym for slaughter.
And when you realize that animals were slaughtered for all kinds of reasons... even for voluntary offerings of thanksgiving, you realize that there is no distinction between "sacrifice" and "offering".

　
I agree that a slaughter, as a noun, is exactly what a animal Minchah is. Not a zebach or sacrifice. I have realized this distinction all along.
　

They both may be freely given, at the expense of the giver.
And if you don't believe "sacrifices" can be given freely... consider this.
If you go to a store and buy a present for someone (nobody ordered you or commanded you to do this).... that money you spent could have gone to fuel your car, feed your family, pay your credit card bill, etc. You've just sacrificed while freely giving.

　
See, again I see no burden of sacrifice in what I choose to do for another out of free will.
I disagree with your analogy. If one is so stupid and ignorant as to give what he needs for self preservation away for a present or gift to another then they should be made to suffer and feel as it is a sacrifice, though a very stupid and ignorant one at that. The law and the prophets teach us against such stupidity and ignorance.
　

Because YOUR thoughts and feelings are authoritative?

　
I do not use my own thoughts and feelings when reading what is plainly and simply written in the Tanach. I add nothing to nor take anything away.
　

Who the hell are you?

　
I’m but a dust bunny. A mud pie with two eye holes and a pie hole. I am an unworthy servant of Yah Elohim. I do his commands and not that of man which are in direct opposition to Yah‘s. I’m a priest, a teacher, a husband, a father and a grandfather. I’m a worker and doer of the precepts, ordinances, statutes and judgments of Yah.
　

Deuteronomy 17:8-11
If a matter of judgment is hidden from you, between blood and blood, between verdict and verdict, between plague and plague, matters of dispute in your cities - you shall rise up and ascend to the place that the Lord, your God, shall choose. You shall come to the Kohanim, the Levites, and to the judge who will be in those days; you shall inquire and they will tell you the word of judgment. You shall do according to the word that they will tell you from that place that the Lord will choose, and you shall be careful to do according to everything that they will teach you. According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment that they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word that they will tell you, right or left.

　
And here we have it. What you stated was written in your talmud in the other thread.
　

This is just one example, of many, where the Torah makes it clear that teaching and learning is an important value... as opposed to simply making it up as you go along.
If the Torah is there to conform to your personal whims, then it is meaningless.
If it is to be God's standard, then you would have to rely on those who came before you and followed the way their elders were instructed, in an unbroken tradition back to God explaining to Moses on Sinai how to carry out the written law.

　
But that chain has been broken. This is why the Hebrew Yisraelites are scattered to the four winds and are accursed. They refused to do as was told to Moshe at Sinai which he was commanded to write down. They did as you said and conformed to their own personal whims. They went after their own vain thoughts and feelings and disobeyed Yah and broke their covenant with him.
　
There is nothing new under the sun.

 

[Poisonshady313]

　I do not use my own thoughts and feelings when reading what is plainly and simply written in the Tanach. I add nothing to nor take anything away.

Oh no?

I rather see it for my own eyes as to make up my own decision for my own sake and not put my trust in man with all of his thoughts and feelings.

 

[gwk230]

Oh no?

Your point?

 

[Poisonshady313]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on the word "sacrifice".

The simple meaning I go with is this:

an act of offering to a deity something precious.


As a substitution for any Hebrew word, "sacrifice" is just a sloppy placeholder, designed to convey nothing more than the action of giving.

Sure, there are differences between voluntary and obligatory offerings... but that is NOT the difference between "offering" and "sacrifice".

In English, there is indeed a difference... but the Hebrew concept of Qurbanot draws no such distinction.



Zebach Sh'lamim: Peace Offering

A peace offering is an offering expressing thanks or gratitude to G-d for His bounties and mercies. The Hebrew term for this type of offering is zebach sh'lamim (or sometimes just sh'lamim), which is related to the word shalom, meaning "peace" or "whole." A representative portion of the offering is burnt on the altar, a portion is given to the kohanim, and the rest is eaten by the offerer and his family; thus, everyone gets a part of this offering. This category of offerings includes thanksgiving-offerings (in Hebrew, Todah, which was obligatory for survivors of life-threatening crises), free will-offerings, and offerings made after fulfillment of a vow. Note that this class of offerings has nothing to do with sin; in fact, the Talmud states that in the age of the messiah (when there is no more sin), this will be the only class of offering that is brought to the Temple.



And, there are 7 categories of obligatory Minchot, which means the word "gift" is not the meaning of the word "minchah"

 

[Poisonshady313]

Your point?

You are indeed relying on your own whims regarding what you personally think these things mean, rather than learning from men who received their knowledge from men who received their knowledge from Moses who received his knowledge from God at Sinai.

 

[Harmonious]

It is replies like yours that remind me why I spent so long away from this forum.

I will answer your questions. For the record, I'm not actually answering YOU, gwk - your contempt of all that I believe is not worthy of a response. But there are others who are reading this, and it is for THEIR benefit that I'm going to answer your questions. Mostly.

And this proves what? That it is also qorban? I have already agreed with this.

It's a beautiful thing. It does indeed mean just that.

It does not prove that it is given for a specific personal purpose like a sin or peace sacrifice.

A Mincha is for whatever purpose it is there for. To try to explain it further is an exercise in futility.

Now you’ve lost me. It’s all about the function because it is the function that defines the service. Minchah is either offered as a vow, tribute, homage, praise or just to show love to Yah or it is used as seasonings and breading to a burnt offering to give it a sweet savor unto Yah. It’s additional and given with no personal expectation.

NO, it isn't. A Mincha (outside of Genesis) refers to a MEAL offering, despite its purpose.

Unless, for some reason, you have become interested in what Jews call our Afternoon Prayer service. But as far as Qorbanot go, it is whatever meal accompanies. Nothing more, nothing less. A Mincha can serve all kinds of functions, from being it's own sin offering (of the horrifically destitute), it is a part of the daily offerings, it is whatever it is for.

As so I. The study of Torah is not unique unto you.

This is true. However, unlike you, I pay close attention to the Jewish (which, to be frank, is the ONLY) application to the commandments, particularly what went on in the Temple.

And like me, you do not have all the answers.

This is true.

You are correct in stating about the correct context of words used. This is why I disagree with the incorrect concept of a present being a sacrifice or rather a minchah being a zebach.

It doesn't matter what you agree with. Until you have any functional knowledge of Kodshim, or at least any of the Tractates that explain HOW the offerings were prepared in great detail, you are sadly only following a translation you barely understand.

Well... You understand it as far as your theology goes. But for its ACTUAL purpose and application, you have no clue, nor do you have the desire to learn, as you expressed.

I also agree with this as myself being one who does not follow after the man made religions of both christianity nor judaism.

Interesting. Then why does it matter so much to you what the appropriate translations of such words are, if you feel they are MANMADE to start with?

But Strong’s as well as Brown-Driver-Brigs are accepted by many in judaism as well and is used.

Not by Jews who are true to Torah learning.

Well... That's not entirely true, either. Sometimes, I DO look things up in places like the Blueletter Bible, but it isn't because I care for the translation therein. Sometimes, it's the only translation I have to work with. (I'm not particularly familiar with the Christian scriptures as I might be, and the Blueletter Bible is quite useful.)

If Jews true to Torah (and as you have said, I don't particularly speak for all Jews, but I do know that Orthodox Jews of any stripe usually agree with at least SOME of what I say) use the concordinances you listed, it is probably 1) for lack of having a Hebrew one, or 2) for lack of being able to READ a Hebrew concordinance. The interpretations in your listed concondinances are negligible to me, and I'm sure they are equally negligible to a great many OTHER Jews.

I recognize that not all Jews are Orthodox, and I also recognize that not all Orthodox Jews are even of one accord. However, I feel perfectly comfortable with my assessment here.

Just because you may not accept them doesn’t mean you speak for the whole of any group. You speak only for yourself at this point.

Just covered that.

Wrong. Just because one studies something doesn’t mean they have a clear and correct understanding of it. They could have studied under one that was taught lies themselves.

In a fashion, you could be right. I don't expect you to believe me. But I'm quite certain that I am correct with this, as the words we are discussing have more than just an academic meaning to me, but come with examples, reasons, and worlds of background.

Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm wrong. However, if you don't even understand the basic Hebrew on your own, and need Strong's or Brigg's to tell you how to understand something, I'm sure you will understand that I find your explanations less credible than the teachers I've had who honestly KNOW what they're talking about.

I rather see it for my own eyes as to make up my own decision for my own sake and not put my trust in man with all of his thoughts and feelings. Not to mention with so many of mankind we would have to add their agenda’s as well whether they be for good or for evil.

Fair enough. But if you don't believe in Judaism or Christianity, I fail to understand why it makes a difference to you what it says in Tanach.

Again, good for you. I do have to say I like your bit on this man made holiday, and notice I didn’t state Holyday, of purim.

Just because it was Rabbinical in origin doesn't make it any less holy. It just means there are different rules.

But then again, I KNOW what those rules are, as I not only studied them, I LIVE by them. See, more practical application to Jewish studies.

But then again... I'm curious to know what you think of the entirety of the Book of Esther.

I have studied these as well and yes they all have their own functions but none of them are offered by ones own free will for just the purpose of reverence or homage.

Then obviously, you haven't studied them enough.

My statements are on the differences between sacrifices for a personal level as opposed to a freely given minchah as Abel gave.

You know, those would not be separated by the idea of Mincha or Zevach. Freely given offerings would be Shelomim, or Toda'ot, or Olot. Or even Nedavot.

MINCHA IS MERELY A MEAL OFFERING (outside of Genesis). But you will ignore the obvious, and cling to your misguided translation stubbornly. Ah, well.

Yes it is an animal being brought for a specific personal purpose. Like a sin or peace offering.

No, it is an ANIMAL. For ANY reason.

O.k. for the sake of argument. It is first defined as a “offering of an important nature”. Are not all offerings important to the one who offers it?

Of course they are.

This concept you have offered does not make sense. Minchah is a present and not to be confused with the same purpose of a sacrifice for sin etc. etc. etc.

That is because you have no clue WHAT the Hebrew word for a sacrificial present is. You have made that painfully obvious.

I believe the confusion may be where I used the word “offering” when I made my statement as there being a difference between “Offerings” and “Sacrifices”. I used it because it was used in Bere**** 4:4 to represent “Minchah” so I understand that a “sacrifice” can be “offered” as well as how a offering can be a sacrifice interchangeably.

You are playing a semantic game in English.

Why don't you use the concordinances you are so fond of, and realize that OUTSIDE OF GENESIS, a Mincha does not mean "a gift", but a meal offering? Or, will this ONE instance of being right blind you to the truth of the matter?

I do not see or accept, unless otherwise shown with real, actual, factual evidential proof to the contrary, which no one has presented to this point, where a present can be a sacrifice. What does one sacrifice if he freely gives? There is no sacrifice.

You are playing a game with English semantics. None of these words actually mean "sacrifice" or "gift" in Hebrew. These words are convenient to use in English.

The Hebrew words referring to such "offerings" or "sacrifices" have nothing to do with a willingness to part with said offering, or one's intention, at least in the way you've been talking.

Honestly - the word "gift" or "Matanot" is not used at all in reference to any offering that goes on an altar, but as a gift that is given to a Priest, for any number of reasons.

I’m not impressed. If you have it wrong then this only means your spreading lie’s.

Back at you. You DO have it wrong, and you are spreading... well, I wouldn't go so far as to say lies, because that would mean that you are purposely spreading falsehoods. You are too ignorant to lie about such things.

Again, If you have it wrong then you have put your faith in a lie. Just because it is practiced by what men have gave through their own thoughts and feelings doesn’t make it correct.

Ditto.

Just be forewarned that I do not accept those things that are outside of the Tanach or berit hadashah.

Hmm... So you accept the Christian Scripture as truth, though you don't believe in Christianity. Interesting.

The rest of your post is merely contempt and condescension, and not worth responding to.

 

[gwk230]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on the word "sacrifice".

　
One offered a sacrifice for atonement. I believe that need be emphasized.
　

The simple meaning I go with is this:
an act of offering to a deity something precious.

　
Now that could be both. You could have sacrificed something precious or just given a precious gift or present.
　

As a substitution for any Hebrew word, "sacrifice" is just a sloppy placeholder,

　
I’m not quite there as yet. I still see the differences.
　

designed to convey nothing more than the action of giving.

　
Kinda true but one may have to give while another just does so out of love. There is a difference and the gift or present form of giving isn’t in my book a sacrifice.
　

Sure, there are differences between voluntary and obligatory offerings…

　
Finally. :woohoo:
　

but that is NOT the difference between "offering" and "sacrifice".

　
Oh man! And just when I thought you had it. Oh well, back to the drawing board. :slap:
　
For the sake of argument, lets just for a moment say that the word “Zebach” is “Sacrifice” and the word “Minchah” is “Offering”. Would I be correct in assuming that YOU believe that a “Offering” is the same as a “Sacrifice” and vice versa? If so then I disagree. I see a difference and it is the same as with the difference between voluntary and obligatory offerings. Just wanting to make sure we are still clear with each other.
　

In English, there is indeed a difference... but the Hebrew concept of Qurbanot draws no such distinction.

　
That’s because they are both qorbanot. They are both brought near to the alter.
　

Zebach Sh'lamim: Peace Offering
A peace offering is an offering expressing thanks or gratitude to G-d for His bounties and mercies. The Hebrew term for this type of offering is zebach sh'lamim (or sometimes just sh'lamim), which is related to the word shalom, meaning "peace" or "whole." A representative portion of the offering is burnt on the altar, a portion is given to the kohanim, and the rest is eaten by the offerer and his family; thus, everyone gets a part of this offering. This category of offerings includes thanksgiving-offerings (in Hebrew, Todah, which was obligatory for survivors of life-threatening crises), free will-offerings, and offerings made after fulfillment of a vow. Note that this class of offerings has nothing to do with sin; in fact, the Talmud states that in the age of the messiah (when there is no more sin), this will be the only class of offering that is brought to the Temple.

　
I like jewfaq as well. Though I do not follow judaism, I read it when I need a good laugh.
　
I see the peace offering to be something totally different than what you have thus posted. The definition I see here is for a “Todah Offering” and not a “Shelem Offering”. The way I have been taught as well as my understanding of a “Shelem Offering is that if you feel that you have in some way angered Yah or done something that you feel was displeasing to him or if you have an issue with a brother and wanted to regain some sort of restoration with them then one would offer a “Shelem Offering”. a “Todah Offering” is as it is stated as a offering to give thanks for something. In both cases they are for a personal purpose and not to be considered “Minchah” or gifts or presents.
　
I also disagree with their concept of their being no more sin after the return of the Moshiach but that is entirely for another thread.
　

And, there are 7 categories of obligatory Minchot, which means the word "gift" is not the meaning of the word "minchah"

　
What are they and where are they found in the Torah?
　
I used the word “Gift” as in “Present”.

You are indeed relying on your own whims regarding what you personally think these things mean, rather than learning from men who received their knowledge from men who received their knowledge from Moses who received his knowledge from God at Sinai.

　
It is deluded to think that one of these men are still alive today.
　
　

 

[gwk230]

It is replies like yours that remind me why I spent so long away from this forum.

I will answer your questions. For the record, I'm not actually answering YOU, gwk - your contempt of all that I believe is not worthy of a response. But there are others who are reading this, and it is for THEIR benefit that I'm going to answer your questions. Mostly.

　
What I said wasn’t meant to offend anyone personally but I do have contempt for man made religions. Mostly.
　

It's a beautiful thing. It does indeed mean just that.

　
Glad we can agree on something finally.
　

A Mincha is for whatever purpose it is there for. To try to explain it further is an exercise in futility.

　
Any excuse is better than none when a reputable answer isn’t at ones finger tips.
　

NO, it isn't. A Mincha (outside of Genesis) refers to a MEAL offering, despite its purpose.
Unless, for some reason, you have become interested in what Jews call our Afternoon Prayer service. But as far as Qorbanot go, it is whatever meal accompanies. Nothing more, nothing less. A Mincha can serve all kinds of functions, from being it's own sin offering (of the horrifically destitute), it is a part of the daily offerings, it is whatever it is for.

　
Then can you kindly explain what it is that they offered (minchah) that was torn, sick and lame in Mal 1:13?
　
Mal 1:13 You also say, 'It's all so tiresome!' and sniff scornfully at it," says Yah-Tzva'ot. "Then you bring animals that were taken by violence, or they are lame or sick. This is the sort of minchah you bring. Am I supposed to accept this from you?" asks Yah.
　
　

This is true. However, unlike you, I pay close attention to the Jewish (which, to be frank, is the ONLY) application to the commandments, particularly what went on in the Temple.

　
I disagree as it being the only. We debate here as to what actually happened and so do the so called rabbinates.
　

It doesn't matter what you agree with. Until you have any functional knowledge of Kodshim, or at least any of the Tractates that explain HOW the offerings were prepared in great detail, you are sadly only following a translation you barely understand.
Well... You understand it as far as your theology goes. But for its ACTUAL purpose and application, you have no clue, nor do you have the desire to learn, as you expressed.

　
As the same can be thrown right back at you with what you think you know being only of your theology. Further, I wouldn’t care anymore to be misguided by your thoughts and feeling about Torah no more than that of the man made religion of judaism.
　

Interesting. Then why does it matter so much to you what the appropriate translations of such words are, if you feel they are MANMADE to start with?

　
I don’t care what the man made religions of judaism or christianity translate. I do take notice to the true understanding of the Hebrew Yisraelite culture and the language in which they used. I just don’t believe that judaism nor christianity can bring any honesty into defining it as it has been so clearly proven here as far as I am of concerned.
　

Not by Jews who are true to Torah learning.

　
That’s not very honest……..
　

Well... That's not entirely true, either. Sometimes, I DO look things up in places like the Blueletter Bible, but it isn't because I care for the translation therein. Sometimes, it's the only translation I have to work with. (I'm not particularly familiar with the Christian scriptures as I might be, and the Blueletter Bible is quite useful.)

　
Thanks for the honesty.
　

If Jews true to Torah (and as you have said, I don't particularly speak for all Jews, but I do know that Orthodox Jews of any stripe usually agree with at least SOME of what I say) use the concordinances you listed, it is probably 1) for lack of having a Hebrew one, or 2) for lack of being able to READ a Hebrew concordinance. The interpretations in your listed concondinances are negligible to me, and I'm sure they are equally negligible to a great many OTHER Jews.

　
Oh, don’t get me wrong. In my opinion there are mistakes in both just like I am sure in all the rest up to and including any you can mention.
　

I recognize that not all Jews are Orthodox, and I also recognize that not all Orthodox Jews are even of one accord. However, I feel perfectly comfortable with my assessment here.

　
As do I.
　

In a fashion, you could be right. I don't expect you to believe me. But I'm quite certain that I am correct with this, as the words we are discussing have more than just an academic meaning to me, but come with examples, reasons, and worlds of background.

　
I agree with them coming with examples which are in the law and the prophets which reflect the true nature of the words in question 100% which I have shown.
　

Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm wrong. However, if you don't even understand the basic Hebrew on your own, and need Strong's or Brigg's to tell you how to understand something, I'm sure you will understand that I find your explanations less credible than the teachers I've had who honestly KNOW what they're talking about.

　
As you believe. I have teachers as well and so far they have agreed with my understanding unanimously. But then again, they are not followers of judaism either. Must be a trend to bring truth after over two thousand years of the thoughts and feelings of rabbinate judaism.
　

Fair enough. But if you don't believe in Judaism or Christianity, I fail to understand why it makes a difference to you what it says in Tanach.

　
Because it is what I listen to and do and not the man made traditions of any man made religion.
　

Just because it was Rabbinical in origin doesn't make it any less holy. It just means there are different rules.

　
I disagree. It is nothing if it be tampered with. It is defiled by man. It becomes an abomination. Why not just leave it as Elohim made it? Why must man try to fix what is already perfect? Just leave it alone.
　

But then again, I KNOW what those rules are, as I not only studied them, I LIVE by them. See, more practical application to Jewish studies.
But then again... I'm curious to know what you think of the entirety of the Book of Esther.

　
In which sense? Would it be the part of the unruly wife that was replaced with one that did adhere to the commands of her head? Or the part of the loyalty of a jew to his captive king? Or maybe it was the fear of genocide by one who was jealous and full of pride? Or maybe it is about the casting of the lots where the day of purim was so named? There’s a lot to this book to try and discuss here. Maybe you should start another thread on the subject in which you want to know about.
　

Then obviously, you haven't studied them enough.

　
I learn something new every single day and hope to continue but as far as this issue is of concerned I have the fullest of confidence in my understanding.

 

[gwk230]

You know, those would not be separated by the idea of Mincha or Zevach.

　
What Abel offered was an animal of his flock which was not a zebach but raher a minchah. So easy even a cave man understands it.
　

Freely given offerings would be Shelomim, or Toda'ot, or Olot. Or even Nedavot.

　
Yes, a freely given zebach would be but not a freely given minchah.
　

MINCHA IS MERELY A MEAL OFFERING (outside of Genesis). But you will ignore the obvious, and cling to your misguided translation stubbornly. Ah, well.

　
Talk about stubborn. Whewwwwwww.
　
I brought light to your misguidance with my minchah of Mal 1:13
　

No, it is an ANIMAL. For ANY reason.

　
No, the zebach were as I stated.

That is because you have no clue WHAT the Hebrew word for a sacrificial present is. You have made that painfully obvious.

　
You haven’t as yet offered any factual evidential proof to the contrary. Just your say so. I have brought scores of evidence which, of course, you deny. You, on the other hand, have only really brought your own words.
　

You are playing a semantic game in English.

　
This may be some game to you and what you must be used to within the realms of christianity and judaism but I assure you that this is very serious to me. I don’t play with truth and lies when it comes to the word of Yah.
　

Why don't you use the concordinances you are so fond of, and realize that OUTSIDE OF GENESIS, a Mincha does not mean "a gift", but a meal offering? Or, will this ONE instance of being right blind you to the truth of the matter?

　
Lets see. Now remember I used the word “gift” as in “present”. To me they are kinda interchangeable though I do see different words used for each in the Hebrew. In any case lets give this a whirl……..
　
Minchah / מנחה
　
Jdg_3:15; 1Sa_10:27; 1Sa_26:19; 2Sa_8:6; 1Ki_4:21; 2Ki_8:8; 2Ki_8:9; 2Ki_17:4; 1Ch_16:29; 1Ch_18:6; 2Ch_17:5; 2Ch_17:11; 2Ch_26:8; 2Ch_32:23; Psa_72:10; Psa_96:8; Hos_10:6; Mal 1:13; Mal_2:12; Mal_3:3
　
Well the last two say nothing one way or the other as to what kind of minchah.
　

None of these words actually mean "sacrifice" or "gift" in Hebrew. These words are convenient to use in English.

　
I know this but we are speaking in English here and I am trying to explain to you something that’s Hebrew in English. This isn’t rocket science.
　

The Hebrew words referring to such "offerings" or "sacrifices" have nothing to do with a willingness to part with said offering, or one's intention, at least in the way you've been talking.

　
Nor would I expect them to. it’s a given how one would feel when they have to give up something as opposed to how they feel when they freely want to. Yah loves a cheerful giver you know.
　

Honestly - the word "gift" or "Matanot" is not used at all in reference to any offering that goes on an altar, but as a gift that is given to a Priest, for any number of reasons.

　
And “Mattan” is only used 4 times and “Mattanot” 1 in the whole of Tanach. This sort of gift expects something in return. A true minchah does not.
　

Back at you. You DO have it wrong, and you are spreading... well, I wouldn't go so far as to say lies, because that would mean that you are purposely spreading falsehoods. You are too ignorant to lie about such things.

　
LOL. I figured as with most that follow christianity and judaism that your true colors would flaunt out on the floor.
　

Hmm... So you accept the Christian Scripture as truth, though you don't believe in Christianity. Interesting.

　
What makes it christian scripture? Because man decided to call it such? You run along now and follow the crowd. I’ll sit here and wallow in what you say is ignorance with the rest of the remnant. :beach:

 

[gnostic]

I think we've strayed off-topic.

What do the distinction between offering and sacrifice, or the Hebrew word for either have to do with this topic?

How do this relate with Saul's soldiers sacrificing sheep and cattle to god, thereby disobeying god of killing everything, in 1 Samuel 15?

 

[gwk230]

I think we've strayed off-topic.

What do the distinction between offering and sacrifice, or the Hebrew word for either have to do with this topic?

How do this relate with Saul's soldiers sacrificing sheep and cattle to god, thereby disobeying god of killing everything, in 1 Samuel 15?

Well we have strayed a little here and there but for the most part we have stayed just within the lines. There is a lot to do with the thoughts and feelings of men when it comes to the obedience or disobedience to the commands of Elohim.

 

[Poisonshady313]

　
What are they and where are they found in the Torah?　

Omer (Leviticus 23: 9-13)

Sotah (Numbers 5:15)

Chotay (Leviticus 5:11-13)

Chavitin (Leviticus 6:12-16)

Chinuch (Leviticus 12-16)

Nesachim (Numbers 28:5-8)

Nesachim Omer (Leviticus 23:16)

 

[Poisonshady313]

　　
I agree that a slaughter, as a noun, is exactly what a animal Minchah is. Not a zebach or sacrifice. I have realized this distinction all along.

The use of Minchah in Malachi 1:13 is called a sacrifice.


You bring the stolen and the lame, and the sick, and bring it as an offering - shall I accept it from your hand? says the Lord. Cursed be the charlatan who has a superior ram in his flock, but vows and sacrifices a blemished animal to the Lord.

Of course... the word Mincha is used in 1:11 to refer to solely to meal offerings.

What I'm gathering is, that typically, as Harmonious stated, a mincha is a meal offering. However, the few exceptions have the word "mincha" being used interchangeably with Qorban... which is to say, having nothing to do with whether or not it was freely given.

Offer:
To put forward for consideration.

This does not speak of whether this putting forward was done freely or by obligation.. as a sin atonement or as a gift.

 

[gwk230]

The use of Minchah in Malachi 1:13 is called a sacrifice.
You bring the stolen and the lame, and the sick, and bring it as an offering - shall I accept it from your hand? says the Lord. Cursed be the charlatan who has a superior ram in his flock, but vows and sacrifices a blemished animal to the Lord.
Of course... the word Mincha is used in 1:11 to refer to solely to meal offerings.
What I'm gathering is, that typically, as Harmonious stated, a mincha is a meal offering. However, the few exceptions have the word "mincha" being used interchangeably with Qorban... which is to say, having nothing to do with whether or not it was freely given.
Offer:
To put forward for consideration.
This does not speak of whether this putting forward was done freely or by obligation.. as a sin atonement or as a gift.

　
Because it is known by anyone who knows Hebrew that it is what it means.
　
The word “sacrifices” that you have from 1:14 is the Hebrew word “Zabach” which simply means “to slaughter”. It does not imply it is a sacrifice.

 

[gwk230]

Omer (Leviticus 23: 9-13)
Sotah (Numbers 5:15)
Chotay (Leviticus 5:11-13)
Chavitin (Leviticus 6:12-16)
Chinuch (Leviticus 12-16)
Nesachim (Numbers 28:5-8)
Nesachim Omer (Leviticus 23:16)

　
Well lets see what your guys say about all that………….Emphasis mine ………
　

The Korban Minchah​

(Part 1)
(Adapted mainly from the Seifer ha'Chinuch)​

Perhaps the flour-offering is called Minchah, the Chinuch suggests, because it is the least costly of all the Korbanos, much like a small gift, which translates as 'minchah'. Or perhaps it is because it often comes as a voluntary Korban, and what one gives voluntarily is often referred to as a Minchah, too.
All types of Menachos (flour-offerings) are Kodesh Kodshim (the highest level of sanctity), and can therefore only be eaten in the Azarah by male Kohanim.

*​

http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/chrysler/archives/tzav63.htm
　
See even by this we see that “minchah” means gift which one gives voluntarily. That said, I do concede that there are those certain obligatory menachos which, as is already stated, was so small and such a low cost that it was considered a small gift even though it really isn’t a minchah at all but just considered it because it is so small of an offering.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

No, I don't like it, and I can't imagine any meaning of justice in which it is just to slaughter little babies because of something their ancestors did, can you?

Is killing an innocent baby always unjustified?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

At least the Encarta article he mentions has the decency to define genocide:

"Genocide, crime of destroying or conspiring to destroy a group of people because of their ethnic, national, racial, or religious identity."

Based on this definition, and contrary to the article written by that Christian Think Tank, the Amalekites were the victims of genocide.

They were:
1) A group of people
2) who were murdered because of their ethnic/national identity

You are seriously misinformed (maybe reading the article more closely would help). The action against the Amelekites was due to their actions against Israel and God and not because of who they were.