ha‘almah harah: "a young woman is pregnant"

[CMike]

Jesus would fall into this category.

Deuteronomy - Chapter 13 (Parshah Re'eh) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

 

[sincerly]

You haven't said anything.

Tribal lineage goes solely by the father.

I am a jewish priest because my father was a jewish priest.

I'm taking a guess that Levite is a levite because his father was a levite.

We practice this today.

Once again, it's extremely arrogant that you (an outsider) are telling us what are laws are.

Hi Mike, because your father was a priest, you are a priest. and that would make your tribal lineage from Levi--- from whom came Aaron, Meriam and Moses.

 

[CMike]

Oy veh

 

[sincerly]

Mike, Jesus was caught by a great multitude from the priests, elders on the Mt of Olives(Gethsemane) where HE had gone to Pray. Jesus was tried before the High Priest and Sanhedrin(?) before taken to Pilate where they demanded the Death of Jesus even though Pilate saw no guilt in HIM and he(Pilate) then offered one who was guilty to be set free as was the custom in place of Jesus. The condemnation was by those who demanded by mob out cry---"crucify HIM". (Actually, that was the sentence imposed by every sinner.)

Without HIS death and Resurrection, ALL would be subject to death---a future of dust/ashes.

Jesus would fall into this category.

Deuteronomy - Chapter 13 (Parshah Re'eh) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

Hi Mike, My comments is the only one your reply could possibly be referencing.
With the Rejection of Jesus by the priests/scribes/pharisees/etc, it is the only charge that the leaders of Judaism could arouse the people to accept and support even though they had to secure false witnesses to bare in their anger at Jesus exposure of their corruption.
It started with the same corruption seen in the two kingdoms after splitting into the Northern and Southern Kingdoms.
Tell me! How many kings were there of the two kingdoms who were totally submissive to the GOD of the Universe? How many were not making offerings to the "gods" of the heathen about them? Those Scriptures are open for all to see.

The ones who were to be the recipients of Deut.13 were the very ones who were and had lead the Israelites/people astray.
AS the People attested, Jesus "taught with authority"---showing where the leaders were disobedient to that adding/diminishing of the "Thus saith the Lord GOD".

Since GOD is GOD, which is imperative to one's salvation according to the Scriptures---national pride OR Obedience to the GOD who is the Author of those Scriptures.

 

[Levite]

Oy veh

You could say that twice.

 

[dantech]

Hi Dan, No! your conclusion/supposition is erroneous.

The Creator GOD gave mitsvah=commandments
chuqqah=statutes, ordinance
torah=laws
mishpat=judgments
peh=precepts
etc,
with some overlapping meanings/usages. Some of these words referred to from GOD and to being from man . Context deciding. Also, whether for specific purposes or of limited duration.

"My Scriptures"? I believe those given/written by GOD and given by GOD via the Prophets for the admonition and learning of mankind as to the right relationship of man to GOD and his fellow Beings.

Yes/No, I see the whole earthly Sanctuary system as abolished, because it was patterned ofter the one in heaven and the one righteous Sacrifice came from heaven and fulfilled its symbolic meaning.
The Dietary laws, the health/sanitary laws/ the civil legal laws/etc. are still present.

I don't at all understand what you are saying here...

Just answer this question with a yes or no please.
Do you follow any laws written in the Torah that are not part of the 10 commandments?

 

[Sleeppy]

This is what happens when you have no clue of the context and you are trying to create passages that in no way deal with the issue you want it to deal with.

G-D is saying that "a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife" and they create a child together.

I don't get how you feel that has anything to do with the issue.




This has to do with the laws of inheritance.

The link below has the passage straight form the Torah.

Numbers - Chapter 27 (Parshah Pinchas) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

The daughters of Zelophehad's father died and there were no brothers. During the current law the inheritance would go to the uncle.

However, they appealed to Moses. Moses first said no, and then brought it before G-D. G-D overruled Moses.

This deals strictly with the laws of inheritance and is not about tribal lineage.



This is saying that if a wife's husband died, his brother is supposed to marry her.

Once again nothing to do with tribal lineage.

Below is how we know tribal lineage come solely from the father.

Numbers chapter 1

Numbers - Chapter 1 (Parshah Bamidbar) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

( had some formatting issues)

Hide
Chapter 1

1. The Lord spoke to Moses in the Sinai Desert, in the Tent of Meeting on the first day of the second month, in the second year after the exodus from the land of Egypt,

: 2. Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by families following their fathers' houses; a head count of every male according to the number of their names.


:3. From twenty years old and upwards, all who are fit to go out to the army in Israel, you shall count them by their legions you and Aaron.ג


4. With you there shall be a man from each tribe, one who is head of his father's house.



:16. These were the ones summoned by the congregation, the princes of the tribes of their fathers; they are the heads of the thousands of Israel.



18. and they assembled all the congregation on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees according to their families according to their fathers' houses; according to the number of names, a head count of every male from twenty years old and upward.יח


20. This was [the sum of] the children of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army.



:22. Of the tribe of Simeon, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; his tally, according to the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army.


:24. Of the tribe of Gad, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army.כד. לִבְנֵי גָד תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:

1) Not all marriages result in childbirth. Marriage is the act of becoming, and being as one flesh.

2) How are you separating tribal inheritance from tribal lineage? God gave the daughters of Zelophehad the inheritance of their tribe, though they themselves were not of their father's tribe? And Joshua mentioned them among the fathers?

3) The entire point was to maintain tribal inheritance. The heads of every household were men; the fathers, and daughters married between tribes. Hence, Zelophehad's daughters were required to marry within their own tribe, in order to retain tribal inheritance. If they hadn't, as was their concern to Moses and to God, they would be required to assume the tribe of their husbands, relinquish their inheritance, and discontinue the tribe of their father.

4) According to marriage; according to God, the daughters of Zelophehad are rightful heirs, because they are the result of one joined flesh. And they themselves are that joined flesh.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Reference?

Genesis 2:24 'Therefore doth a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife, and they have become one flesh.'

Josua 17:1-6 The daughters of Zelophehad inherited tribal rights and retained them by their cousins.

They said, 'Why should our father's name disappear from among our family? Allow his brothers to raise up sons on his behalf.'

It is clearly not at all obvious to you.

It's all very obvious.

What is obvious is that you haven't a clue what you're reading. Genesis 2:24 is irrelevant to the question and the story about Zelophehad, if anything, emphasizes the patrilineal character of tribe. Just what is there about "Why should our father's name" and "Allow his brothers to raise up sons on his behalf" that is so difficult for you to comprehend? Further ...

The line of descent for monarchs and main personalities is almost exclusively through males. Tribal descent, such as whether one is a kohen or a Levite, is still inherited patrilineally in Judaism, as is communal identity as a Sephardi or Ashkenazi. This contrasts with the rule for inheritance of Jewish status in Orthodox and Conservative Judaism, which is matrilineal. Karaite Judaism interprets the Tanakh to indicate that Jewish status is only inherited patrilineally. See Davidic line and Matrilineality in Judaism. [source]

Now stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Sleeppy]

What is obvious is that you haven't a clue what you're reading. Genesis 2:24 is irrelevant to the question and the story about Zelophehad, if anything, emphasizes the patrilineal character of tribe. Just what is there about "Why should our father's name" and "Allow his brothers to raise up sons on his behalf" that is so difficult for you to comprehend? Further ...

​

Now stop embarrassing yourself.

How could I be embarassing myself? You've supported everything I've said. And your bolded red are the words of my summary. Notice these are the daughters speaking. And their names are what upheld their father's name and tribe, by the sons of their uncles. So when you read their father's name, and the names of the other heads of that family and tribe, it isn't possible to omit them.

You misunderstand marriage, however. Marriage has everything to do with what we're talking about. Hence, a man, before raising legal sons to his deceased brother, must marry the widow. So you tell me; if the brother is deceased and his wife is married again, how is the deceased claiming children?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

How could I be embarassing myself? You've supported everything I've said. And your bolded red are the words of my summary. Notice these are the daughters speaking. And their names are what upheld their father's name and tribe, by the sons of their uncles. So when you read their father's name, and the names of the other heads of that family and tribe, it isn't possible to omit them.

You misunderstand marriage, however. Marriage has everything to do with what we're talking about. Hence, a man, before raising legal sons to his deceased brother, must marry the widow. So you tell me; if the brother is deceased and his wife is married again, how is the deceased claiming children?

The brother would have the same lineage as the deceased husband.

 

[CMike]

1) Not all marriages result in childbirth. Marriage is the act of becoming, and being as one flesh.

Not all people get married one either.

The one flesh is taking about a child.

2) How are you separating tribal inheritance from tribal lineage? God gave the daughters of Zelophehad the inheritance of their tribe, though they themselves were not of their father's tribe? And Joshua mentioned them among the fathers?

3) The entire point was to maintain tribal inheritance. The heads of every household were men; the fathers, and daughters married between tribes. Hence, Zelophehad's daughters were required to marry within their own tribe, in order to retain tribal inheritance. If they hadn't, as was their concern to Moses and to God, they would be required to assume the tribe of their husbands, relinquish their inheritance, and discontinue the tribe of their father.

4) According to marriage; according to God, the daughters of Zelophehad are rightful heirs, because they are the result of one joined flesh. And they themselves are that joined flesh.

I am not seperating anything.

I am telling you jewish law based on what G-D told the Jews from in the Torah and which has been practiced by thousands of years by jews.


The case of the daughters of Zelophehad dealt with a very specific case that had to do with inheritance.

It has NOTHING to do with tribal lineage.

Tribal lineage only goes through the father, as I showed, from Numbers Chapter 1.

Mary had no tribal lineage.

Jesus' tribal lineage is unknown, which would make him an Israelite, into the general population.

Therefore, he doesn't fulfill the prophesy of being a descendent of David.

 

[Sleeppy]

Not all people get married one either.

The one flesh is taking about a child.


I am not seperating anything.

I am telling you jewish law based on what G-D told the Jews from in the Torah and which has been practiced by thousands of years by jews.


The case of the daughters of Zelophehad dealt with a very specific case that had to do with inheritance.

It has NOTHING to do with tribal lineage.

Tribal lineage only goes through the father, as I showed, from Numbers Chapter 1.

Mary had no tribal lineage.

Jesus' tribal lineage is unknown, which would make him an Israelite, into the general population.

Therefore, he doesn't fulfill the prophesy of being a descendent of David.

1) The 'one flesh' is referring to 'they'. It's the definition of marriage and childbirth.

2) You've turned the law into a tradition that disregards the intent. If you were keeping the covenant, shouldn't God give you the land of that covenant? And guard His own house from idolatry and destruction?

3) It had everything to do with tribal lineage, which is why they were required to marry within their tribe.

4) Mary had a father. He and his fathers were of David; of Judah. Mary was married to Joseph, of David; of Judah. Their son, like Joseph, was of Judah.

 

[CMike]

1) The 'one flesh' is referring to 'they'. It's the definition of marriage and childbirth.

Yes, they create a child.

Man=1
woman=1

They create a child together= .5 + .5=1

2) You've turned the law into a tradition that disregards the intent. If you were keeping the covenant, shouldn't God give you the land of that covenant? And guard His own house from idolatry and destruction?

Now you are telling jews the intent of their laws? :slap:

I don't udnerstand the rest of your point.

3) It had everything to do with tribal lineage, which is why they were required to marry within their tribe.

They are not required to marry within the tribe.

Since the tribes at the time hung out together, they prefer the money stay within the trible.

What is difficult to understand?

The daughters issue dealt with getting inheritance when there were no siblings. That's it.

I quoted you already from Numbers chapter 1 that says that tribal lineage goes soley by the father.

Did you read it?

4) Mary had a father. He and his fathers were of David; of Judah. Mary was married to Joseph, of David; of Judah. Their son, like Joseph, was of Judah.

It's irrelevant.

Jesus tribal lineage went only by his father...whomever he may be.

Since we don't know he was considered part of the general population.

 

[CMike]

Hi Mike, My comments is the only one your reply could possibly be referencing.
With the Rejection of Jesus by the priests/scribes/pharisees/etc, it is the only charge that the leaders of Judaism could arouse the people to accept and support even though they had to secure false witnesses to bare in their anger at Jesus exposure of their corruption.
It started with the same corruption seen in the two kingdoms after splitting into the Northern and Southern Kingdoms.
Tell me! How many kings were there of the two kingdoms who were totally submissive to the GOD of the Universe? How many were not making offerings to the "gods" of the heathen about them? Those Scriptures are open for all to see.

The ones who were to be the recipients of Deut.13 were the very ones who were and had lead the Israelites/people astray.
AS the People attested, Jesus "taught with authority"---showing where the leaders were disobedient to that adding/diminishing of the "Thus saith the Lord GOD".

Since GOD is GOD, which is imperative to one's salvation according to the Scriptures---national pride OR Obedience to the GOD who is the Author of those Scriptures.

Jews had not choice but to reject jesus' self claim to being a god.

G-D stated there is only him. He said worship him.

He said anyone else that claims that he is a god or who asks you to worship other gods should be stoned without mercy.

He said don't worship gods that you don't know.

Jesus was a false prophet. According to jewish law those who asked jews to worship jesus should have been stoned without mercy. That's what Deuterenomy 13 says.

That said at that time there was no jewish court in session because of the Roman occupation.

Jesus may be the christian god but he has nothing to do with the Torah, the G-D of the jews, or anything else having to do with Judaism or jewish law.

 

[Sleeppy]

Yes, they create a child.

Man=1
woman=1

They create a child together= .5 + .5=1




Now you are telling jews the intent of their laws? :slap:

I don't udnerstand the rest of your point.



They are not required to marry within the tribe.

Since the tribes at the time hung out together, they prefer the money stay within the trible.

What is difficult to understand?

The daughters issue dealt with getting inheritance when there were no siblings. That's it.

I quoted you already from Numbers chapter 1 that says that tribal lineage goes soley by the father.

Did you read it?



It's irrelevant.

Jesus tribal lineage went only by his father...whomever he may be.

Since we don't know he was considered part of the general population.

1) Marriage isn't defined by childbirth. Childbirth is defined by marriage.

2) What prevents me from knowing the intent, whereas you do? Which of the fathers after Adam gave you exclusive rights to God's law?

3) God said He would keep the covenant forever, if it could be kept. How much of it is kept?

4) We've both read Numbers. And not only the numbers, but His words too. They put a few daughters after their father, in his tribal lineage.

5) Mary married Joseph, of Judah. Jesus' legal fathers consist of both Mary's fathers and Joseph's fathers.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

How could I be embarassing myself?

Yet again the Dunning-Kruger effect raises its silly little head ...

 

[CMike]

1) Marriage isn't defined by childbirth. Childbirth is defined by marriage.

I didn't say it was. I was referring to the passage that you quoted.

2) What prevents me from knowing the intent, whereas you do? Which of the fathers after Adam gave you exclusive rights to God's law?

Because you have no clue what you are talking about.

You haven't bothered to study the context.

You just found a passage that has to do with women, and them getting inheritance, and you are trying to make it fit into what you want it to fit into.

It doesn't.

3) God said He would keep the covenant forever, if it could be kept. How much of it is kept?

How much can G-D keep? All of it.

4) We've both read Numbers. And not only the numbers, but His words too. They put a few daughters after their father, in his tribal lineage.

Whose words?

No they didn't put the daughters in his tribal lineage.

They allowed the daughters to get the inheritance of their father.

That's all that story has to deal with.

Numbers Chapter 1 makes it clear that tribal lineage goes solely by the father.

5) Mary married Joseph, of Judah. Jesus' legal fathers consist of both Mary's fathers and Joseph's fathers .

It almost gives me a headache trying to figure out what you are saying.

Mary is irrelevant to tribal lineage.

Jesus' father is unknown. Therefore, he was considered an Israelite and has no trible.

A grandfather is not a father.

 

[Sleeppy]

Yet again the Dunning-Kruger effect raises its silly little head ...

You've taken the time to read wikipedia and post it.. But, what is it worth? Is it proven?

 

[Sleeppy]

I didn't say it was. I was referring to the passage that you quoted.



Because you have no clue what you are talking about.

You haven't bothered to study the context.

You just found a passage that has to do with women, and them getting inheritance, and you are trying to make it fit into what you want it to fit into.

It doesn't.



How much can G-D keep? All of it.



Whose words?

No they didn't put the daughters in his tribal lineage.

They allowed the daughters to get the inheritance of their father.

That's all that story has to deal with.

Numbers Chapter 1 makes it clear that tribal lineage goes solely by the father.



It almost gives me a headache trying to figure out what you are saying.

Mary is irrelevant to tribal lineage.

Jesus' father is unknown. Therefore, he was considered an Israelite and has no trible.

A grandfather is not a father.

1) Actually, I have studied the original context. And I summarised it.

Providing me with shallow denunciations doesn't do much for either of us.

2) And yet much of it is not kept, til this day. God's keeping of the covenant depends on what? You say you keep, and are the sole interpreters. What are you not doing right?

3) Tribal lineage is inherited by the 'one flesh', from the head of that marriage, which would be the man; the husband; the father. You can't omit women from the entire equation because men are put over women. This is the reason the daughters of Zelophehad received an inheritence from God; because they were, and were to remain of their father's tribe.

4) Again, Mary was the wife of Joseph. Joseph was Jesus' legal father.

5) A grandfather is a father. Are we called the grandsons of the Most High, or simply sons?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yet again the Dunning-Kruger effect raises its silly little head ...

You've taken the time to read wikipedia and post it.. But, what is it worth? Is it proven?

As I was saying ...