To my Jewish friends on this forum...

[Jayhawker Soule]

Oh there's no hiding my affiliation with the Urantia Book, I talk about it all the time on RF.

Yes

 

[Colt]

If you are talking about Mosheh ben-Amram, let's just say he spoke the following:

View attachment 68775

View attachment 68776

View attachment 68777

Calling what he spoke (עברית ישראלי) Ivrith Yisraeli and also the dialects of Kemetic would be an accurate description of the langauges of his time. And, again if we are talking Mosheh ben-Amram then this discussion in the below video would have been clear to him.

Thanks. You make a good point about the Aramaic to Greek. Christians who get picky about translations from Greek to English overlook the Aramaic to Greek. Moses would have predated the Biblical Hebrew used in the books finalized during the Babylonian captivity by 1000+ years. He likely spoke a dialect of Palio Hebrew.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

He likely spoke a dialect of Palio Hebrew.

Palio-Hebrew is not a language. It is a script. It is also a modern western term.

For example, I can look at something written in the Paleo-Hebrew script and understand it because it is (עברית) and it follows the same linquistic rules used in all Jewish and Samaritan communities for thousands of years non-stop and without break.

The challenge that Western scholars have is in defining what is an Israeli text vs. a non-Israeli text from the same region, based on western definitions and terms.

 

[Alien826]

It would be like us saying that the Allied Forces were war-mongering nations when they attacked German forces. Seems like a twisting to me and a lack of critical thinking. Now... "modern-day anti-Christian God view?" yes.. .that would nail it.

Perhaps a better example would be someone who says something like "Nazis were evil and the allies were good, no exceptions". Then he is confronted with the carpet bombing of Dresden.

 

[Alien826]

Palio-Hebrew is not a language. It is a script. It is also a modern western term.

The above is just a hook to address you. I'm referring to everything you have written, and most of which I've read.

I have no doubt that you are unbelievably knowledgeable in this subject. That no doubt reflects a lifetime of study. What I am asking though is the implications of that. Are you saying ...

1. You are the be all and end all authority on Jewish scripture and nobody that doesn't have the same level of expertise should have an opinion?
2. You are an expert because you can read Hebrew and anyone who can't is not an expert by definition?
3. You are only claiming expertise in the translation of the actual words?

What bothers me is that what you say about expertise is fair enough, but if we applied this approach to every subject, then there would be little discussion, just accepting the dictates of experts. Even setting aside the fact that experts often disagree (and I'm not setting it aside in general), it's quite possible to sometimes form a reasonable opinion without a lifetime of study. I'll give an example, then ask two questions.

I receive a weekly Da'var (sp?) by Email from a Rabbi. In it he has claimed that "the Rabbis" say the following. The tablets on which the ten commandments were handed down were not two "gravestones" as often depicted, but a cube where the words went all the way through and could be read from both sides. This required two miracles. The words appeared the same from both sides, one side was not laterally inverted. And "dots" hung unsupported in the air. I challenged him (he will reply to friendly questions) as this seemed to be ridiculous, and he admitted that some of these statements were less likely to be literally true than others. My questions follow.

1. Was I, a relatively untutored person on this subject, entitled to an opinion?
2. Out of interest, what is your take on it?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

1. You are the be all and end all authority on Jewish scripture and nobody that doesn't have the same level of expertise should have an opinion?

The reality is that anyone in the world can have any opinion they like or want, and no Torath Mosheh Jew is going to tell someone what opinions they should and shouldn't have.

That being said, if you go by the OP of this thread a very specific question was asked to the Jews on RF about a very specific topic. So, anything I post in this thread is directly concerning that issue mentioned in the OP.

In terms of expertise, there is another reality that seems to be ignored sometimes. That is that the vast majority of Jews on RF and in the world are not trying to convince Christians to convert out of Christianity. There are though very well funding Christian organizations that have an established mission to convert Jews to Christianity.

Lastly, to rephrase your statement so it meets with the reality.

"For Torath Mosheh Jews and Orthodox Jews the be all and end all authority on Jewish scripture, is the Hebrew Torah, the Hebrew Tanakh, and the mesoreth we received from thousands of years of Israeli/Jewish history in Hebrew and Aramaic. Someone who doesn't have the level of expertise specified in both the Written Torah and the Oral Torah is someone who Hashem commanded Torath Mosheh Jews to ignore, as specified in the Hebrew or Yeshayahu 8:20."​

2. You are an expert because you can read Hebrew and anyone who can't is not an expert by definition?

I will repharse your statement.

"Ehav4Ever and all the Jews on RF who know Hebrew, in its varioius dialects and stages in history, know the Hebrew language because we a) learned it from an Israeli/Jewish chain of transmission that goes back thousands of years, b) we learned from experts who grew up interacting with the vast Israeli/Jewish based knowledge of our ancestral language, c) because most of us interact with ancient and modern Hebrew daily as a spoken, read, and written language, and d) because it is our ancestral language. Thus, from the time a Torath Mosheh Jew is about 3 years old until we pass away we learn with experts, become experts (daily), and we train our chidren to be experts in the ancestral language of our people. Someone who has not taken part in such a process if of course someone who cannot claim to know Hebrew nor know what is actually written in a Hebrew text of any period."​

3. You are only claiming expertise in the translation of the actual words?

The best way for someone to determine what I do and don't know is to test me on it. You are correct, I could easily be claiming to do something I can't do. Yet, I would also suggest that I have been on RF long enough to have built up a reputation for being more than willing to show my sources for someone I claim. Yet, there is no requirement for anyone to take my word for it. People should challenge anything and everything that they can't prove to be true.

What bothers me is that what you say about expertise is fair enough, but if we applied this approach to every subject, then there would be little discussion, just accepting the dictates of experts.

Another way you can look at it is like this. If I need to get some serious auto-work done on my car which will either make my car safe to drive or dangerous to drive I can:

1. Seek out the expertise from someone who has a proven track record to successfully work on cars, and the correct and current credentials to work on cars.
2. Seek out someone who, by their own admission, knows nothing about cars - has never driven one and has no idea where the engine is.

Personally, if I am going to have a discussion with someone on the topic of auto work and safety it is only going to be with someone who has something valid to say about said topics. Thus, I am going to have that discussion with the person represented in #1. I could easily, for the sake of wasting time, discuss the issue with #2 but that would be foolish for me to waste my time if the person is trying to claim to know how to repair a car while also admitting they don't know cars. On my part, if I rely on their advice I am going to probably involved in a major and fatal accident.

Even setting aside the fact that experts often disagree (and I'm not setting it aside in general), it's quite possible to sometimes form a reasonable opinion without a lifetime of study. I'll give an example, then ask two questions.

I receive a weekly Da'var (sp?) by Email from a Rabbi. In it he has claimed that "the Rabbis" say the following. The tablets on which the ten commandments were handed down were not two "gravestones" as often depicted, but a cube where the words went all the way through and could be read from both sides. This required two miracles. The words appeared the same from both sides, one side was not laterally inverted. And "dots" hung unsupported in the air. I challenged him (he will reply to friendly questions) as this seemed to be ridiculous, and he admitted that some of these statements were less likely to be literally true than others. My questions follow.

1. Was I, a relatively untutored person on this subject, entitled to an opinion?
2. Out of interest, what is your take on it?

As to question #1, if you receive such a mailing I am going to assume that you requested it or accepted it and said rabbi, whoever he is, did not force you to accept the mailing. Thus, you are at all times free to have your own opinion.

Further, based on your description the rabbi you describe did not state that you had to accept what you were told. I.e. your first question should have been which rabbis state this, where did they get such information, and what is the meaning of such an element of reality - if it were true? In terms of it being ridiculous you can say that the entire account of how the Torah was received is ridiculous. So, if how the Torah was received has a kernal of truth to it then one can assume that a description of how the (לוחות) actually looked, in reality based on the statements of certain rabbis could also have a kernal of truth. That being said, the Hebrew Torah is not the source of most westerners get the tombstone image from. Most of them get it from Christian artists and not from the Hebrew texts.

My take on it is covered in what I wrote above.

 

[dybmh]

.

He once said to Thomas: “My people take themselves too seriously; they are just about devoid of an appreciation of humor. The burdensome religion of the Pharisees could never have had origin among a people with a sense of humor. They also lack consistency; they strain at gnats and swallow camels.”

And he continued... "Which reminds me, have I ever told you the one about the tall pharisee on shallow camel?"

 

[dybmh]

Did Moses speak Hebrew?

( A literal reading of Exodus 2 has Moses being raised by his sister and mother until he was "grown" "יוַיִּגְדַּ֣ל")

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No I cannot prove it but I hear it is unreasonable from a phychological perspective to say that so many followers of Jesus experiences the resurrected Jesus and heard Him speak and say Him ascend etc.
Yet the Hebrew prophecies from what I see, do point to Jesus being the only possible candidate for the Messiah, and other having come too late. And of course I see Jesus having fulfilled prophecies with His dying and rising. But all this is just silly talk for a Jew who has learned that these things in the Hebrew scriptures have to mean something else.

There is a real psychological phenomenon known as bereavement hallucinations. It's actually fairly common.

Al Halaj was a Sufi mystic who said many of the same things Jesus is reputed to have said. He was executed by the religious authorities for blasphemy. Many people claimed to have seen him after his death. Now, are you going to believe that he was resurrected based on those testimonies? Because there is really no difference here.

 

[Brian2]

What you wrote sounds like the same thing to me. The authors of the gospels appear to make it clear that jesus intentially stated things in order for them not to be understood.

This seems to be alluded to in the gospel of Thomas.

View attachment 68770

That is a gnositc gospel with secret knowledge that only the enlightened can understand.
However in the real gospels do say that Jesus spoke in parables so that some would not understand what He was on about.

 

[Brian2]

Your assumption is interesting. Especially given I have made no assumptions about you.

Please be aware, it was an offer. You could have just said no thanks. You are not the first RF's that I offered this to who had their reasons they didn't want to do it. There was one RF who did a few years ago, and it was great experience.

BTW, if you read what I wrote you would know that I offered to go through ALL ancient Hebrew texts and not just Masoretic ones, Torath Mosheh Jews use all ancient Hebrew texts in a matter like this and not just one type. i.e. as we all know Masoretic means with vowel points and grammer marks added. This means that I have no problem going to the Torah Scrolls (w/o vowels and punctiation) Samaritan Torah, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.

The following may help.

Great video, very informative and easy to follow.
Sometimes in your videos I find it hard to hear what you are saying but I think that may be more to do with the audio on my computer than with the volume in your videos.
Sometimes it is the speed you speak which can make it hard to keep up with what you are saying.

 

[idea]

When I say "lean unto my own understanding" I mean forming an opinion without consideration of others input. It seems at least for me that more often than not groups and books cross my path without me choosing the path that they cross that I happen to be on. Sometimes to my delight sometimes to my chagrin. The challenge is in paying attention with integrity to what has crossed your path.



I don't know that I would say admire. Many people leave their faith for the wrong reasons. Its too hard, too unrealistic, too against what I feel I want to do etc.
But I understand what your saying. It is an admirable thing to have the strength of character to be able to follow perceived truth where ever it may lead.

I think opinions are a given for all, it's holding onto them when new evidence suggests otherwise that is the problem. Grasping, clinging being stuck is an end to growth/life/learning and the start of stagnation/death.

I should clarify, stick with it to mastery, study deeply, but hold no loyalty to arms of flesh. It's groupthink that is dangerous, following any political or religious leaders leads to tribaliam/group think/ bias / favoritism/ wars - to change faiths, hold to principles above people, always remain detached from groups, ready to walk away, remain independent of tribalism.

All genealogy, Jewish, gentile, "chosen" - principles of inclusion, justice, love tell me to avoid groups or thinking/labeling anyone from any group.

If Jewish people are against racism, seems like they stop identifying with their race. Seems like everyone should stop any this group or that group stuff, we're all humans.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

That is a gnositc gospel with secret knowledge that only the enlightened can understand.
However in the real gospels do say that Jesus spoke in parables so that some would not understand what He was on about.

And who decided that it was to be defined as Gnostic gospel and that Gnostic was not an authoritative text? Also, what evidence do you have that the gospels currently found in the NT are not themselves Gnostic?

Who decided what was a real gospel and what was not? What are the names of the Jews who were involved in this process of deciding?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

However in the real gospels do say that Jesus spoke in parables so that some would not understand what He was on about.

I agree with your statement here.

 

[InChrist]

Well let's look at what the messiah is supposed to due, which is basically reign during the idyllic messianice era. He is to usher in an era of worldwide peace (Jesus didn't). He will bring all the Jews back to the Land of Israel (Jesus didn't). He will rule from Jerusalem (Jesus didn't). Is this making sense to you?

Thank you for sharing your view.
Yes, it does make sense, except for the other prophecies that appear to reveal another purpose of the Messiah.
I am of the perspective that the messianic prophecies have dual fulfillment; first that He would come as the Lamb of God, be sacrificed for the sins of the world, and bring spiritual peace and atonement between humanity and God (Isaiah 53; Psalm 22, etc.)... then return again to bring all Jews back to the land of Israel, rule from Jerusalem, and bring in the millennial kingdom of world peace.
I assume that doesn’t make sense to you, though, so I’ll respect that and end there because this probably isn’t the thread for further discussion/debate about it.
Thanks again.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Thank you for sharing your view.
Yes, it does make sense, except for the other prophecies that appear to reveal another purpose of the Messiah.
I am of the perspective that the messianic prophecies have dual fulfillment; first that He would come as the Lamb of God, be sacrificed for the sins of the world, and bring spiritual peace and atonement between humanity and God (Isaiah 53; Psalm 22, etc.)... then return again to bring all Jews back to the land of Israel, rule from Jerusalem, and bring in the millennial kingdom of world peace.
I assume that doesn’t make sense to you, though, so I’ll respect that and end there because this probably isn’t the thread for further discussion/debate about it.
Thanks again.

Hello my friend. Thank you for replying. Unfortunately, the two references you gave for messianic prophecies are not about the Messiah at all. The servant in Isaiah 53 is Israel, and Psalm 22 is talking about David. There is nothing in the Tanakh to indicate there are two messiahs (or one messiah coming two times). You don't find that idea until Christianity.

 

[Colt]

And who decided that it was to be defined as Gnostic gospel and that Gnostic was not an authoritative text? Also, what evidence do you have that the gospels currently found in the NT are not themselves Gnostic?

Who decided what was a real gospel and what was not? What are the names of the Jews who were involved in this process of deciding?

You have a legitimate point, clearly the NT gospels aren't documents of perfection, but religion itself develops in a realm of its own. It's not the product of historians, philosophers or scientist. All of the OT scriptures are retrospectives written long after the events depicted. What did Abraham write 5-6 centuries before Moses? What scriptures, customs, traditions and laws did the Israelites use for 400+ years in Egypt? Where are the stone tablets that God supposedly wrote with his own finger that were smashed and rewritten again??? If Moses wrote any of the scriptures, then who had possession of them for 1000 years before they became fixed in their present form???

 

[Ehav4Ever]

What did Abraham write 5-6 centuries before Moses?

If you are speaking of Avraham ben-Terahh. What he wrote, during his time, exist today in the form of restatement of that information. It is found in a text known as (ספר יצירה). Since there was no requirement to maintain the original or even exact copies of, the main of the information is what Israelis/Jews preserved throughout our history.

What scriptures, customs, traditions and laws did the Israelites use for 400+ years in Egypt?

There was no concept of a "scripture" in Israeli/Jewish culture during the time you are talking about. Again, you have to remember that that is a "western" term. An Israeli/Jew from ancient times would have used a number of words to describe what had been textually and orally received from previous generations.

In terms of customs and traditions, that is easy. From the time of Avraham ben-Terahh until the time when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the customs/traditions of the Avraham ben-Terahh, his son Yitzhhaq ben Avraham ben-Terahh, Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhhaq ben-Avraham ben-Terahh, and the descendents of Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhhaq ben-Avraham ben-Terahh were the following:

1. The 7 mitzvoth/Noachide laws.
2. Brith Milah on the 8th day for males.
3. Prayer during Shahhrith (morning), Minhhah (afternoon), and Arvith (night).

A better way of putting it is, the the three above items were their "culture" and the the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the 613 mitzvoth of the written and oral Torah of Hashem became the culture of all Torath Mosheh Israelis.

Where are the stone tablets that God supposedly wrote with his own finger that were smashed and rewritten again??? If Moses wrote any of the scriptures, then who had possession of them for 1000 years before they became fixed in their present form???

Because the tablets were not ever the central focus, and instead the entire written Torah, when the 1st Temple was destroyed there are some who claim the tablets were hidden with the Aron. Since the written and oral Torah were the required method for all generations, not matter the circumstances that was what was protected to make sure that the actions of the Torah would continue.

According to us Torath Mosheh Jews, Karaites, and Samaritans Mosheh ben-Amram didn't write the Torah, as you may mean. He had it dictated to him by Hashem and he "transribed" what was dictated to him. According to Torath Mosheh Jews and Samaritans Mosheh ben-Amram made 13 copies of the Torah he transcribed and gave a copy to each leader of each of the 12 tribes with one being kept in the MIshkan. From there, copies were made from those 12 and transmitted in every generation to every individual Israeli. Thus, the reason that modern day Torah scrolls are 98% to 99% the same when compared to Hebrew texts between displaced Jewish communities and Jewish texts from more than 2,500 years ago.

The following may help:

 

[Colt]

If you are speaking of Avraham ben-Terahh. What he wrote, during his time, exist today in the form of restatement of that information. It is found in a text known as (ספר יצירה). Since there was no requirement to maintain the original or even exact copies of, the main of the information is what Israelis/Jews preserved throughout our history.



There was no concept of a "scripture" in Israeli/Jewish culture during the time you are talking about. Again, you have to remember that that is a "western" term. An Israeli/Jew from ancient times would have used a number of words to describe what had been textually and orally received from previous generations.

In terms of customs and traditions, that is easy. From the time of Avraham ben-Terahh until the time when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the customs/traditions of the Avraham ben-Terahh, his son Yitzhhaq ben Avraham ben-Terahh, Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhhaq ben-Avraham ben-Terahh, and the descendents of Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhhaq ben-Avraham ben-Terahh were the following:

1. The 7 mitzvoth/Noachide laws.
2. Brith Milah on the 8th day for males.
3. Prayer during Shahhrith (morning), Minhhah (afternoon), and Arvith (night).

A better way of putting it is, the the three above items were their "culture" and the the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the 613 mitzvoth of the written and oral Torah of Hashem became the culture of all Torath Mosheh Israelis.



Because the tablets were not ever the central focus, and instead the entire written Torah, when the 1st Temple was destroyed there are some who claim the tablets were hidden with the Aron. Since the written and oral Torah were the required method for all generations, not matter the circumstances that was what was protected to make sure that the actions of the Torah would continue.

According to us Torath Mosheh Jews, Karaites, and Samaritans Mosheh ben-Amram didn't write the Torah, as you may mean. He had it dictated to him by Hashem and he "transribed" what was dictated to him. According to Torath Mosheh Jews and Samaritans Mosheh ben-Amram made 13 copies of the Torah he transcribed and gave a copy to each leader of each of the 12 tribes with one being kept in the MIshkan. From there, copies were made from those 12 and transmitted in every generation to every individual Israeli. Thus, the reason that modern day Torah scrolls are 98% to 99% the same when compared to Hebrew texts between displaced Jewish communities and Jewish texts from more than 2,500 years ago.

The following may help:

You can just use Abraham and Moses, we all know who they were.

There was NO scripture that predates Moses will do. We don't know what their beliefs, traditions, laws etc were.

The authors of the Hebrew scriptures (you know what Hebrew means right? If there are some long, important sounding words for Hebrew, just default to Hebrew, that will be fine), anyhow, the Hebrew authors appropriated existing Mesopotamian lore in the construction of their story of origins for consumption by the common believer. There is NO proof that the Torah was preserved inviolate generation after generation. Thats more of a hope and faith by those who derive their authority from the Torah as it exists today.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Do y'all get annoyed when Christians come in trying to explain your own holy scriptures to you? I see this happen all. the time. In discussions, in debates, it seems to happen a lot. I just know I'd get annoyed personally, but that's just me.

I'm a Jewish Christian as were ALL the NT writers, so no!