HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: (none)
Date: 25 Aug 1992 16:30:19 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Subject: Shunning and Psy-war
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

Bruce Benning writes:

>  I guess you have never talked to any of those children of parents
>  who disowned them because of their faith, so you are unable to
>  have an objective opinion about this.

I've met people estranged from their parents because of
their faith.  I have seen short-term disownment.


>  I suggest that by your comments
>  above, you support the use of the emotional/psychological tool of
>  -disownment- (should we say shunning?) of Jewish children who believe
>  in Yeshua. Am I correct?

Each family situation is different, and I doubt that shunning
would be effective in most cases.  But there may well be
cases where it is necessary.  Again, I'm referring to grown
children.

...
BB> Now Rob, do you want to talk about emotional/psychological warfare of
BB> this nature? [disowning, shunning, and threats thereof - RL]
BB> It does exist. How would you respond to it?

It depends on the situation and the people involved.  Sometimes
the threat of alienation is strong enough to dissuade a person
from self-destructive activity, such as conversion to Christianity
from Judaism, or intermarriage.  Sometimes the threat backfires.


>RL> Psychological warfare is one more front on which enemies do battle.
>
>  So you do believe that the use of emotional/psychological warfare of
>  this nature is proper for Jewish parents against their children. Is that
>  what your comment means?

No, it means that I don't oppose the practice.  If dropping propaganda
leaflets on an enemy city would produce the same demoralizing effects
as dropping firebombs, then I'd drop leaflets.  If disowning is
a sufficient shock to bring back one's child, then I support it,
i.e. the "Tough Love" approach.

Again, this doesn't mean that I recommend it; it makes it
easier for brainwashers to hot-box a victim and love-bomb him
with "See how your family hates you?  We really love you" when
the only real interest is chalking up another conversion.

Intentionally portraying parents as enemies is a rather standard
technique.  I wonder if such people get their mandate from Luke 12:51-3 ?

>  By your comment "enemies do battle", are you
>  inferring that the child of Jewish parents becomes their enemy when
>  the child believes in Messiah Yeshua?

Only if the child works to convert Jews to other religions.
However, the possibility of bringing one's child back to
Judaism often justifies continued contact.

>  Does this mean it is a valid
>  action for the children to use upon the parents in return?

If the threat "If you convert, you'll never see your grandchildren"
needs to be used as a last resort, it should be used.  'Shmad'
[spiritual destruction, conversion out of Judaism] is not
a matter to be taken lightly.

R
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Shunning and Psy-war
Date: 3 Sep 1992 20:46:35 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

>> ... If disowning is
>> a sufficient shock to bring back one's child, then I support it,
>> i.e. the "Tough Love" approach.
>
> What if disowning doesn't do the trick?  What's the next step?

Seek further advice.

>> Again, this doesn't mean that I recommend it; it makes it
>> easier for brainwashers to hot-box a victim and love-bomb him
>> with "See how your family hates you?  We really love you" when
>> the only real interest is chalking up another conversion.
>
> I don't believe this "love-bombing" has *ever* happened among MJ's.

That's reassuring.  Then would you join me in condemning
Campus Crusade for Christ and others who do it?  It was
either the Navigators or the Intervarsities who did it to
an acquaintance of my brother, but I don't recall which.

...

>> Intentionally portraying parents as enemies is a rather standard
>> technique.  I wonder if such people get their mandate from Luke 12:51-3 ?
>
> Standard technique?
>
> WHOSE technique?  Not among the talmidim of Yeshua!
> ..Who told you this stuff, Rob?

See Conway and Siegelman's _Holy Terror_, published in '82 I think.
I've read a number of accounts as well.


>  Did you get this from some Jews for
>  Judaism "anti-missionary" propaganda course?

I have not taken their course, although I have seen their literature.

R

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: Harvey.Smith@p0.f1.n7002.z8.FIDONET.ORG (Harvey Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Anti-Semitism charges
Date: 31 Aug 92 04:53:34 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 8:7002/1.0


To: Tom Albrecht


 TA=>of anti-Semitism.  It is quite clear, at least to me, that the MJ
 TA=>definition of anti-Semitism is very different from the dictionary
 TA=>definition, or the defintion used by most rational folks.  When 

Again Tom you are once again not willing to repent of your false 
accusations against MJ's but just level more of them.

Your doctrine or biblical perspective is no problem with me or many other 
MJ's.  We just shrug our shoulders and go on.

But you keep on accusing with slander and other statements that just aren't 
true.

Lets just recap a little:  You stated that we in the UMJC had formed a 
strictly Jewish denomination.  When told that we were only and umbrella 
organization and that we related to many different denominations, you just 
got quiet, and said nothing.

You accused us of perverted doctrine.  When i published our doctrinal 
statement again you remained quiet.  

You accused us of being a cult, like the JW's etc, and again you are 
slandering us, but we just keep going on.

You accused us of many other things, that you just were in error over, but 
you just ignored your errors, and keep on slandering MJ's.

Now Tom, you have a great anomosity towards MJ's,  thats why we called you 
anti semitic.  YOu desire to see Jews become "gentile Christians" and true 
"Israel" the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob replaced with only gentiles 
and fully assimilated Jews.

that we consider anti semitic...  


--  
Harvey Smith - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Harvey.Smith@p0.f1.n7002.z8.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: Malachi.Robertson@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Malachi Robertson)
Subject: Colossians (Re: Identification with Abraham)
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: alt.messianic
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 04:52:30 GMT


Recently Tom said that Colossians 2 was directed at Judaizers.  This is
the second time in recent days I have come across this notion.  I consider
this wrong as the context says otherwise.  I won't say much but here are a
few pointers away from the Judaizers.

(1) The group in question taught things focusing on the elemental spirits
of the universe.

(2) They were into angel-worship.

(3) They were into ascetic practices ("self-mortification"; "do not handle
this, do not taste that, do not touch the other"; "forced piety";
"severity to the body"; interested in combating sensuality)

These observation have significance on how one views Col. 2:16, 17.  Paul
is not telling them that those practices should not be observed, but he is
telling them not to let these false teachers tell them how they should
practice these things.  Paul also emphasizes that real saving power is in
Jesus and not in the observance of rituals.

"Malachi Robertson" better known as Ian Robertson Brown
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: (none)
Date: 25 Aug 1992 16:42:04 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Subject: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

Harvey Smith writes:

> To: Daniel Leavitt
> DL=>Thought I would interject a question for you.  Have you seen a 
> DL=>book entitled, "You Take Jesus, I'll Take God"? [...]  I have 
> DL=>read the book and have not found one legitimate reason not to 
> DL=>beleive the Yeshua is the Messiah. 
>
> Yup thats for sure.  This book was published several years ago by the 
> Chabad house, Lubavitchers.

Where did you get that?  I thought it was from Hamorah Press, in California.


>  I discussed their book at length at a Chabad 
>  house in New Orleans

How long was your discussion.  With whom did you discuss it?
If you don't remember names, a description will do.  What
do you look like?


> during a "Ruach" National Jewish conference there.  We 
> were invited to Chabad,

When was this conference?

Who invited you, or did you just walk in?


> and had an amicable conversation,

In what way was it amicable?


> and shared Yeshua with them.  
>
>They were alarmed that i an orthodox jew would believe in Yeshua.

How did you detect their alarm?


[...]

R
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Personal Query: Jewish Heritage
Date: 1 Sep 92 03:03:08 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/18.0 - Midrash, Denver CO


 -=> Quoting Rich.bellacera@amail.amdahl.com to All <=-
 Ri> From: rich.bellacera@amail.amdahl.com
 Ri> Date: 30 Aug 92 00:19:13 GMT
 Ri> Message-ID: <m0mOd0S-0000NzC@juts.ccc.amdahl.com>
 Ri> Newsgroups: alt.messianic
 Ri> (Yeshua).  While my mother dedicated herself to atheism, her
 Ri> mother was a practicing Jew.  I don't know about her father's
 Ri> devotion, I believe he was a Catholic.  Her parents, as well as my
 Ri> parents were raised during a time when Jewish-Catholic marriages
 Ri> were considered taboo. In fact my Grandparents on my father's side
 Ri> disapproved of their union, much to my mother's dismay, for the
 Ri> very reason that she was "Jewish" by heritage. (reminds me of that
 Ri> old T.V. sitcom "Brigette Loves Berney").
    If you mother, or even your mother's-mother, is Jewish by birth,
    then according to halachah, you are physically Jewish as well, -
    whether you practice Judaism or not.
 Ri> I was raised Catholic, but in my 19th year I became a
 Ri> non-denominational Christian through spiritual rebirth.
    As you feel led, you should go check out a Messianic Congregation
    sometime.
 Ri> Yeshua Messiah (is this the MJ equivalent to Jesus Christ?)
    Yes.  Y'shua/Yeshua = the word -> "Salvation" in Hebrew.  Messiah
    is the English transliteration for the Hebrew word: Mashiach = the
    word -> "Anointed" in Hebrew.  -Usually seen as HaMashiach, (which
    would then be in English: The-Messiah.)
 Ri> Oh, one other question, concerning MJs.  Is there an accepted
 Ri> version of the Bible that you read?  Does it include "other" books
 Ri> not found in, say, the KJV?  I've seen references to the Didache &
 Ri> Barnabas (both of which I've read, along with the Shepherd of
 Ri> Hermas, and others).
    The Hebrew Bible of the "Older Covenant" - called the Tanakh:
    [short for Torah-Netuvim-Ketuvim (five books of Moses - Prophets -
    writing)], are the same books as the KJV has - (some are in a
    different order though.)
         The other books that you mentioned: Shepherd of..., etc...,
         were popular books of the early Believers, but are not
         part of the New Covenant nor Tanakh cannon.  However, Didache
         is excellent, {in my opinion}.

... 012 B'rasheet haya HaDavar... 210    
--  
Bill Carlson - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Date: 4 Sep 1992 00:33:50 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <m0mQU7Z-0000hKC@juts.ccc.amdahl.com> Rich writes:

> ...  However the grace of Jesus has freed me to "live and
> walk in the spirit of the law."  It is NOT a lisence to sin, but rather a
> freedom from the shackles that bring nothing but death.

See Deut. 30.  Read the whole chapter.

> In my understanding, Judaism does not believe that any man has the
> ability to forgive another for trangressions, hence the requirements
> of the law.  This understanding may be wrong, but it is besides the
> point.

You're 180 degrees away.  If you wrong someone, *only* that
person can forgive you.  Repentance, charity, etc. only help
if you transgress against G-d.

>  If, inorder to recieve forgiveness from God blood must be shed how
> does one do this today?

Heartfelt prayer, sincere repentance, and righteous action.

[...]

> My "conversion" to Christianity (NOT "Xtianity", I do not find that
> humorous!)  was a "real" experience.  The way it is spoken of by some
> folks it is as if I up and decided, "Hmmmm.  I think I'll be a
> Christian today."  I assure you it was no such thing.  Until you have
> had the same experience you can NEVER know what it is like to KNOW
> beyond a shodow of a doubt that God is with you every walking second.

Actually, G-d warned us about such experiences in Deut. 13:4.

[...]

> I still don't know what "good" can now come of the knowledge that I am
> a Jew by birth, but I do know what awful thing could come should I do
> as has been suggested, to renounce my faith and take back the yoke of
> the Law.

What?

>  I obey the law because I want to, not because I fear God is
> standing behind be ever ready to strike me with judgement for slipping
> up.  If I make a mistake, or sin, I do indeed repent (I turn from that
> wickedness and cry out to God who has and does hear me...and forgives
> me, then I try with all my strength never to do that sin again).

That's a very Jewish understanding of repentance.  Psalm 145
tells how G-d is close to all those who sincerely call to him.

[...] 

> One person told me that in order to become faithful to the Jewish
> religion I would have to be circumsized again, properly.

No!  Not at all!  Please tell me in e-mail who told you that.

>  I'm afraid
> of that.  I was circumsized as a child and now have no foreskin.  What
> would these priest do to someone who has no foreskin merely to fulfill
> an ageold ritual?  I shudder is fear of the answer.

Jewish men who have not undergone a proper circumcision ritual,
either through being born without a foreskin or through having
been given a medical circumcision, undergo a symbolic
circumcision, "hatafas dam bris."  The skin below the
corona is given a pin prick, and a drop of blood is let.
That's it.

See the book _To Be a Jew_ by Rabbi Hayim Donin for information
on these and similar matters.

R

-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean / Maccoby book
Date: 1 Sep 92 12:54:46 GMT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

Laura Johanna Manninen writes:

> Robert A. Levene writes:

>> 1.  I'm not telling anyone to go out an buy a book.  You can borrow
>>     Hyam Maccoby's books from your local free public library or
>>     university library.
> 
> I guess that is the situation in America. Never mind...

I doubt it.  I don't think you'll find it in my local library.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

     /\			I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power
____/__\____		of God for salvation to every one who believes, to the
\  / || \  /		Jew first and also to the Greek.  For in it the
 \/--++--\/		righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith;
 /\  ||  /\		as it is written, "But the righteous man shall live
/  \ || /  \		by faith."
----\--/----						-- Romans 1:16-17
     \/			-- Bruce Tiffany
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean Un / Maccoby book
Date: 1 Sep 1992 00:02:32 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <140025.2A9E1D27@paranet.FIDONET.ORG>
Harvey Smith writes:

> ...I would tend to agree with you and others that if we are talking
> about post Nicean Christianity, then we are indeed speaking of another
> religion other than Biblical Judaism.  But Pre Nicean Faith, is
> Biblical Judaism...

In that case, you either agree with the Nicean creed and are
"another religion" or you disagree with the Nicean creed.

Which?  In what way?
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Words Like Arrows
Date: 29 Aug 92 15:29:08 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    In response to Robert A. Levene
RA>From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
RA>Date: 26 Aug 92 16:40:26 GMT
RA>Organization: Johns Hopkins University
RA>Message-ID: <9208261639.AA24205@aplpy.jhuapl.edu>
RA>Newsgroups: alt.messianic

RA>2.  I don't "support" Tom's theology, nor do I consider holding it
RA>    to be A Good Thing.   But the charge "anti-Jewish" is not the
RA>    same charge as "sincerely has a theology which the masses usually
RA>    misinterpret as anti-Jewish."  I feel the same way about the
RA>    Neturei Qarta, whose sincerely-held beliefs concerning the
RA>    State of Israel I consider incorrect and dangerous, but not
RA>    malicious.

    I understand that.  But, from where I am sitting it is high time for
certain sectors of Christianity to wake up to the eventual outcome of
their sincerely-held beliefs.  The intent may not be malicious, but that
does not change the final result.  If Martin Luther's anti-Judaic
tirades had been challenged, then what would the Nazis have used to
justify thier actions to German Christians?  You know, I can keep quiet
and do the liberal thing of respecting dangerous religious beliefs, or I
can be a voice that refuses to advance words that end up killing people.
The way I heard it, Silence is also an answer.

RA>What I do support is the idea:
RA>
RA>TA> But we call ourselves Christians so as not to be religiously confuse
RA>TA> with Jews who have rejected Messiah Jesus.  This is both biblically
RA>TA> and practically correct.
RA>
RA>It seems like "religious confusion" is the bread and butter of folks
RA>like Harvey Smith who post statements such as "we believe that
RA>Biblical Judaism is in fact New Covenant, which is called Christianity"

    Yep...the waters have been pretty muddied by centuries of wrong
Christian teaching concerning the roles and relationship between Jewish
and Gentile believers in Yeshua, but why should Harvey or any other
Messianics perpetuate the wrong identification?  Tom's statement may
sound good and logical and acceptable to you...the only problem is
that it isn't accurate for Messianic Jews.  And is your preference not
more based on disownership of Messianics as Jews than in clarity of
identifying terms?  Let's be real.
    Donna D'Iorio


--  
Donna D'Iorio - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: (none)
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:29:23 GMT
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Subject: Re: Missionizing to 2-year-olds
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

I wrote:

> If you think that frightening pre-school kids with stories of eternal
> fiery hell (or a drowning at the beach) for refusing to love Jesus is
> as equally wrong as disowning a grown child who makes a bad decision,
> then you have a truly sick sense of morality.

Bruce Benning replies
>  [You make a good point. The shunning of one's children because of
>  their decition to follow Yeshua is more cruel. And it hurts the
>  parents along with the children.]

Are you seriously suggesting that shunning grown children is somehow
worse than making death threats against pre-schoolers?  If not, then
please clarify what you meant.

I'm moving the rest of the post to a new thread.

R
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Biblical
From: tbeaudoin@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 06:40:28 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <LJMORLY.92Aug27124005@polaris.utu.fi>, ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen) writes:
>> What do Mormons or JW's have to do with anything?
> 
> They both hold Yeshua as the central figure in their religions, but
> have attached stuff to their doctrines that is not biblical. (Someone 
> else could maybe explain this more accurately, if necessary.)
> 

	Allow me to raise a red herring: what exactly is "wrong" about
developing "doctrines" that are not Biblical?  What does "not being
Biblical" mean?  I'm not trying to be hostile, just trying to pursue this
point.

Thomas Beaudoin
Lee's Summit High School
International Baccalaureate Program
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean Under B'rit Chadashah
Date: 25 Aug 92 08:54:54 EDT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

Tom Albrecht writes:

> Donna D'Iorio writes:

>>    But TA doesn't like hearing that the ancient fathers were capable of
>>error.  It mars the pedestal he has his heros perched on.
> 
> Nice job of speculating.

Nice because it is accurate.

>>    What I don't understand is why *you* would choose to support the
>>dangerous theological stance of TA, while holding MJ's in such
>>contempt.  My friend, it is Messianic Jews who are laboring so hard to
>>rid the Church of its anti-semitic theological strongholds!  ...
> 
> Shade of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Days Saints!  "Don't be
> fooled by these gentile churchianity-practicing infidels.  Come to the true
> fount of learning.  Come to the nouveau religion of Messianic Judaism.  We
> have all the 'correct' answers.  We have a direct line to the apostles of
> the first century, and we know EXACTLY what they were thinking.  And we
> KNOW all those other guys, from 'Barnabas,' to the authors of the Didache, to 
> Justin Martyr right up to, and including, Tom Albrecht, got it all wrong."

She didn't say they got it *all* wrong.  But they sure got it wrong concerning
Israel and the Church.

Perhaps you feel we should follow them into error, rather than question them,
since they lived a long time ago and you hold them in high esteem.  My view
is that no matter who departs from Scripture, he's wrong wherever he departs
from it.  I'm not impressed with names or resumes; I want the truth of God's
Word, and I'm not so proud of traditional doctrine that I defer to it over
the Word of God.

By your logic, Martin Luther should not have posted his 95 theses.  Instead,
he should have stuck with the traditional teachings of the Church, rather
than introduce his "nouveau religion" of Protestantism.  But you prefer
teaching as doctrine the traditions of men rather than the Word of God.

> What a joke.  These folks from the toy network barge in on a conversation
> that has been going on for years, and they think they have all knowledge. 
> I'm sure Donna KNOWS my theology inside and out.

And your arrogance is appalling.

I *do* know your theology, and her assessment is accurate.  It is your pride
which prevents you from comprehending the antisemitic nature of your theology.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

     /\			I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power
____/__\____		of God for salvation to every one who believes, to the
\  / || \  /		Jew first and also to the Greek.  For in it the
 \/--++--\/		righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith;
 /\  ||  /\		as it is written, "But the righteous man shall live
/  \ || /  \		by faith."
----\--/----						-- Romans 1:16-17
     \/			-- Bruce Tiffany