From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Religious question
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:25:09 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)

In article <1a+pbj+.solovay@netcom.com>, solovay@netcom (Andrew Solovay) writes:
>>  Do Orthodox Jews still practice animal/food sacrifice to the God of Abraham?
>>Why or why not?

>The best answer would be "not at the moment". According to Orthodox
>(Talmudic) belief, sacrifices may only be performed on the site of
>Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem; [...]

Righteous _gentiles_, by the way, are permitted to build their own alters.
I know of one who did an occasional pigeon, before he converted.

>>-Jehovae?

>This is the result of a scholarly error by Renaissance Catholics. It
>is a conjectured pronounciation of the four-letter name; it is almost
>certainly wrong. Nevertheless, Orthodox Jews are unlikely to pronounce
>it for the same reasons as above.

The actual name is not pronounced with any vocalization.  Instead, the
word for "my lord" is usually said (hence "Lord" in many translations).
Pointed text[*] usually includes the vowels from "my lord", so if you
are unaware of what is going on, you get the above error.

[*]Hebrew is written as consonants with optionally indicated vowels.  Text
with vowels is called "pointed", presumably since many of the vowels are
various dot patterns.

>>  Are there any differences in the writings contained in the Old
>>Testament and the Jewish Scriptures?

>There is no difference between the Protestant books of the "Old
>Testament" and the Jewish Bible, except the way the books are
>arranged.

Even this is significant.  Tanakh ends with I & II Chronicles--it's a
completed history on its own.  The OT, in contrast, ends with a minor
prophet's messianic visions, providing an artificial segue into the NT.

>>-John the Baptist (New Testament)

>Well, Josephus mentions him (he never mentions Jesus, nor does any
>other contemporary text besides the Christian Bible). As near as
>anyone can figure, he was an okay dude. (There's no reason to believe
>he ever became a Christian, by the way. My personal opinion is that
>Christians put the John the Baptist stuff in the Gospels in an attempt
>to convince Jophn B's many followers to join up.)

Actually, the Baptist had his own Jewish splinter movement at the time,
presumably related to the Essenes.  After his execution, many became
convinced that *he* was the Messiah.  Believe it or not, this obscure
religion has survived for the past two millennia.  Last I heard (ten years
ago), there were roughly 10000 adherents in Iraq (called Mandaeans).  That
"has survived" may be "had survived", considering.

There's an interesting possibility that John the Baptist is the John of
"the Revelation of John".  See the Anchor Bible REVELATION for details.
In brief, Christianity hijacked an essentially Jewish text, inserted a
few references on its own, and has mystified people ever since.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish