HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: THEY DIDN'T PIERCE (was The Crucifiction Prophecy)
Date: 17 Dec 1992 16:55:45 GMT
Organization: /usr/local/trn/lib/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu
Keywords: Yoshke Panderics licht in drerd, oizgetzeigen vi a ferd.

In article <1992Dec15.170423.203405@uctvax.uct.ac.za> naturman@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
>I might be wrong but as far as I recall, we do not have
>any preserved Greek translations of the Tanach dating back before the middle
>ages. 

I'll start with a disclaimer: the following is not intended as support
for the argument which started this thread. 

In the interest of accuracy, I have to point out that oldest
manuscripts of the Septuagint (usually abbreviated LXX and known in
modern Hebrew as the "Shiv'im") are indeed older than than the oldest
manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible, with exceptions noted below. There are
at least two mss. which date to the fourth century CE, and a number
which date to the fifth. The best known are probably the Codex
Vaticanus (located guess where?) and the Codex Sinaiticus, most of
which landed in the British Museum, with a few fragments somehow
winding up in Leipzig. In addition to these codices, there are numerous
fragments of the LXX which date from as early as the 1st Century
CE--some of them being found in such prosaic areas as mummy wrappings.

The oldest relatively complete mss. in Hebrew date from the tenth
cenury CE, so the Greek mss. are about 5 centuries older than the
Hebrew.  There are various Hebrew fragments, most notably found among
the Dead Sea sites, which date much earlier--perhaps as early as 150
BCE.  With respect to these finds, there is no consistent pattern of
supporting one version over the other. In some cases, the Dead Sea
fragments support the reading found in the LXX, in others, they support
the Masoretic text.

With respect to the various missionary tactics, these facts are
basically irrelevant, since they use whatever they can find or
distort.
-- 
________________________________________
Jack F. Love	| 	Opinions expressed are mine alone.
		|	(Unless you happen to agree.)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward)
Subject: Re: JforJ ad in Newsweek
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 18:04:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.195719.14563@netcom.com> 
strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:

[Jews for Jesus are or are not Jews discussion deleted]

>Comments?

Let me offer a partial retraction.  The definition of who is a Jew is clearly
a complex one.  The point that I am trying to get across is not that Jews for
Jesus are Jewish, but rather that they are not Goyim!  Perhaps a new category
is needed; something like ex-Jews (I think the notion of apostate is probably
the appropriate one).

That is all I am trying to get across.  (Or to put it another way, this is
not (yet another) case of Goyim beating on Jews.  We're not responsible for
this one!)

Paul.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni)
Subject: Re: Trip To Israel
Organization: The Department of Redundancy Department
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 15:58:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec7.162705.21688@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal) writes:

>from the Kotel, are magnificent and moving.  There are a few walking
>tours of the Old City that go at night, as I recall, and I'd bet a walk
>along the wall, all the way around, would be even better at night than
>during the day.  While it would be great to do it alone - allowing time
>from introspection and wonder at the holiness or just at the antiquity
>- I'd recommend going with a group for safety sake.  A shame.

Isn't the walk along the wall (on it, on top) closed at night?
It would be just a bit dangerous in the dark; it's not all smooth 
pavement.

Jake

-- 
Jake Livni  jake@bony1.bony.com              10 years from now, George Bush will
American-Occupied New York                   have replaced Jimmy Carter as the
My opinions only - employer has no opinions. standard of a failed President.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout)
Subject: Re: Andy the Canadian ****
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:11:21 GMT

In <1gssujINN36e@agate.berkeley.edu> lmk2@garnet.berkeley.edu () writes:


>Godfrey,

>I have problems with your referring to a part of the female anatomy
>so negatively.  If you are going to cast aspersions, do it with your
>own anatomy.

How about,
Andy the Jewish nose.






--
Eli Chiprout                 
Dept. of Electronics, 
Carleton University, Canada
emc@doe.carleton.ca                                     
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: Shabbat question
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 08:39:29 GMT

In <9212101526.AA26265@hrt213.brooks.af.mil> tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) writes:

>	I'd say no, as it's similar to the Shabbos clock (appliance
>timer) I've got on my bedside lamp.  It's automatic operation without
>human intervention.

I would think that a switch that detects the presence of a person is
different from a Shabbat clock, in that the operation of the latter is
determined before Shabbat starts (in the absence of blackouts, blown
fuses, and other Murphey-ish occurances), while the former will
trigger if one walks near it and won't trigger if one doesn't.  So I
would think that one ought not to get close enough to the
people-senser to trigger it.

I came across one once on a private house that turned on an exterior
light whenever someone walked by in the street.  Of course I hung
around to find out how long it stayed on, and how close one had to get
in different directions to trigger it.  I don't expect to ever be
there on Shabbat, but if I did, I would suppose that there would be a
reason to ask whether one was allowed to walk down that side of the
street.

Another time I stayed with some people who lived in a building with a
doorman who sat between an outer door which would automatically open
when someone stood in front of it and an inner door that the doorman
would open by pressing a button on his desk.  They would either wait
for someone else to come along and open the door, then rush in (the
door would stay open for a certain period - but still, walking through
the open door probably caused some transistors to turn on and off, or
at least change their position within the active region, whether this
is a problem or not, I don't know) or the doorman would open the door
for them (same issue about transistors here, I suppose).  There's also
the issue of the doorman opening the door, which would have been there
in any case since they couldn't get thru the inner door without his
pressing a button to unlock it.  (So now we can get into the usual
argument about non-Jews working for Jews on Shabbat, but I think that
since the doorman would open the door all week long, not just on
Shabbat, halacha allows it).

Still, I felt better about it when we went out through the garage
using a key-operated door.

The guard in that building also had, in addition to the button that
opened the door, and an intercom, a few video monitors connected to
video cameras throughout the building.  I wonder if one needs to avoid
the video cameras on Shabbat.

> CYLOR to be sure, though.

agreed.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@         "WARENS statement in his signature express a Nazi idea."
/ nysernet.org 			    Gideon Ehrlich
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: chips@eskimo.com (cav)
Subject: Re: Electricity on Shabbat (was Re: Halacha)
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:01:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.181009.18324@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld) writes:
}In article <1992Dec7.201702.25027@eskimo.com>, chips@eskimo.com (cav) writes:
}|> Secondly, when it is shown that previous poskim based their rulings
}|> on incorrect facts, the decisions are reversed (VCR's being an excellent
}|> example). 
}
}Can you elaborate?  What was/is the ruling regarding VCR's that you refer to?
}-- 
At first , almost all rabbis forbade the use of VCR to tape on Shabbos. When it
was elaborated that among other things, the TV did not go on and that it was not
likely that one would turn off the machines on simple impulse, many rabbis said
it was permitted (even if not approved of).
From: dfs@doe.carleton.ca (David F. Skoll)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish STEREOTYPES - the last time
Date: 17 Dec 92 22:58:18 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University

In <Dec17.221329.62773@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>
mk568652@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Mitchell Kotler) writes:

> I was deeply enraged at the fact that NO ONE , not one person,
> supported my views against Jews mocking themselves.  What is wrong
> with you people!  We are not different from Christians!  We are all
> human!  If there is no truth to any of these stereotypes why do you
> use them?  What kind of custom is this?  I post a question about
> Jewish names and I get loads of Jewish jokes for replies. I ask about
> the origin of the Jewish nose myth, and I get nose jokes.  I don't
> understand.  Christians aren't known for self-mockery nor are Muslims,
> so where did we get this recessive trait?

Hang on a second.  I agree with you that we should not perpetuate
stereotypes, but you shouldn't always take the jokes that seriously.
The type of joke I would tell depends greatly on the audience.  Among
Jews, I would feel "safer" about telling Jewish jokes than among non-
Jews.  The ability to laugh at stereotypes is important - it shows that
we can turn these antisemitic stereotypes around and make them a source
of humour.

>If this is truly a cultural "thing" then I'm ashamed.  How can you expect
>non-Jews to respect us.

I don't know, I greatly respect a people who can tell jokes about
themselves instead of making derogatory jokes about others.

>This "you have to laugh at yourself and life " philosophy
>is crap.  When it leads to stereotyping and discrimination , it is no longer
>innocent "laughing at life".  

Well, there's a limit.  Some jokes are tasteless and genuinely
antisemitic, and should never be told.  But most seem harmless
enought.

Ironically, if a non-Jew tells a Jewish joke, I get annoyed, whereas
a Jew telling the same joke wouldn't bother me.  Go figure.

--
                     |         | "Step up and shake the hand
David F. Skoll       | ||||||| |  Of someone you can't stand,
|_ _ _  __   __ _ __ |  \\V//  |  You can tolerate him if you try..."
 / |  | |_|   | |  | |  __|__  |  -- Tom Lehrer, "National Brotherhood Week"
_____|________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Subject: Re:  Holiday wishes for us 
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 17:28:50 GMT

Ok, anyone recall who said the following quote?  I've forgotten.

  " I refuse to call Xmas a 'secular holiday' until they
    move it permanently to the third Thursday in December. "


R

--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: Jewish STEREOTYPES - the last time
Organization: Society for Putting Arguments on Top of Other Arguments
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:23:17 GMT

seth@inst-sun1.tmc.edu (Seth Chazanoff) writes: >
>
>	I have noticed something that I consider very interesting.  People
>who feel that they have "THE RIGHT ANSWER (tm)", or have a "MISSION(tm)"
>never seem to be able to laugh at themselves or their causes.  I know many
>Republicans, for the most part, they laugh at jokes aimed at both the 
>Republicans, and the Democrats.  The Democrats I associate with absolutely
>will not laugh at a joke aimed at a Deomcrat or Democratic party policies.
>My Republican friends love Dan Quayle jokes, when was the last time you
>heard a Democrat laugh at a joke pointed at Ted Kennedy?

This is interesting, Seth.  I am a regular at alt.fan.dan-quayle.  I
have seen both Republicans who can laugh at the jokes, and Republicans
who cannot.  On the other hand, I don't remember any of the Democrats
there getting annoyed at Ted Kennedy jokes, provided they were funny.

Recently, I got a complaint from someone about my moderating r.f.h.
He claimed that the group had gone downhill because I was too 
"politically correct," althought he didn't explain what he meant
by this, or show how I had change the type of joke I accept.
Frankly, if someone sends me a good Clinton or Kennedy joke, I'm
more than happy to run it (my favorite was the one that included
them both!)  Of course, I also get complaints that my jokes are
too cute, too offensive, and too long, so I after a while I get
immune to complainers (hi Mitchell!)

Anyway, maybe your Democrat friends aren't laughing at the Democrat
jokes because they aren't funny, but merely spiteful.  It's all in
the intent.  Of course, maybe they're just a bunch of humourless
boobs, too.

Maddi "No Cow Too Sacred" Hausmann
I Don't Believe in Atheist Jokes   ;-)

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: yaffe@icd.teradyne.com (Art Yaffe)
Subject: Re: To all Jews: STOP the negative Jewish
Reply-To: yaffe@icd.teradyne.com
Organization: Teradyne, Boston MA, USA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:33:46 GMT

In article AA06778@hrt213.brooks.af.mil, tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) writes:
>On Wed, 16 Dec 1992 13:54:30 GMT, yaffe@icd.teradyne.com (Art Yaffe) said:
> > In article 724430329@ro, emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>>>In <1992Dec15.024433.4412@netcom.com> madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
>>>
>>>>   Jews like to argue
>>>
>>>They do not!
>
> > Do SO!
>
>	Sources!  Quote me sources!
>
>-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
>"I'll only believe it's true if Rashi said so!  ;)"



OK! OK!   For example . . .

-------- begin included message --------
|Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
|Subject: Re: To all Jews: STOP the negative Jewish
|Message-ID: <9212161855.AA06778@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
|From tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
|Path:icd.teradyne.com!attain!netcomsv!netcom.com!csus.edu!beach.csulb.edu!nic.csu.net!usc|!rpi!think.com!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!
|Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:55:38 GMT
|Sender: daemon@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
|References: <emc.724430329@ro> <1992Dec16.135430.28783@icd.teradyne.com>
|Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
|In-Reply-To: yaffe@icd.teradyne.com's message of Wed, 16 Dec 1992 13: 54:30 GMT
|Lines: 14
|
|On Wed, 16 Dec 1992 13:54:30 GMT, yaffe@icd.teradyne.com (Art Yaffe) said:
| > In article 724430329@ro, emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
|>>In <1992Dec15.024433.4412@netcom.com> madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
|>>
|>>>   Jews like to argue
|>>
|>>They do not!
|
| > Do SO!
|
|	Sources!  Quote me sources!
|
|-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
|"I'll only believe it's true if Rashi said so!  ;)"
|
-------- end included message --------
---
********************************
Arthur G. Yaffe
Internet: yaffe@icd.teradyne.com
********************************
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: Jews, Cincinatti, and the KKK
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 03:46:32 GMT

emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>In <merlyn.724127301@digibd> merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) writes:
>>emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>>Sorry, I can't agree with this sort of reasoning.  If you're going to allow
>>religious symbols on public property in the US, the government can't decide
>>whose religions are legitimate and whose aren't.  They'll have to allow
>>religious symbols from Satanists, too, if any apply.  Racist speech is
>>still protected speech; it doesn't matter if it's popular or not.

>This migt be legitimate reasoning IF the KKK was a religion.

They wanted to put a cross up along with Jewish symbols; the state
can't arbitrarily decide that one group can present religious symbols
and another cannot.  If any are allowed, all must be allowed.  In the
US, you can't lose your rights for having unpopular or offensive political
views.

>I suggest you study the recent German government movement on
>the neo-nazis.  

I suggest you study the past German government on the old-time Nazis.
Hilter and many of his cronies were imprisoned, and various political
parties were banned; fascist extremist parties got a lot of support
by being oppressed, and they went underground.  Once a government sets
itself up to ban political parties, the next one in power can *easily*
do the same thing for any and all parties it doesn't like.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
From: bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Christianity vs. the Jews
Date: 12 Dec 1992 01:40:10 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


   There have been various recent efforts to link Christianity to 
Judaism.  These efforts range from the repeated use of the phrase   
"Judeo-Christian" to groups of evangelists refering to themselves
as 'Jews' for Jesus.  All of these efforts, calculated to convert 
Jews to Christianity, are doomed to failure.  These efforts prove
that those who do this know little or nothing about Judasim.

   To begin, there is much about how Christians worship that Jews
regard as idol-worship.  From the Jewish point of view, Christian
prayer is wierd and demeaning.  Jews actually do not have visions
of God, let alone any sort of icons.  God is considered as beyond 
anything that we mortals could possibly grasp.  The very thought, 
that "Jesus is Lord," assaults the basic concept of God for Jews. 

   Moshiach(messiah) is not a supernatural being.  He is supposed
to be a man, and only a man.  For this reason, it is not possible
for the Jewish messiah to be born, die, and be resurrected, so he
can try to get right what he never accomplished the first time.

   And finally, the concept of God crucifying his own son for the
sins of any other person, let alone all of humanity, is, from the 
Jewish point of view, totally unacceptable.  It flies in the face
of everything that is important in Judasim.  Judaism teaches that
salvation is achievable by how one behaves.  In Judaism, even the
atheist who behaves in a decent and kind manner will have a place
in the world to come.  Since people of any creed have the ability
to behave in a holy and humane manner, Jews beleive that ANY good
person can go to heaven.  As the old ad slogan for the kosher rye
bread claimed, you don't have to be Jewish...

   If, as Judaism teaches, one can achieve salvation by behavior,
then Jesus would have died for nothing.  This is the basic reason
that Christianity can never accept Judaism.  Judasim holds that a
person is responsible for his or her own salvation.  We also view
an act such as the murder of Jesus as cruel and barbaric.  As the
concept of God in Judasim is one of a loving God, the reason that
is given for God's sacrifice is not acceptable to Jews.  To us it
is repugnant in the extreme.  It flies in the face of all that we
Jews hold dear.

   I hope that this is not regarded as judgement of Christianity, 
for it is not.  Please consider this as simply an explanation why 
Christianity can never find common ground with Judaism.  It is my
hope that this will shed light on why Jews are so deeply offended 
by, and resentful of, Christian proselytising.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: aa324@yfn.ysu.edu (Marlene Miller)
Subject: Re: Maccabee names
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <aa324@yfn.ysu.edu (Marlene Miller)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:58:18 GMT




>In article <1992Dec10.153711.28839@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> em@cvs.rochester.edu (Ethan Montag) writes:
>>Everyone knows Judah Maccabee.  What are the names of his brothers?

E.Montag  em@cvs.rochester.edu says:
>John, Jonathan, Simon-or-Simeon. . .did I miss one?


Forgive me if someone already responded to this: 

Eleazar

--
       No nation can survive without pride in its traditions.
       Marlene J. Miller   aa324@yfn.ysu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Is Failure to Support Pollard Anti-Semitic?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 06:15:07 GMT


Bill Coleman continues once more to avoid the issue. He can't be that
stupid or unable to read, which is what leads to imputing bad motives
to him.

Here's the issue again:

Some here argued that Pollard's sentence was unfair for reasons
that have been repeatedly stated: equal justice under the law,
disporportionality of sentence, reneging on the Feds plea bargain,
denial of medical attention for his wife.

The above is a package--call it "A". It has nothing to do with
Jewishness or Israel.

Coleman accused those who argued "A" above of dual loyalty. That
charge of dual loyalty is an old anti-semitic slur.

THE ISSUE, COLEMAN, IS HOW YOU CAN JUSTIFY A CHARGE OF DUAL LOYALTY
AGAINST THOSE WHO ARGUE PACKAGE A, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
ISRAEL OR JEWISHNESS--ONLY FAIRNESS DUE TO ANY AMERICAN?

In his latest disingenuous post, Coleman attempts to argue
the substance of "Package A" instead of the issue--how
he can justify a charge of dual loyalty against those who
argue Package A.

Finally, since a charge of dual loyalty is an old anti-semitic slur,
and Bill cannot justify his using it in the context of Package A, the
inevitable conclusion, which is what he's been avoiding addressing, is
the anti-semitic nature of that post and subsequent posts in which he
refused to back down and apologize after his error was repeatedly
called to his attention. Instead he's changed the subject in every way
he can, while protesting his innocence.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: st911306@pip.cc.brandeis.edu (Tox)
Subject: Re: Missionary-inundating (Re: Here we go again)
Reply-To: st911306@pip.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 05:14:28 GMT

I'm game.  I may just be a lurker on this group (normally) but even _I_
don't wan't to have to sift through this stuff.

r. scott buchanan
st911306@pip.cc.brandeis.edu
            
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: Shabbat question
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 06:18:42 GMT

In <9212101624.AA26008@cyclone.sbi.com> gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler) writes:

>But wearing a bicycle is a more difficult matter, one that was not
>being discussed.

What about carrying a second bicycle to switch to at the place where
one changes buses?  Or is that a maaseh chol, and one should switch
bicycles at a different place?
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@         "WARENS statement in his signature express a Nazi idea."
/ nysernet.org 			    Gideon Ehrlich
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish