HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Milk & Meat
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:22:32 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: University of Turku

I just heard that in one of his books dealing with various Tanach verses
Rav Kook explains what is the meaning of 'Al tevashel g'di b'chalav imo'.
He says nothing about the separation of milk and meat, but explains that
because some pagan nation had the habit of offering God g'di in milk
(sorry haven't got a dictionary with me), that is the reason why God 
set this particular mitzva. IMHO all those rulings concerning milk and
meat (and some other things as well) are only fences built upon fences.
(If you want to know the name of the book, it'll take some time for me
to find that out; furthermore I don't know whether it has been translated
from Hebrew to English.)

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Intrater
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:16:06 GMT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

#3315

Subject: Intrater
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Date: 21 Sep 92 16:21:02 GMT

>    I have some things "bubbling" under about the Day of Atonement, and
>since this book was written two years ago, I am wondering if you know of
>any further development Intrater has done concerning these feasts?
>Perhaps something available on tape, beyond what is found in this book?
>I suppose I could just write El Shaddai and inquire, but its more fun to
>ask you here. <grin>

He and Dan used to do in depth teaching at Messiah Biblical Institute
(Director is Mike Brown).  I never took an MBI course, but I've heard Keith
talk a lot about the subject.

MBI has correspondence courses -- you might try writing or calling for
information.  Maybe you can get a course on tape.

You should also read:  REVELATION -- THE PASSOVER KEY.

-- Bruce Tiffany
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: Very Old Question For Rob Levene
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:08:41

>            -=> Quoting Robert A. Levene to Bruce Tiffany <=-
>  RAL> No comparison.  Jesus is dead, having failed to bring about the
>  RAL> messianic redemption.  Rabbi Schneerson is alive, and still can
>  RAL> accomplish what the messiah has to do.

Chabad has declared the Rebbe dead. (I'm afraid I threw away the newspaper
where I saw that...)

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Gentile Christianityi
Date: 5 Oct 92 09:25:46 EDT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

#3350

Subject: Re: Gentile Christianityi
From: topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht)
Date: 28 Sep 92 23:50:47 GMT

>I'm here to make a case for orthodox (aka biblical) Christianity.

And some of the the RJ's are here to make the case for Orthodox Judaism,
which they also wrongly believe is biblical Judaism.

>  I find it offensive that MJs make sport of
>"gentile Christianity" without direct reference to the word of God.

Make sport?

Without direct reference to the Word of God?

I can hardly believe I'm reading this.

The Pharisees also found it offensive that the Messianic Jews and their
ringleader Yeshua criticized those Orthodox traditions which ran contrary
to the Spirit of God.

People tend to get testy when you question their hallowed traditions.  You
may stick to your church traditions and sink with them, then, sactified in
formaldehyde.

-- BT
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Biblical Feasts
Date: 4 Oct 92 17:04:00 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    In Response to Tom Albrecht:
TA>From: topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht)
TA>Date: 1 Oct 92 22:52:47 GMT

TA>I would appreciate a thoughtful, biblical analysis.

    Here is my thoughful, biblical reply: 1 Cor 2:14   But the natural
man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are
foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are
spiritually discerned.

1 Cor 2:7-14   BUT WE SPEAK THE WISDOM OF GOD IN A MYSTERY, EVEN THE
HIDDEN WISDOM, WHICH GOD ORDAINED BEFORE THE WORLD unto our glory: {8}
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it,
they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. {9} But as it is
written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the
heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
{10} BUT GOD HATH REVEALED THEM UNTO US BY HIS SPIRIT: FOR THE SPIRIT
SEARCHS ALL THINGS, YEA, THE DEEP THINGS OF GOD. {11} For what man
knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?
EVEN SO (in the same way) THE THINGS **OF GOD** KNOWETH NO MAN, BUT the
Spirit of God.
{12} NOW WE HAVE RECEIVED, not the spirit of the world, but THE SPIRIT
WHICH IS OF GOD; THAT WE MIGHT KNOW the things that are freely given to
us of God. {13} WHICH THINGS ALSO WE SPEAK, **NOT** in the words which
MAN'S WISDOM teacheth, BUT WHICH THE HOLY GHOST TEACHETH; COMPARING
SPIRITUAL THINGS WITH SPIRITUAL.

    (As in the prophetic appointed seasons/feasts of the Lord)

{14} But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:
for they are foolishness unto him: NEITHER CAN HE KNOW THEM, BECAUSE
THEY ARE SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED.

    We have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto you
were not able to bear it, neither yet now are you able.

    John 16:12-13   I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye
cannot bear them now. {13} Howbeit WHEN HE, THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, IS
COME HE WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH: for he shall not speak of
himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: AND HE
WILL SHOW YOU THINGS TO COME.

    That is my thoughtful and biblical answer to you, Tom.
    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: Re: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Date: 30 Sep 1992 11:49:50 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

RL>Agnostics and atheists have not adopted another religion, so
>there is no comparison with "Messianics[sic]."

Bruce Tiffany writes:
> Imagine this!  Adopting a belief in no God -- denying the very existence of
> Hashem -- is OK, but keeping Torah while trusting Yeshua is not!

I didn't say "OK" - I said it's not as bad as adopting another religion.

Put it this way.  Suppose you had $500 to your name.  Then you
paid your rent of $500.  You now have zero dollars, and are "broke."

Suppose your rent was $700.  You pay $500 and borrow $200.  You
are now "in debt" $200.

Similarly, a Jew who (G-d forbid) gives up Judaism for atheism is
"broke."  A Jew who practices another religion is "in debt,"
which is worse in a spiritual sense than having no religion.

Rob
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Date: 28 Sep 92 12:49:03 GMT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

#3290
Subject: Re: (old) Question For Rob Levene
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Date: 15 Sep 1992 09:09:27 -0500

>Agnostics and atheists have not adopted another religion, so
>there is no comparison with "Messianics[sic]."

Wow!!  The more you say, the more you confirm that Rabbinic Judaism is about
rejection of Yeshua as Messiah (God's way of imputing righteousness).  That
makes Rabbinism itself "another religion" -- definitely not the Judaism of
the Bible!

Imagine this!  Adopting a belief in no God -- denying the very existence of
Hashem -- is OK, but keeping Torah while trusting Yeshua is not!

What a meshuggena concept!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
		Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried;
     /\		... He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was
____/__\____	crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being
\  / || \  /	fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed.  All of us
 \/--++--\/	like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own
 /\  ||  /\	way; but the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on
/  \ || /  \	Him. ... By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will
----\--/----	justify the many, as He will bear their iniquities.
     \/							-- Isaiah 53
		Bruce Tiffany
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean and unclean
Date: 5 Oct 92 09:26:46 EDT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

#3352

Subject: Re: Clean and unclean
From: topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht)
Date: 29 Sep 92 00:08:22 GMT

>> From: Harvey.Smith@p0.f1.n7002.z8.FIDONET.ORG (Harvey Smith)
>>                                                        One is in a group
>> >called "Kingdom now" and is headed up by a guy in Atlanta, Ga.  ...

>"Bishop" Earl Paulk?  I hear he's making it big time with some of the MJs
>Bruce hangs out with.  Are the "Bishop" Paulk and "apostolic pastor" Juster
>still keeping company, Bruce?

(Who's "making sport", Tom?)

Just what have you heard to make you think he's "making it big time" with
MJ's?  What do you know that I don't know?

What I said was that Paulk has changed his tune on Israel, and now sees a
place for national Israel after HaShem used Keith Intrater and Dan Juster
to correct him.  They made several trips down there some time back and talked
to leading people.  When they first walked into Paulk's office (at Paulk's
invitation), Paulk said:  "God has told me that I have been wrong about some
things, and you are going to correct me."  (These are some of the same things
you've been preaching on alt.messianic, Tom.)  Although they did catch some
flak from some quarters of the Messianic Jewish community which feared we
were being influenced by the incorrect Replacement theology of these people,
actually the opposite occurred, and as Keith told me, "How could we *not*
work with this man?"  Should they have disobeyed God when He told them to
accept Paulk's invitation to come to Atlanta?

Paulk hasn't come all the way around to see things just as we do, but from
what I'm told there has been real change.  I'm not aware that Dan or Keith
have had anything to do with Paulk in the last year or two.

By the way, Dan and Keith did seminars at quite a few major churches, as well
as at CBN / Regent University.

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

     /\			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
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Judaizers In Colossians
Date: 27 Sep 92 16:53:08 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/18.0 - Midrash, Denver CO

To: btiffany@pbs.org

                   -=> Quoting Bruce Tiffany in <=-
 Bt> Date: 24 Sep 92 19:30:20 GMT
 Bt> Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA
 Bt> Message-ID: <1992Sep24.153020.17931@pbs.org>
 Bt> Newsgroups: alt.messianic

 Bt> You're just wasting your time, Harvey.  I explained all this in
 Bt> great detail to Tom a couple of years ago, at which point he
 Bt> claimed he'd never heard this before (of course not in a church
 Bt> that equates celebration of the Biblical feasts with "offering up
 Bt> strange fire to God"!), but he has heard it more than once since
 Bt> then.

    Yup.  A long time back, Daniel Segard, Harvey Smith, and myself,
    went over all these issues IN DETAIL with TA.  His ploy is one that
    I've seen a few use over the years.  They are completely
    unteachable in regard to a stance, and feel that the others belief
    is completely incorrect.  Even though one can go to great lengths
    showing their stance Biblically, and even if they refute point by
    point, - after a sufficient amount of time goes by, - the refuted
    one will re-introduce the very same objections, - all the while
    feinting ignorance of the other-parties stance!  So as to make it
    appear that they are indeed interested in sincere discussion.  Yet,
    all the while simply using that as a platform for their party-line.
    Tom says he hasn't seen Scripture to back up our stance?!  Ha!
    Between Harvey, and Daniel, and myself alone; I'd be willing to
    say that we have quoted more than a significant portion of
    Scripture, (during the course of many months), to TA in apologia of
    our position!  And I have little doubts, that if he gets tired
    here, he will show up somewhere else, feinting the same ignorance
    of our position!

 Bt> Besides, Tom doesn't *want* to accept Messianic Judaism.  It
 Bt> threatens his cherished misconceptions, ...

    I think that is the real problem.  We are living proof that his
    dogma is incorrect.  And it is hard for someone, (but not
    impossible), to accept that something they hold as foundational, is
    incorrect.  You'll see the same type of 'lack of circumspection'
    with most people who hold to any type of: Two-Covenant-theology;
    accursed Israel; militant A-Millennium-ism; Replacement theology;
    Spiritual vs. actual Israel, etc... btw.  When it gets to this
    point, someone needs to say something, (to keep the innocent from
    getting sucked in), yet the benefit is for the reader, rather than
    the original writer.

Shalom and l'Shanah Tovah.

... 012 Think not that I am come to annul the Torah or the Prophets: 210  
--  
Bill Carlson - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean and Unclean
Date: 2 Oct 92 12:47:50 GMT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Subject: Re: Clean and Unclean
Date: 30 Sep 1992 11:42:00 -0500

>> Would Adonai really tell the kohanim to be sure not to leave out the blood
>> when sacrificing?  Ludicrous!
> 
>It's shorthand for the 'zrika' (sprinkling the blood) step, which
>they could not leave out.

Because it is only the blood that atones, silly!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
		Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried;
     /\		... He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was
____/__\____	crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being
\  / || \  /	fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed.  All of us
 \/--++--\/	like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own
 /\  ||  /\	way; but the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on
/  \ || /  \	Him. ... By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will
----\--/----	justify the many, as He will bear their iniquities.
     \/							-- Isaiah 53
		Bruce Tiffany
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: Identification with Abra
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 27 Sep 92 16:16:21

In article <140324.2AC3207D@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Harvey.Smith@p0.f1.n7002.z8.FIDONET.ORG (Harvey Smith) writes:
> To say that the hebrew race is pure, would also not be correct.  it is noted 
> that Jews in Exile did in fact take many brides of the gentiles, and even 
> took on some of their characteristics.  I remember when i was stationed in 
> Hong Kong, and playing chess at the Jcca with Chinese looking Jews, that 
> however, talked and acted like Jews because they were.  (grin).
[...]
> So to say that the Jewish race or the Hebrew race is pure, would not be 
> correct.  However, when G-d speaks of Israel and the Jewish people He is 
> speaking of those who are accounted for the seed...

I'll repost something I saw in SCJ/TPM some time ago concerning Jews as
race/converts/people. (The garbage part of the article deleted.)

--------------------------SCJ/TPM-------------------------------------

Jews are not a race.  Look up race in the dictionary.  There are only
a couple of races in the world.  Jews are not a race.

Now look up Semitic in the dictionary.  There are Semitic people.  Jews
are a Semitic people.

You seem to think that either 1) jews are a race 
			or    2) they are converts.

Both are false.  Jews are a people.  And the Jewish people has accepted
converts.  But by converting, they ARE NOT accepting the principles of
the Jewish faith (the way a convert to Islam or Christianity is accepting
the principles of those religion.)  They are accepting membership into
the Jewish people.

Judaism is spread primarily by birth.  It has never been spread by mass
conversion.  Judaism is a people of historical continuity.

Look in ANY Jewish prayer and read the Hebrew.
Jews are refered to as 1) Am Yisrael-- the people of nation of Israel
		       2) B'nai Yisrael -- children of Israel.
Now look in the same books, and see if you can find anything about
conversions, Jews converting people, or the word 'religion'.
None of these are religious terms at all.  

Jews are a people.  Germans are a people.  French are a people. Japanese
are a people.   None of these are races.  No one thinks that it's racist 
that there should be a German State, a French State, or a Japanese state.
That term is ONLY applied to the Jewish states, which shows a hostility
towards Jews.

--------------------end--quote--------------------------------------

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: dah@tko.vtt.fi (David Harwood)
Subject: Re: Maimonides on the Trinity  - (was( old) Question For Rob Levene)
Organization: VTT
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:58:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.162241.920@cbfsb.cb.att.com> hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz) writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.111259.20457@ousrvr.oulu.fi> dah@tko.vtt.fi (David Harwood) writes:
>>In article <9209251201.AA29681@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
>>>dah@tko.vtt.fi writes:
>>>
>>>...
>>>> Maimonides, the greatest rabbi and codifier of your "fundemental principles"
>>>> of Judaism - stated that it was false that the Christian concept of the
>>>> Trinity involved "belief in another diety,"
>>>
>>>I think you're confusing what's permitted for Jews to believe
>>>and what's permitted for gentiles to believe.  To which
>>>statements of Maimonides do you refer?
>>>
>>>Some codifiers would say that for gentiles, belief in a mandatory
>>>intercessor or "assistant" to G-d would be OK, others still call that
>>>idolatry.
>>>
>>>R
>>>
>>\\\\\\\\\\\
>>Actually, you are confusing issues more by omitting the relevant context
>>of my reply, and by some speculative confusion of other notions.
>>
>>I meant what I said, responding to a mistaken but traditional polemical
>>criticism of Christianity, reiterated by H.M. Which context you omitted.
>>
>>If you remind me, I will research the reference when I return home from
>>overseas (in a few weeks). Maimonides was correcting uninformed Jewish
>>criticism, in this passage - he knows that Christians do not believe
>
>It seems appropriate to repost a translation of what the RAMBAM
>actually said at this point.
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>| Hillel Markowitz    |  Said the fox to the fish, join me ashore  |
>| H_Markowitz@att.com |  The fish are the Jews, Torah is the water |
>|_____________________|____________________________________________|
\\\\\\\\\\\\\

[Long quotation from M's Code, of passages concerning the Messiah, and
with some remarks concerning rejection of Jesus ...; the quotation is
advanced from someone else; cf Misneh Torah. I have already read this
before, although this may interesting to others. But Maimonides wrote
many interesting things in his letters, essays, and other voluminous
writings - thousands of pages of which I have read. That is why I cannot
immediately remember the reference I have in mind; it has been years ago.]

This is all fair enough, and interesting enough. But it does not address
the subject of dispute, what M said about the Christian concept of the
Trinity vis a vis Jewish monotheism.

D.H.
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Choice for men: moving beyond anti-feminism
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:21:31 GMT

In article <m8FwRB8w164w@cellar.org> rogue@cellar.org (Rachel McGregor) writes:
>gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:
>
>> In article <3ZmRRB7w164w@cellar.org> rogue@cellar.org
>> (Rachel McGregor) writes:
>> >Intrauterine devices are often uncomfortable, sometimes painful, and carry
>> >not only a greater health risk (witness the number of women killed or
>> >maimed by toxic shock syndrom brought on by the Dalkon Shield) but a 
>> >lower rate of prevention than condoms.  
>> 
>> What are you excuses with respect to the:
>> 1) Contraceptive foam (98% effective).
>> 2) Diaphragm (97% effective).
>> 3) Carvical cap.
>> 4) Sponge.
>>
>Diaphragms ARE intrauterine devices, and your cited prevention rates are too
>high.

Are you sure you want to claim that diaphragms are intrauterine devices?

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women
From: garry@rice.edu (Garry C. King)
Subject: Re: Bias in Academia?
Followup-To: alt.feminism
Organization: Rice University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 18:58:39 GMT

In article <2v0ncrd.tyger@netcom.com>, tyger@netcom.com (Kitty in the
Middle) wrote:
> 
> Now, I am interested to hear *your* story, whether it is over 
> (WRT work in science) or whether it just began, if you are female.
> Or your opinion on the opportunities of women in science, if you
> are male.
> 
> And, in case you share my opinion that there is a real problem
> but you do not believe either in the antique prejudices against
> women's logical capabilities (e.g.), I would like to know what
> you think could radically change the situation. At universities
> as well as outside of Academia.
> 

Situations differ so widely that I'm not sure this will be helpful, but
here are my perceptions.

I'm a member of a Biochemistry department which currently has 3 female
faculty members out of 17.  The oldest of these women is the present
Department Chair (which rotates). Having participated in rounds of faculty
hiring over the past three years, I can say unequivocally that there is
*no* preference given to one sex over the other here.   

I tend to disagree with your suggestion that some kind of mentoring would
help the general position of women in the sciences.  Performance is still
the dominant standard - good work is generally recognized whether done by a
man or a woman at Yale or Podunk U. I know some women who will probably not
reach the top of the profession because they have decided (wisely, I think)
that having a family is more important to them than that extra bit of
recognition. Let's face it, internationally-competitive science is a tough
thing to do, and most people need to devote huge amounts of energy to do it
well.  I remember a recent email exchange with a female friend, where she
said that it was time to pick-up her kid from day care and " ... I wish I
could work late too ..." to which I could only respond "I wish I could go
home at 5:00".  That's life.  

I don't see a unique problem for women in this field at least. Your
reference to _antique_ preferences is pretty correct.  There are some old
bastards (only some, not all) running around with blatantly sexist ideas,
but they're retiring and dying.


Garry.