From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: they have eyes yet they do not see, was (I'm God) [200+ LINES]
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<70931@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 06:09:44 GMT

In article <70931@hydra.gatech.EDU> 
rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
>In article <fTKMHnC@quack.sac.ca.us> 
pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
>|In article <10989@gunn.ed.ac.uk> 
>|iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
>|>No, it isn't, for two reasons: (1) those books belong first and
>|>foremost to Judaism, and it denies that they have anything to do with
>|>Jesus of Nazareth -- and Jews ought to know, it's _their_ scripture;
>|>and (2) those books are so full of wild claims and odd contradictions
>|>that they are best dismissed altogether.
>|That's one of the strangest things about Christianity. The idea that the
>|Jews are not capable of correctly interpreting their own Hebrew
>|scriptures and that Christians are able to correctly interpret a Greek
>|translation (Septuagint) of Hebrew scripture. In Judaism, there is only
>Oh.  I thought the Jews (specifically, Jesus) opened the eyes of the
>people to his fulfilment of the Olt Testament.

Yeshua, if he even existed, did not pull the wool over many of the eyes
of Hellenistic Jews. It remained for Paul to take Christianity and
market it to the remains of the Roman Empire. Clearly, "convert or die"
was a very effective technique of selling Paulist Christianity to the
Europeans.

>|monotheism, one God of Israel, He whose name is not to be pronounced, He
>Jesus repeated this. The Lord our God is one. The question is who is the Lord.

He provided the answer when He said, "I am that I am".

>|who responded, "I am that I am", no Christian Devil, no Christian Jesus,
>I suppose the book of Job wasn't in the OT, huh?  Who came to God after
>roaming to and fro on the earth?  I think it was Satan (i.e., the Devil).

Satan is a Hebrew word meaning adversary, it is not the name of another
God or some prince of darkness. You will not find the Christian Devil in
the books of Judaism, what you find in Christian translations is
mistakes in translation, lots of them. That's what happens when you
forget to ask the Hebrews what their own books mean. Though the claim is
that 72 Hebrews, six from each of the twelve tribes, translated the
Hebrew scriptures into Greek and produced the Septuagint in Alexandria,
Egypt, each one translating separately yet yielding the exact same words,
it is obvious that the result was a poor translation. As to what
went wrong, one can only speculate. Christianity was based on this poor
translation. It remains for modern Christians to seek a better
translation, that is if they seek the truth.

>The whole OT points to the coming of a Savior, the Messiah, the Annointed
>One.  In Malachai 3, we see the Lord Almighty telling us that he (the
>Lord) will come.  Often we see THE angel of the Lord being referred to
>as God.  (angel means messenger.)  In Zechariah chapter 1, we see this
>angel of the Lord (who is at times referred to as God) and the Lord
>Almighty in the same passage - a hint of the trinity.
>Jesus even said he was the "I AM" - and that he was before Abraham.

All Christian exegesis propaganda and you fell for it! Why don't you consult 
with a Judaist for the meaning of the Hebrew scriptures? After all, whose
scriptures are they anyway?

>|no Christian Hell and the day of rest is the seventh day, Saturday. The
>Saturday is the Sabbath.  It is still observed by the Jews.  However,
>Jesus told us that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the
>Sabbath and that IT IS LAWFUL to do good on the Sabbath, as it is any
>day of the week.

Jesus told? Do you have a reference of what Yeshua said in Aramaic? And
you still haven't explained why most Christians seem to think that
Sunday is the day the Lord rested. Could that be a mistake? If such
a simple mistake as a confusion over which day of the week the Lord
rested exists, what else do you suppose might be mistaken? It's no big
deal really, provided that if you seek the truth that you search for the
truth in earnest. Truth is seldom found in propaganda.

>|irony of Christians trying to tell the Jews the meaning of their own
>|Hebrew scriptures is not lost. Part of the reason for this
>Again, the Jews are the ones who gave us the NT.

Oh really. Then why is it in Greek and Aramaic? Hebrew wasn't good
enough anymore? Think Richard, think! Hebrew has been the language of
Judaism from the very begining right up to the present, continuously
without interruption. Hellenistic Jews did produce the NT, but don't get
that confused with the Hebrew scriptures with which they have little
comparison. The center of Judaism was in Babylon at this time, not
Hellenistic Judaea nor Alexandria, Egypt. The mistakes in the Septuagint
make that rather obvious.

>|miss-communication on the part of the Christians is that the center of
>|Judaism was in Babylon at the time and Babylon was outside of the known
>|Christian world. Some Christians even try to claim that the Hebrews of
>I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Why were all of the Jews in 
>Jerusalem for the feast (Passover and Pentecost, etc.), if what you
>say is true?

I said that Babylon was outside of the known Christian world, not that
Jerusalem was outside of the known Babylonian and Hebrew world. Big
difference.

>|the OT died out or disappeared and the Jews of Babylon adopted the
>|ancient scriptures and claimed it as their own. Thus, by this logic,
>I've never heard this claim - the Jewish high priest was there in Jerusalem.

The center of Judaism was in Babylon at the time, not Jerusalem.

>|Christians are the rightful heirs of the Hebrew scriptures and Judaism
>|is a more modern re-interpretation of Hebrew scriptures that are more
>|modern than the Greek Septuagint. The fact that Judaism has been in practice
>Jesus the Christ is the fulfillment of the Scriptures.

Why is it that few followers of Judaism believe this? Could it be that
they know their own Hebrew scriptures better than you do? Why do you
suppose that they find the Christian argument to be unconvincing? Do you
suppose that the mistakes are just too comical? Judaism is monotheistic,
that's one of the things that separates it from other religions, why do
you think they would find the European pagan notion of a Holy Trinity to
be appealing?

>|continuously from the begining of the oral tradition right up to the
>|present, against all odds, and in the same Hebrew language is something
>|that the Christians prefer to ignore. Clearly, from a Christian
>How is this (Hebrew language) ignored?????

In incorrect translation into other languages and Christian attempts to
make the errors of the Septuagint correct. In a total failure to consult
the keepers of the faith of Judaism.

>|perspective, the Jews must be misguided in their interpretation of their
>|own Hebrew scriptures. It makes no sense to me, but some people buy this
>|argument, then again, you remember what PT Barnum said about suckers
>|being born every minute. If they'll go for the free gift grift, they'll
>|go for anything.
>And there is someone (Mr. Harvey?) trying to sell something to the
>sucker, isn't there?  What are you sell?

I sell nothing, but you are correct to be suspect. Seek the truth
Richard!

>|The topic of what Buddha did or didn't do is far to complicated for the
>|average EVILgelical Christian. Richard Pitts has so far demonstrated
>I am often amused at these kinds of intellecual superiority statements
>made they "THESE ENGLIGHTENED" people.  

I'm sure you are. Christianity also suffers from years of persecution of
Christian scholars. What becomes of a religion that burns all its
scholars and converts via "convert or die"? Is that the way of truth?

>|that he has read the Bible, (probably KJV), a book of Christian History
>Oh.  I guess the KJV is not worth reading.  I guess you've never read
>any of the modern translations, for I generally (90+%) of the time
>quote from the NIV.

That's good, that's a big first step from KJV to NIV. But NIV suffers some
from Christian exegesis, if you want just the words perhaps you should
get a copy of JPS:Tanakh, ISBN:0-8276-0252-9. I'm not saying that
Christian exegesis is all wrong and useless, but it is one big step removed
from the actual words of scripture. And a little word of advice on your
quest for the truth: Encylopedias are fine for fifth grade reports but
they can only be a very light version of the truth. Discover the world
of books. If all your local library has is encyclos, take a trip to the
big city or the closest university library. The Bible stands on its own,
using propaganda to support it only insults the writers. Propaganda is
for selling what is false or what can be sold through no legitimate
means.

>|propaganda and an encyclopedia. The message of the Buddha is an
>|intellectual one. Your average Christian is not interested in the truth,
>|instead they are interested in the easy story, the quick grift,
>|something simple that doesn't tax the mind. Most Christians aren't
>I see that intellecutalism is going to save you, correct?  

No, I didn't say that, but one must think if one is to find the truth.
And next you launch into the classic Christian attack on scholars. Sad
Richard, truly sad. Why do you resort to common street grifts? Is your
understanding of Christianity so poor that you must do this when you are
confronted with the truth? Why do you fear the truth? Why do you
distrust yourself? No one will lead you, you must find your own way.
Allow yourself to be led by others and you will most likely be misled.
Use your mind Richard, it was given to you for a reason. Learn from
dogma but please don't become dogmatic. Don't insult the Creator.

<Devil may quote scripture deleted.>

>|interested in the truth, that would be far to complicated, instead they
>You are right - they are far to complicated.  Wisdom is not required
>to enter the Kingdom of God.  Faith is required - you can be wise, but
>that doesn't get you in.  Else, why would an ability one is born with 
>be the factor of one being able to merit salvation.

One is not born with knowledge of truth, that is why. If you seek truth,
then seek it honestly. If you seek deception, the strength of ignorance,
don't mask it by claiming to seek truth. Ignorance is strength, but not
the way of truth. Are you seeking truth, or ignorance, Richard?

>|prefer the easy assurance of selffulfilling propaganda, the fool's idea
>|that the only book worth reading is KJV. The main attraction of
>The fool has said in his heart there is no God.

Don't be so sure of that.

>|Christianity is the marketing concept that all you have to do is believe
>|in Jesus and ride his coattails into Heaven when you die. If you believe
>That's right.  Jesus paid the price - you got a pretty good grasp of what
>is required to follow Jesus and so be saved.

You sound like an authentic person leading an inauthentic life. I
thought you were seeking the truth. How have you been misled?

>Don't let it be said of you that you never understood, but just heard.
>Open you heart up to Jesus the Christ - humble yourself and he will 
>exalt you.

If you seek truth, seek truth. Learn from dogma but please do not become
dogmatic.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc