HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Words Like Arrows
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:11:09 GMT
Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA

In article <LJMORLY.92Sep9184512@polaris.utu.fi> ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen) writes:
>
>> Other religions believe differently.
>
>Religions are just human attempts to reach God, whereas the true relation-
>ship with God is no religion. C'mon join us !

Christianity is THE true religion, and it expresses itself in love of God
and love of neighbor.  It expresses itself in love for God's law, and a
desire to live according to it.

  If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridles not his tongue,
  but deceives his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
  Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit
  the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself
  unspotted from the world.  (James 1:26,27)

-- 
Tom Albrecht
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Mann)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 18:09:44 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Paradise
Reply-To: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: Usenet 3.0

Rob Strom writes:
>If you mean by your question, "How would I justify myself before
>God at the time of my death", then my answer is:  through my
>acts of righteousness, justice, mercy, kindness, charity,
>and improving the world.  I think that the answer to this
>question distinguishes Jews of all flavors from Christians.

Hi Rob!

I read this as saying you will stand before God and justify yourself
by saying "look what I have done."  This answer not only "distinguishes
[rabbinic] Jews from ... Christians," it distinguishes *ALL* other religions
from Christianity.  Christianity is the *ONLY* religion where God justifies
us before Him because of our belief and relationship with Y'Shua, not
because of what we've done on our own merits.  It's what God has done for us.


 Shalom!  |  INTERNET: mannk@fshvmfk1.vnet.ibm.com            Christ
   Ken    |  VNET:     FSHVMFK1(MANNK)                          is
          |  IBMnet:   mannk@saskatchewan.fishkill.ibm.com    risen!
-----------------------------------------------------------
               You can only coast downhill!
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Mann)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 13:51:19 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Gentile Christianity is false?
Reply-To: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: Usenet 3.0

(posted with permission from Tom A.)
In private communications with Tom A., he is of the impression that some
MJs in this newsgroup feel that MJ is not a sect of Christianity (like
Methodist, Baptist or Roman Catholic), but the one true way, and gentile
Christianity (as practiced by most Christians) is basically a false
religion.

Can you please comment on this?
Please direct your responses to/at me, not to/at Tom.  Thanks.

 Shalom!  |  INTERNET: mannk@fshvmfk1.vnet.ibm.com            Christ
   Ken    |  VNET:     FSHVMFK1(MANNK)                          is
          |  IBMnet:   mannk@saskatchewan.fishkill.ibm.com    risen!
-----------------------------------------------------------
               You can only coast downhill!
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Words Like Arrows
Date: 7 Sep 1992 10:33:09 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Apparently, a comment of mine was unclear...

>>    Don't know how you figure it.  The Messiah is a wholly Jewish
>> concept.
> Yup.
>>  Yeshua was a Jewish man
> If he existed, yes he was.

Replace with "If you contend that his existence was that of
the messiah as understood as a *Jewish* concept, then Jesus would
have to be fully human, not the man-god Christianity portrays."

R

--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean
Date: 14 Sep 1992 22:48:43 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Bruce Tiffany falsely accuses (as usual):
[...]
> But Bill, it *is* OK for a Jew to believe he knows who the Messiah is ...
> as long as it isn't Yeshua!

A Jew can say "I believe that a particular person is the potential
messiah in this generation, and will assume the role if we deserve
him."  My brother Howard might be the Messiah, assuming we're
actually from Judah, not Levi.

However, no dead person can be the messiah, whether he be Jesus,
Shabbeta Tzvi, Jacob Frank, or Bar Kochba.  It is *not* OK for
a Jew to believe that one of those persons was the messiah since
they all died, having failed to do what the messiah must do.

Rob


-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Shunning and Psy-war
Date: 15 Sep 92 08:43:30 EDT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

#3218

>Subject: Re: Shunning and Psy-war
>From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
>Date: 3 Sep 1992 20:46:35 -0500

>>> ... 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.

And what would you advise?

>>> 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.

As with Rob Strom's one-sided view of what may have happened on a beach years
ago, I won't condemn anyone without hearing *both* sides of the story.

I haven't learned *nothing* from raising five kids ...	:-)

-- Bruce Tiffany
From: Malachi.Robertson@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Malachi Robertson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Date: 7 Sep 92 04:28:18 GMT
Distribution: alt.messianic
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

Rich,

I have three questions:
(1)  Are you advocating that the letter of the law be ignored so that one
can follow the spirit?
(2)  What code of ethics are you referring to?
(3)  If you are negating the Sabbath, then are you then negating the other
nine ten commandments?  If you are just negating the fourth, then what is
your basis for doing so?

Seeking the truth,
"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: Re: My Heritage
Date: 8 Sep 1992 11:31:07 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

>>                             -BC> response <BC-
>>    Nope.  Though you didn't have exactly a Brit-Millah according to
>>    Torah, (since it was a medical circumcision), you still are
>>    circumcised and a Jew.

Please, let's not confuse the guy:

1.  He is circumcised
2.  He is Jewish
3.  He has NOT fulfilled the commandment of "bris milah"
      through his medical circumcision.


>>  ...  This "re-circumcision" business, applies
>>    only to proselytes/converts to Judaism, from the Gentiles, who are
>>    already circumcised, and would include shedding a single drop of
>>    blood.  That is not necessary for a natural born circumcised Jew
>>    anyway, so you don't have to worry about it.

Totally wrong.  This step *is* necessary for every Jew who has not
had a "bris milah," both converts and natural born.

R

-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Identification with Abra
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:02:02 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    In response to Tom Albrecht
TA>From: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
TA>Date: 1 Sep 92 17:07:06 GMT
TA>Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA
TA>Message-ID: <2511@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM>

TA>Messianic Jews claim to be real Jews in the tradition of Abraham, Isaac,
TA>and Jacob, that is, they claim to be both religiously and racially relat
TA>to the patriarchs.

    Oh...here we go. When all else fails then there is always the
argument that the Jews are not really Jews!  Next stop: Jesus was not
really a Jew and real Jews are the Anglo Saxons of Great Britain.
When this garbage that Jews aren't really Jews comes in then the problem
absolutely ceases to be doctrinal error and is openly full fledged anti-
semitism.

TA>But are MJs racially related to the patriarchs?  The answer is, maybe, b
TA>who knows.  Unlike many of the Jews of Jesus' and Paul's day, no modern 
TA>I'm aware of can trace a direct, unbroken line back to our father Abraha
TA>Few if any can even identify for sure which of the twelve tribes they ar
TA>descended from (if they are in fact descended from any of the twelve
TA>tribes.)  Their lineage is based on "oral tradition," rather than
TA>established fact.  From an objective standpoint, no MJ has any more
TA>evidence that they are from Abraham physical seed than I do.  They only
TA>direct claim MJs have to the title of racial Jews is based on the fact t
TA>they are descended from rabbinic Jews.  And since rabbinic Jews have
TA>abandoned the biblical standard of patriarchal lineage in favor of a
TA>matriarchal one, this testimony is very shaky.

    Such desparation to deny the on-going role of Israel in the plan of
God! From the KKK, from neo-nazis, from Aryan Nations, etc. I expect to
hear this denial of ethnic Jews, but this is going a little farther than
most of your Reformed Church associates would dare to go.  Some
"objective standpoint," Tom.  You are wrapping racial prejudice in
theological garb.

--  
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: My Heritage
Date: 10 Sep 1992 08:17:58 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

I said:

RAL> 3.  He has NOT fulfilled the commandment of "bris milah"
RAL> through his medical circumcision.

Bill Carlson said:

>     Yes, let's not confuse the guy.  He has not fulfilled the halachah
>     of Brit-Millah, yet he HAS fullfilled the Mitzvah of Brit....

The mitzvah is "bris-millah." (bris and brit are the same word)
I've never heard of a mitzvah of "brit."  Source, please?


[...]
>      Nope.  You are absolutely incorrect.  There is only one recored
>      case of a "medical" circumcision in all of Scripture and Rabbinic
>      lit..  And when it was done, it was accepted by HaShem!  That was
>      when Moshe was going to be killed by G-d for failing to
>      circumcise his son through Zipporah.  Medical I say, as Zipporah
>      did it, not as a 'Mohel',
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^

The term 'mohel' means 'one who performs bris milah' (Jewish circumcision)
Zipporah certainly qualified.


>  not in regard to the Mitzvot, and not
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This was before Sinai.


>      in the proper time 
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A 'bris milah' is still valid after the 8th day, although the
8th day is preferable.  Right now, Rich could get "hatafas
dam bris" (there is no such thing as "re-circumcision") and 
fulfill the Torah commandment.


> - yet, it was accepted by HaShem and saved the live of Moshe.

Why shouldn't it have been?


Thus, a Jew who has a medical circumcision:

    (1) is _not_ considered "uncircumcised"
    (2) has _not_ fulfilled the Torah commandment of bris milah
    (3) does _not_ need "re-circumcision" - he's already circumcised
    (4) _does_ need "hatafas dam bris" (drawing the drop of blood 
        for the sake of the commandment of bris milah)

>...      circumcised prior.  And if you disagree - please show me in
>      HALACHAH - (not some obscure commentary), where it is so...

A medical circumcision is not done for the sake of the commandment
of 'bris milah' and therefore doesn't fulfill it.

R

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: alper@sushi.psych.nwu.edu (Theodore M. Alper)
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:59:23 GMT

In article <139971.2AAC547E@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson) writes:
> Ri> One person told me that in order to become faithful to the Jewish
> Ri> religion I would have to be circumsized again, properly.
>                             -BC> response <BC-
>    Nope.  Though you didn't have exactly a Brit-Millah according to
>    Torah, (since it was a medical circumcision), you still are
>    circumcised and a Jew.  This "re-circumcision" business, applies
>    only to proselytes/converts to Judaism, from the Gentiles, who are
>    already circumcised, and would include shedding a single drop of
>    blood.  That is not necessary for a natural born circumcised Jew
>    anyway, so you don't have to worry about it.

Is this accurate? Could you cite your source for this? 
(Note, I'm too ignorant of halacha to be certain you're mistaken,
but I am curious to know how MJs come to decisions on this sort
of thing.)
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Clean And Unclean Un
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:11:04 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/18.0 - Midrash, Denver CO


                -=> Quoting Robert A. Levene <=-
 RAL> From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
 RAL> Date: 6 Sep 92 13:11:10 GMT
 RAL> Organization: Johns Hopkins University
 RAL> Message-ID: <9209060719.AA04641@aplpy.jhuapl.edu>
 RAL> Newsgroups: alt.messianic
 RAL> You don't share tenets with Judaism, so don't call your practice
 RAL> Jewish.  Simple?
     Simple?!  What do you call practicing: Erev-Shabbat - l'Yom
     Shabbat - Havdolah; laying Tefillin, wearing tzitzit; keeping
     the High Holy Days; giving tzaddakah and supporting Zionist
     causes and Israel; chanting the Torah portion; etc....?  Hindu?!
          An Observant Jew, who comes to the conclusion that Y'shua is
          the Messiah, - does NOT suddenly: shave his head, sit on a
          rock, and eat rice! - NO, he remains Observant.
     We're not playing games here; so we'd appreciate the same from
     you.  You remind me of the little Dutch boy looking for a hole
     in the dyke, - only NOT to plug it!
     +================================================================+
     |                               /\                               |
     |                          ____/_ \____                          |
     |                          \  ___\ \  /                          |
     |                !!!!!!!    \/ /  \/ /    !!!!!!!                |
     |                |||||||    / /\__/_/\    |||||||                |
     |                |||||||   /__\ \_____\   |||||||                |
     |       |        ***W***       \  /       ***W***        |       |
     |      _-_          T           \/           T          _-_      |
     |      | |----------------------------------------------| |      |
     |      | |    Sh'ma Yisrael YHVH ELOHEINU YHVH Echad    | |      |
     |      | |  V'ahata et HaShem Elohekha b'khol l'vavcha  | |      |
     |      | |     oovkhol nafsh'kha ovvkhol me'odekha      | |      |
     |      | |----------------------------------------------| |      |
     |      -_-                                              -_-      |
     |       |                                                |       |
     |It has been said: The Father spoke, and the Word is Messiah, and|
     |            the breath that carries the Word is the             |
     |                   Ruach HaKodesh-(Holy Spirit).                |
     +================================================================+

... 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: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: lifdot & l'chaper (was: Re: Paradise (was Re:
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:25:49

> not the only noun form derived from the root kaf-peh-resh. "kapporet"
> means "the Holy of Holies" and "kopher" means "atheist" as well. 

Oops. "kodesh hakdoshim" is "the Holy of Holies" and "kapporet" is "the 
mercy seat" or "curtain"...  

- Laura
--
Loving the truth is loving God.
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean Un / Maccoby book
Organization: University of Turku
	<LJMORLY.92Sep12184716@polaris.utu.fi>
Date: 13 Sep 92 10:26:02

I just want to elaborate a couple of things I said.

Rambam's 5th principle:
> >   5  Prayers should be directed to G-d

I wrote:
> The the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, yes.
  (to)
Nothing wrong with 'God', either.

Rambam's 7th principle:
> >   7  Moses' level of prophecy was unique, of greater quality
> >       than those who preceded and followed him

I wrote:
> Are there different "levels" of prophesy ? Moshe was a servant of God
> like many others. 

I didn't mean to dismiss Moshe Rabbeinu (or Rabbeichem or whatever) at
all; he really was the greatest navi as Deut. 34:10-12 says. Just that
this principle is easy to understand in somewhat oriental way, so that
we couldn't even imagine of having a close relationship with God.
I'm awfully sorry for possible misunderstandings.

Yours, Laura
--
Loving the truth is loving God.
From: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Words like arrows
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:28:45 GMT
Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA

Donna D'Iorio wrote:

>     Don't know how you figure it.  The Messiah is a wholly Jewish
> concept.  Yeshua was a Jewish man whose ministry was ONLY to the lost
> sheep of the house of Israel and the house of Judah.  All His disciples
> were Jewish.  All those who came to faith in Him in the beginning were
> Jewish.  Sounds to me like it is the non-Jewish believers that
> have changed their family name and come into the family fortune.
> So how can Harvey be faulted for making his affiliation clear just
> because the adopted children have outnumbered the natural children for
> so long?

God has been changing people's names for thousands of years.  It's nothing
to be embarrassed about.  Abram became Abraham.  Jacob became Israel.
Simon became Peter.  Saul became Paul.   The Hebrews became the Israelites.
The Jews became the Christians.

How many Jews still refer to themselves publically as "Hebrews?"  How many
Jews (in this country) refer to themselves as Israelites?  Wouldn't it be
confusing for an American Jew to go about in public claiming to be an
Israelite?

For that same reason, given modern circumstances, isn't it confusing for a
Christian to go about publically claiming to be a Jew?  While technically
MJs may be descended from modern Jews, religiously they are Christian.
They subscribe to the orthodox creeds of the Church -- written by all those
good, gentile Christians.

Just as technically, according to the apostle Paul, I'm a member of the
commonwealth of Israel and a child of Abraham, but it would be unwise for
me to claim to be an Israelite in public (except, of course, in this forum
:-) ).

-- 
Tom Albrecht
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Date: 8 Sep 1992 14:20:28 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Bill Carlson writes:

>      Actually, I think the idea is more that modern Rabbinic Judaism
>      has built into itself, (all too often), an auto-rejection of
>      Y'shua as Messiah.

I insist that you prove or retract this accusation.  To do so, you
would have to demonstrate that rejection of Jesus as a man-god
messiah was the cause, not an effect of Judaism's principles.

Otherwise, I'll just add your accusation to the usual collection
of "Jewish conspiracy" accusations our enemies have concocted over the years.


>     ...  One can be going along in Rabbinic Judiasm,
>      and simply come to the conclusion that Y'shua is the Messiah, and
>      woooosh - off you go; even though nothing else has changed at
>      that point in ones belief system,

Smokescreen, Bill. 

A Jew who believes "Jesus was the messiah-ben-Yosef"
doesn't really change his beliefs that much.

A Jew who believes "Jesus was the messiah-ben-Dovid"
is grouped along with those who thought Shabbetai Tzvi, Jacob Frank,
and Bar Kochba were after the latters' deaths.

A Jew who believes "Jesus is God" no longer practices Judaism.

>           No statues; no easterous/ishatar worship day; no winter
>           solstice (yule, etc...) celebration; not holding to the
>           sinless nature of Mary/Miryam; not agreeing with 'Papal
>           authority' for any man; not anti-Nomian/Torah; that
>           wafers do not become actual-physical flesh and blood;

You're obviously not Roman Catholic.

Now, how do you differ from Evangelical Protestant Christianity?


[...]
>   The Orthodox are Jews.  But they don't identify themselves
>    as Reform Jews.  Why not? :-)

Because "Reform" and "Orthodox" are sub-groups of "Judaism."
These labels give a fair picture of the range of our principles.

You'll find us under "Synagogues - Orthodox" and "Synagogues - Reform"
because in the U.S. "Synagogue" denotes a house of worship in which
Judaism is practiced.

Similarly, you don't identify yourselves as "Catholic" because
you aren't.  However, but you and the Catholics would use
the term "Christian," and the appropriate name for such houses
of worship is "Churches."  Therefore, it's logically correct
for Catholics to be under "Churches - Roman Catholic,"
"Churches - Anglican" and for you to be under "Churches - Messianic."

It's clear from Harvey's post that other Christian organizations
accept you under their umbrella, but no Jewish organizations do.
Therefore it is deceptive and anti-semantic to list yourself
as "Synagogues - Messianic."

Rob

-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Mann)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 16:41:54 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Gentile Christianity is false?
Reply-To: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: Usenet 3.0

I wrote:
>Can you please comment on this?
>Please direct your responses to/at me, not to/at Tom.  Thanks.

and Connie Stillinger replied:
>Please post instead of or in addition to emailing, because I (and no
>doubt others) would also like to see the responses to this.

Sorry Connie.  I meant please direct your responses to me, here on
this newsgroup (not through email).  My concern was to avoid any
bashing of Tom A., because I am asking, not him.  Sorry if I caused
any confusion.

 Shalom!  |  INTERNET: mannk@fshvmfk1.vnet.ibm.com            Christ
   Ken    |  VNET:     FSHVMFK1(MANNK)                          is
          |  IBMnet:   mannk@saskatchewan.fishkill.ibm.com    risen!
-----------------------------------------------------------
               You can only coast downhill!