HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Words Like Arrows
Date: 6 Sep 1992 08:10:37 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG writes:

RL> I don't advocate silence, rather make sure that your charges
RL> have a basis in reality so they can be dealt with honestly.
>
>    Well, Robert, I have spent the last several years looking into
> exactly that.  What do you think about Tom's latest assertion that your
> bloodlines are questionably "Jewish"?

He's incorrect.

>   How much more reality do you need
> to understand that I'm not making groundless charges?

I await his response.

RA> Because re-defining terms enables them to rationalize misleading
RA> others, who assume that "MJ" terms such as "orthodox Jew" are
RA> equivalent to their non-MJ counterparts.
>
>    You are ascribing motives that have nothing to do with with the
> Messianic movement.  It is no attempt to mislead anyone, but to be true
> to who they really are.

Then why does the "Messianic Jewish Movement" publish their
"communications card" for witnessing to Jews using certain
terms and avoiding others?  For example "tree" instead of "cross"
and "Bible believer" instead of "Christian."

>  If you could see this as a line with first
> century Messinic Jews on one end and 1992 Messianic Jews on the other
> end, then you would see that just about all the Jews that have believed
> in Yeshua in between the two ends have been denied the expression of who
> they really are!  Denied on one hand by the gentile Church and on the
> other by non-believeing Judaism.

Rightly so.


>  But the return to identification as
> Messianic Jews is not for the purpose of misleading anyone..

Then why avoid "Christian" sounding terminology?


> ..who do you
> know that is truly confused or mislead by this?  This is a non-argument.

My great-aunt's stepdaugther's daughter and her family.


>    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.

>  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.

There's a chasm of difference between believing a particular person
to be worthy of being validated as messiah, and asserting that
a god-man messiah had to be sacrificed to atone for sin and
throw out Torah law.

>  Sounds to me like it is the non-Jewish believers that
> have changed their family name and come into the family fortune.

Not at all.  Although they believe themselves to be the
heirs, they call themselves "Christians" and avoid confusion
with Jews.

> So how can Harvey be faulted for making his affiliation clear just
> because the adopted children have outnumbered the natural children for
> so long?

You have to be suspicious of the motives of someone who intentionally
uses an ambiguous self-description.  That's anti-semantic.

R
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean Un
Date: 6 Sep 1992 08:11:10 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


I wrote:
>> So tell your "MJ" brethren to identify themselves publicly
>> as a Christian movement (since they share tenets with other
>> Christian groups) instead of a Jewish movement (since their
> >tenets differ from all the Jewish groups.)

Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG writes:
>    Not exactly true, Robert. If you go back to the root system of the
> faith in Yeshua, it is we gentile believers who are sharing the tenets
> with Messianic believers rather than how you have stated it here.

What difference does that make?  You do share tenets, so you should
call your practice by the term descriptive of both, "Christianity."
You don't share tenets with Judaism, so don't call your practice
Jewish.  Simple?
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Date: 6 Sep 1992 08:09:53 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


Rich B. writes:

> with my reference to "bonds of the Law."  This phrase (to me) means
> taking on all of the rituals and observences and every 'jot & tittle'
> of the Law as my "religion."  This is NOT what I wish to do.  The same
> book of Romans explains how the Law "worketh death" because it reveals
> sin and sin is the reason we die.

What a fascinating insight.  People hate the Torah because it reveals
that many activities people do are forbidden.  Classic
shoot-the-messenger attitude.

>  I'm not sure even now if my words
> will be misunderstood (I hope not), but I believe in being free of the
> rituals & observances of days and months and all to be "free to walk
> in the spirit of the Law."  In otherwords I believe in obeying the law
> in reference to things such as "codes of ethics" and such.

Where does G-d make a distinction between ethical laws and other types?

> I do not
> believe I am sinning because I work on Saturday and go to church on
> Sunday.  I do not believe it is wrong to eat pork.  I do not believe
> in the ritual of circumcision of the flesh, but rather the siritual
> circumcision of the heart.  Does this make sense to you of the MJ
> faith? :(

G-d commanded Jews not to eat pork.  That's the point.

[...]
> That makes good sense.  Though I'm still not quite sure how to get
> info on where and how to find Messianic Congregations.  One article I
> read on a.m said that MJs are found in every denomination. Based on
> your words above I checked the yellow-pages and could find no
> reference to Messianc Jewish fellowships (I checked under "Churches"
> and "Synagogues") so I'm still in the dark about that.

Maybe your region has been spared.

> Is this what Laura meant when she said you'd say I was "acting goyisha"?
> Because I percieve from the "gentile" upbringing (especially within the
> Christian community), having no real experience with Judaism other than
> studying it in Christian and secular literature?

Then study Judaism for real, from Jewish literature, from Jews who
believe the Torah and practice it.

R
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Date: 6 Sep 92 16:52:37 GMT
Organization: University of Turku

In article <9209060711.AA04615@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
> I wrote:
> >> You're 180 degrees away.  If you wrong someone, *only* that
> >> person can forgive you.  Repentance, charity, etc. only help
> >> if you transgress against G-d.

> In article <LJMORLY.92Sep4110218@polaris.utu.fi> you write:>
> > [..] If you kill someone, you can't ask forgiveness
> > from him anymore. 

> That's right.  One more reason not to murder.

So are you saying that killing someone is an act both agaist God and 
that person ? What are the means of atonement for that ?

> > And if you transgress against God (as actually is the
> > case always), you are under the thread of punishment until the sacrifice
> > has been made. Repentance is needed, but charity etc. has nothing to do with
> > this.[...]

> One's path of repentance usually includes charity.

What is the difference between "sincere" and "insincere" righteous acts ?
(ref. Is. 64:5 (6), see Jer. 17:9 as well) Or what is your "path of
repentance" ?

> >> >  If, inorder to recieve forgiveness from God blood must be shed how
> >> > does one do this today?
> >
> >> Heartfelt prayer, sincere repentance, and righteous action.
> >
> > Sacrifice. (that was given for us about 2000 years ago)

> Answered in other post.

Same here. See Is. 53, Ps. 40:7-9

> >> > Christian today."  I assure you it was no such thing.  Until you have
> >> > had the same experience you can NEVER know what it is like to KNOW
> >> > beyond a shodow of a doubt that God is with you every walking second.
> >
> >> Actually, G-d warned us about such experiences in Deut. 13:4.
> >
> > Where do you get that ?

> "Signs and wonders" are sometimes a test of faith.  It's easy
> to tell if it's a test - if the message is to go against the
> Torah, you know it's a test.

That's right. I'll pray you won't wait until Tzar haMashiach 
(Anti-Christ). BTW I asked, why the wrath (of God) came upon Israel
instead of Moab (2 Kings 3:27) ? This story makes Torah shebe'al-pe
untrustworthy, you know.  

> R

- Laura
--
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans 
of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from ancient, from the days of eternity." - Micha 5:1

"Though the mountains be shaken and the hills be removed, yet my unfailing 
love for you will not be shaken nor my covenant of peace be removed,"
says the LORD, who has compassion on you.    - Yeshaya 54:10

met b'chet, CHAI B'Y'SHUA !
From: Malachi.Robertson@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Malachi Robertson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Identification with Abra
Date: 7 Sep 92 03:53:44 GMT
Distribution: alt.messianic
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

Donna,

I will start out by saying that I disagree with Tom on several theological
issues and possibly other issues, but I find that your post that appeared
to place him into the camp of anti-semites like the Nazi's a bit hard to
swallow given the words of Tom you were reacting to.  It seemed to me that
all Tom was pointing to was the difficult he seemed to have in believing
that modern Jews can actually trace their lineage clearly back to Abraham.
I didn't see some massive attack against ethnic Jews in this nor an attack
upon the Israel of G-d playing a role in G-d's plans for the future.  All
I saw was a person expressing skepticism.  Instead of attacking Tom, it
might be more fruitful to address his skepticism.  Also, I would like to
see his skepticism addressed such that my own knowledge about Jews might
be increased.

"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: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Date: 15 Sep 1992 09:09:27 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


> RAL> It only looks like an auto-rejection because many Jews live
> RAL> among Christians.

Bill Carlson:
>     Now?  What about tractate "Toldot Yeshu".  It obviously was
>     written with an ax to grind.

Lighten up, Bill.  Ever hear of satire?  This may well be the
oldest known example of Jewish literary humor.

[...]
>     Because if someone goes to a shule, their personal beliefs are
>     seldom questioned.  Even two agnostic/athiest Jewish people can
>     be married by a Rabbi.  Can two Messianic's?

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

>   -No!  What about
>     the adoption of the Kararim "Faith strengthened"?

Karaism is not accepted for Jewish law rulings, which isn't
a problem since R' Troki's book isn't about law rulings
in the first place.

R

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: Paradise (was Re: Clean And Unclean Un / Maccoby Book)
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 18:14:24 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Research

In article <LJMORLY.92Sep5192923@polaris.utu.fi>, ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep04.200800.25038@watson.ibm.com> strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> > In article <LJMORLY.92Aug30185025@polaris.utu.fi>, ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen) writes:
|> 
|> > |> How do you think you'll get pass the angel who is standing in front of the 
|> > |> paradise with a flaming sword (Gen. 3:24) ? 
|> > |> 
|> > Do you (Christians) equate the garden of Eden with heaven/the afterlife?
|> 
|> What do you mean by this question ? It's all the same how you call it;
|> heaven, paradise, olam haba... It's the place without evil, and evil
|> can't enter to it. 

To me, the garden of Eden and olam ha-ba are two different ideas entirely.

The garden of Eden refers to a place on the earth.  And the story
in Genesis makes it clear that we can never go back there.  Whether
you interpret the story literally or as a metaphor for the origin
of human awareness of God and of sin, either way you can't go back.

Olam ha-ba, on the other hand, means "the world to come".  There
are also many different interpretations of what this is,
but it is generally not thought of as a place on the earth.

What I meant by this question is:  do you view the garden of Eden
and olam ha-ba as two different names for the same thing?


|> So, how would you answer to the question, how you'll get pass the angel 
|> who is standing in front of the paradise with a flaming sword ?
|> Or do you count yourself to the Sadducees who didn't believe in afterlife ?
|> 

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.

-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Intrater
Date: 6 Sep 92 16:06:02 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    In response to Bruce Tiffany:
bb>From: btiffany@pbs.org
bb>Date: 2 Sep 92 12:49:40 GMT
bb>Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA
bb>Message-ID: <1992Sep2.084940.16978@pbs.org>

bb>I probably was, although I don't remember it specifically.  Keith is my
bb>friend.  I'm not sure it's accurate to call him Dan's "offspring", since
bb>he knew the Lord when he came to Beth Messiah years ago, but he did rece
bb>a lot of training and growing at BMC from Dan and others.  He's kind of 
bb>Sha'ul, who came in late but LOOK OUT!  He was in Guatemala as a Marxist
bb>revolutionary when he came to Yeshua, and he was convinced he was the on
bb>Jew in the world who realized Yeshua is the Messiah.

    Hmmm...the "offspring" thing was just my assumption from bits and
pieces of information.  A Guatemalan Marxist, eh?  Interesting
background...had no idea...just that he struck me as you describe above,
Look out! He's coming through!

bb>If you can give me an e-mail address that actually works, I'll send you
bb>some more stuff regarding Keith.

    I am working on that to see how it might be accomplished.  I would
very much like to get this some way.

bb>Did you happen to see Keith at the conference?

    I knew he was there at some point but never saw him actually.  Had
really hoped he would be teaching...but not this year.

--  
Donna D'Iorio - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Rob's Law
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:26:48 GMT
Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA

In article <m0mRiFd-0000XmC@juts.ccc.amdahl.com> rich.bellacera@amail.amdahl.com writes:
>
>I know why *I* believe this is true, but you would probably disagree.  I
>believe that the REAL reason blood sacrifices have ceased is because for a Jew
>to shed blood for the remission of sins *today* would be a most henious deed.
>The Temple was destroyed to prevent this form of sacrilege continuing.  Yeshua
>paid the ULTIMATE price for our sins, to sacrifice today would be like
>slapping God in the face for his most precious of gifts: His Son.

Rich,

Those are interesting questions, and an insightful perspective on Temple
sacrifices.  Other interesting questions might be: from a new covenant
perspective, what is "real Judasim" and who today practices it?  Is real
Judaism defined by ancient customs and traditions, or by identification
with the new covenant in the blood of Messiah Jesus?

-- 
Tom Albrecht
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Words Like Arrows
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:10:03 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 13:10:37 GMT
 RAL> Organization: Johns Hopkins University
 RAL> Message-ID: <9209060757.AA04757@aplpy.jhuapl.edu>
 RAL> Newsgroups: alt.messianic
 RAL> 
 RAL> Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG writes:
 RAL> Then why does the "Messianic Jewish Movement" publish their
 RAL> "communications card" for witnessing to Jews using certain
 RAL> terms and avoiding others?  For example "tree" instead of "cross"
 RAL> and "Bible believer" instead of "Christian."
                             -BC> reply <BC-
     Because "Christian" is a Greek to English term; and the only ones
     called that were the Gentile Believers in Antioch in Scripture.
     As a matter of fact; in Talmud we are refered to as the Natzratim
     Y'hudim, so... why does that bother you.  We are NOT refered to
     as the Goyim followers of Y'shua in Talmud, so..., I think your
     contention is groundless, from both a historical, and a logical
     point of view.  Why tree?  - Because cursed is everyone who hangs
     on a tree.  And it is called a "tree" in the Good-News account of
     Yochanan.  And cross is a misleading term, as it is a later Greek
     term, (post 2nd century), and simply refers to a persecution-
     stake, or a rough hewn beam -(without or with the cross-beam, that
     would be a digression at this point, so I'll not get into that).
 >  Yeshua was a Jewish man
 RAL> 
 RAL> If he existed, yes he was.
                             -BC> reply <BC-
     Various place in Talmud and Rabbinic writings, even in the Mishnah
     it says He did.  Are you doubting your own Rabbinic writings :-)
BTW..., Whether YOU like it or not, Rabbinic Judaism, by and large,
refers to us as "Messianic Jews" - same as we do.  The term is here
to stay!

... 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: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Genesis
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:44:43 GMT
Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA

In article <19920908.105826.200@almaden.ibm.com> mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
>I would like to know what the MJ position is on interpreting Genesis,
>specifically the Creation account.
>Was it six 24-hour days, or millions of years?
>Was Noah's flood worldwide r just figurative?
>Does the UMJC has an "official" position?
>
>While we're at it, I'd like to hear Tom A.'s position as well!

Wow, gee, thanks ...

I believe in a six (24-hour) day literal creation.

I believe Noah's flood (actually it was God's flood, Noah just got to play
a bit part) was a literal, worldwide flood.

The reason I believe these things I because I also believe that all truth
is God's truth, and that scientific theories and speculation (like
evolution) must be judged by the Word of God, not vice versa.  Scientists
who deny the truth of the Word of God obviously have a different worldview
than a person who believes in divine revelation, and the supernatural aspect
of God's creation.  Creating the world in six-days is a trivial task for
a God who could become flesh and die for our sins.

-- 
Tom Albrecht
From: tom@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Words Like Arrows
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:47:44 GMT
Organization: Unisys, Applied Technology, Malvern, PA

In article <9209060757.AA04757@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
>Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG writes:
>
>>    Well, Robert, I have spent the last several years looking into
>> exactly that.  What do you think about Tom's latest assertion that your
>> bloodlines are questionably "Jewish"?
>
>He's incorrect.

I questioned whether any modern Jew could prove conclusively that s/he was
descended from Abraham's loins and would unquestionably qualify as a racial
Jew.  The racial issue seems to be a the heart of Paul's discussion in
Romans 9-11.  Further, I asked what bearing that question might have on the
matter of restoration found in Romans 11.  That question was ignored. 

Whether folks who call themselves "Jews" are "Jewish" or not is another
matter altogether.  I suppose that's for Jews to decide.

>>   How much more reality do you need
>> to understand that I'm not making groundless charges?
>
>I await his response.

But until I'm given something to respond to by Donna, there will be none. 
Donna uses her own manipulative words to make her point.  Inflammatory
comments about the KKK and Nazis is a smokescreen often used by the
theologically illiterate in Christian circles.  When Donna can quote God's
law-word with equal gusto, then we can discuss theological questions.

-- 
Tom Albrecht
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: lifdot & l'chaper (was: Re: Paradise (was Re:
Date: 15 Sep 1992 11:57:37 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


> But there is this distiction between Messiah ben Yosef and Messiah
> ben David. Now, put them two together and you'll get someone who dies
> and after that is a king. 

You can't be a king after you're dead.
You're a corpse after you're dead.

Even if one is raised from the dead, that doesn't change one's
ancestry from Yosef to Yehuda.

...
>The yod's and vav's are easily confused when reading an old text without 
>vowels. The word I wrote 'ka'aru' is written with vav in some manuscripts
>and translated as 'pierced' in Septuagint and Syriac. 'ke'ari'/'ka'ari'
>is not a verb at all; it's the distorted form from which you can (with
>good imagination) derive 'like a lion' - 'ke-ari'.

You're making the mistake of relying on translations rather than
the traditional text, which is authoritative to Jews.


>> The expression in Numbers 31:50 and Leviticus 17:11 is
>>  __   __  ___  |_ 
>>    | |_ |    |   |
>>    | ___| ___|  / 
>>       ..   _    :  
>
>> which means "to atone," not "to ransom."  
>
> No one has ever claimed it means 'to ransom'.

That was Mike Brown's entire basis for misreading the
atonement in Num 31:50 as a redemptive ransom.  He
says it should be rendered as "to pay a ransom."

He related it to Ex. 21:30 which used "kopher" with
the . .   not with the  . .  as in Num 31:50 as Lev. 17:11
     .



> Therefore, Numbers 31:50 is describing an atonement, without blood.
>
> You have a bit same kind of logic than TA with "Satan being bound"[sic].
> The word used doesn't affect the interpretation of the verse. The folks
> were doing against the commandment in Lev. 17:11.

How can you possibly understand the text if you think
that G-d's choice of words doesn't affect the verse?  Why would
G-d use the word for atonement if He meant "ransom?"


I don't recall a "Satan being bound" quote.  Perhaps you mean
when the impulse to transgress will be suppressed?

R