HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Rabbinic Gymnastics
Date: 13 Oct 92 12:17:01 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/18.0 - Midrash, Denver CO

To: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu

 RAL> Date: 11 Oct 92 05:04:39 GMT
 RAL> Message-ID: <9210101059.AA01848@aplpy.jhuapl.edu>

          -=> Quoting Robert A. Levene to Bill Carlson <=-

 BC> I'm still waiting to hear why a Midrash that calls The-Messiah by
 BC> the VERY NAME OF HASHEM, (not a 'form' of the Name, nor a name
 BC> 'qualified' by the verse in Tanakh; but a Name 'supported' by the
 BC> verse in Tanakh), can exist in recognised Rabbinic lit.!

 RAL> I'm going to give you a Jewish response: "Why not?"

     So I'm going to give you another 'Jewish repsonse': Why not-not?

 RAL> Please cite the halacha which forbids a person from using a name
 RAL> of G-d in his name.

     Sorry, that is not the question you were asked.  The question is
     NOT that one has a composite, nor a form, nor as included in their
     name, -the NAME of HaShem; BUT: THAT THE MIDRASH CALLS MESSIAH THE
     VERY NAME [Y-H-V-H] OF HASHEM!  It says of Messiah:
                    Y-H-V-H IS HIS NAME
                          IT DOES >NOT< SAY:
                    Y-H-V-H Tzidkiyahu is His Name
                          ONLY, refers to this in Tanakh as the proof
                          that:
                    Y-H-V-H IS HIS NAME!
      NOT a "form", not a "composite", not even two words together.
      SIMPLY A STATEMENT in the Midrash, to a direct question: What is
      His Name? ... His Name is Y-H-V-H
           The Same thing the Zohar has to say on the Metatron - The
           Angel of HaShem - a Tzimtzim.  As the Amsterdam version of
           Zohar, {a fully recognised and accepted version by Orthodox
           Judaism}, has to say on the Second Light of the One Light
           HaShem.  As the Midrashim in various places conclude, and as
           Targum Jonathan speaks of the Memra of HaShem.  Truly:
                              HaMashiach HaShem.
           And by Ruach HaKodesh we KNOW HIM!  And His Name is Y'shua!
                           Y'shua Mashiach HaShem!

... 012 Y'shua Mashiach HaShem! 210      
--  
Bill Carlson - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Proof that Judaism is based on rejecting Jesus
Date: 11 Oct 1992 03:06:44 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


RL> Then put together a summary post on the topic.  Call it
>> "Proof that Judaism today is built around rejecting Jesus" and
>> put the highlights there.

> I don't save these things.  But you've read it -- you just did it
> with your eyes close and your fingers in your ears.

No need to repost.  Just summarize.  I'll make it easier.  Here
are some hypotheses which are IMHO totally bogus, but which
appear on alt.messianic with some regularity.  Go ahead
and fill in the blanks.


1.  Many great sages accepted Jesus, but for their own
    nefarious reasons, chose to cover up the evidence.

Proof:



2.  The fundamentals of Judaism were tailor-made to rule
    out Christianity, not non-Jewish religion in general.

Proof:



3.  Jews who reject Christianity do so not out of differences
    in tenets, but because they hate Jesus.

Proof:



4.  It is acceptable for Jews to be atheists or accept
    the tenets of any religion except Christianity.

Proof:


5.  It is impossible for any intellectually honest, open-minded
    person to reject Christianity after studying it, therefore those
    who reject it must be intellectually dishonest, closed-minded,
    stupid, or possessed by Satan.

Proof:



Rob

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: pab1@quads.uchicago.edu (paul andrew braier)
Subject: Re: Proof that Judaism is based on rejecting Jesus
Reply-To: pab1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 08:26:46 GMT

Actually, the proof is very simple. Here it goes...

Start with the statement:

    Vegetarianism is based on rejecting toads as food.

Now this statement is obviously true. Next, make the substitutions
'Judaism' for 'Vegetarianism' and 'toads as food' for 'Jesus.'
This completes the proof.

I'm so glad I could help out.

Paul Braier

-----------------------
Paul A. Braier
pab1@quads.uchicago.edu
From: dah@tko.vtt.fi (David Harwood)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Out Of Context Zohar Passage Clarified
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:31:48 GMT
Organization: VTT

In article <Bw0EE6.Mo1@cs.vu.nl> xerox@cs.vu.nl (J. A. Durieux) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.194159.25806@ousrvr.oulu.fi> dah@tko.vtt.fi (David Harwood) writes:
>>It is no longer clear that this is an 'interpolation' according to one of
>>the most renown Jewish academic scholars, G. Vermes, who has changed his
>>mind about this recently.)
>
>Is this *the* Vermes, the one who also has published translations of Qumran
>texts?  Do you have a reference on this?  (Or is he on the net?)
>
>Please answer by email as well, since I am about to go abroad for some
>time, and Usenet messages will be gone before I return.
>
>						      Biep.

\\\\\\\\\\
Yes - this is *the* Vermes, very renown Jewish scholar of ancient Judaism
and Christianity, at Oxford, editor of a prominent scholarly journal devoted
to studies of ancient Jewish writings. I also seem to recall reading his
article in the J. Jewish Studies. I read a current article, maybe 3 or
4 years ago.

D.H.
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Rabbinic Gymnastics
Date: 15 Oct 1992 08:21:19 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu



> RAL> Please cite the halacha which forbids a person from using a name
> RAL> of G-d in his name.

Bill Carlson:

>     Sorry, that is not the question you were asked.  The question is
>     NOT that one has a composite, nor a form, nor as included in their
>     name, -the NAME of HaShem; BUT: THAT THE MIDRASH CALLS MESSIAH THE
>     VERY NAME [Y-H-V-H] OF HASHEM!


It is the question.  In an earlier message, reposted in 
<LJMORLY.92Oct4133130@polaris.utu.fi> around 4 October, you were quoted:

BC> [Midrash Echa (1:51):]...What is the Name of King Messiah?    To this
BC> answered Rabbi Abba bar Kahana: HaShem is His Name, for it is written:
BC> 'This is the Name whereby He shall be called: HaShemZidkenu'. {NOTE:
BC> HaShem/YHVH is His Name?  ...yet none only created may take His Name!}

In your note, you asserted that that none only created may take G-d's
name, so the issue does revolve around the permissiblity of using the
tetragrammaton as a name.  Please either support or retract your
assertion.

Rob

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: xerox@cs.vu.nl (J. A. Durieux)
Subject: Re: Out Of Context Zohar Passage Clarified
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:51:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.194159.25806@ousrvr.oulu.fi> dah@tko.vtt.fi (David Harwood) writes:
>It is no longer clear that this is an 'interpolation' according to one of
>the most renown Jewish academic scholars, G. Vermes, who has changed his
>mind about this recently.)

Is this *the* Vermes, the one who also has published translations of Qumran
texts?  Do you have a reference on this?  (Or is he on the net?)

Please answer by email as well, since I am about to go abroad for some
time, and Usenet messages will be gone before I return.

						      Biep.
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Chabad  (was Re: Very Old Question For Rob Levene)
Date: 7 Oct 1992 23:29:17 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Three things relating to Chabad:

1.
( Correction:  I wrote:
(
(  >> My friends in Chabad inform me that the Rebbe is alive, and even
(  >> addressed his community this past Rosh Hashana...
(
(  He didn't actually give an address, but he appeared before the community.

2.

> Ma'ariv August 7, 1992 / Chet b'Av Tashna"v  by Menachem Rahat.

[quoting the 'nafal l'lo chayim' article]


Thanks.  I'll forward the post to a Chabad friend of mine and see what
the real story is.


3.

I'd like Harvey Smith to respond to this post
from 25 August or thereabouts.


---
Subject: (old) Question For Rob Levene
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

Harvey Smith writes:

> To: Daniel Leavitt
> DL=>Thought I would interject a question for you.  Have you seen a 
> DL=>book entitled, "You Take Jesus, I'll Take God"? [...]  I have 
> DL=>read the book and have not found one legitimate reason not to 
> DL=>beleive the Yeshua is the Messiah. 
>
> Yup thats for sure.  This book was published several years ago by the 
> Chabad house, Lubavitchers.

Where did you get that?  I thought it was from Hamorah Press, in California.


>  I discussed their book at length at a Chabad 
>  house in New Orleans

How long was your discussion.  With whom did you discuss it?
If you don't remember names, a description will do.  What
do you look like?


> during a "Ruach" National Jewish conference there.  We 
> were invited to Chabad,

When was this conference?

Who invited you, or did you just walk in?


> and had an amicable conversation,

In what way was it amicable?


> and shared Yeshua with them.  
>
>They were alarmed that i an orthodox jew would believe in Yeshua.

How did you detect their alarm?


[...]

R

-------


Rob
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Zohar thread: Reason for Anonymity
Date: 14 Oct 1992 20:50:33 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Forwarding from my friend...

------

Rob has asked me to post why I choose to maintain anonymity.

My experience has been that missionaries are unethical people and
evangelical messianics are among the worst.  They use every possible
means in their attempts to convert Jews.  I routinely see posts like
"Rabbi Berel Wein says: [something they use to justify their
theology]," knowing that Rabbi Wein would wince in disgust if he knew
how his words were being warped.  I don't want to see my words being
twisted by the likes of Mr. Carlson, or for that matter, my name being
associated with him in any way.

I also think that Rob has done an excellent job here and don't care to
dilute his efforts.  I'm content to channel my input through him.

In any case, my name and position is unimportant.  What's important is
that alt.messianic's readers are informed so that they can do their
own research and make their own informed decisions.  I think that it
would be a terrible shame if they took Mr. Carlson's deceptive posts
as truth simply because no one chose to expose him for what he is: a
Christian missionary.  I applaud Rob's efforts here and will aid him
when I am able.

Thank you.

-------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: Very Old question for Rob Levene
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 8 Oct 92 10:12:04

In article <1992Oct05.202224.35571@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
> In article <1992Oct2.084714.18025@pbs.org>, btiffany@pbs.org writes:

> |> Next question:  Who cares?  Nobody's claiming that MJ's adhere to Rabbinism,
> |> which essentially is the rejection of Yeshua in favor of a sort of
> |> mystical humanistic system of works righteousness which runs contrary to
> |> the Spirit of Torah.
> |> 
> What exactly do you claim is contrary to the spirit of Torah?

> (a) mystical?
> (b) humanistic?
> (c) works righteousness?

> Actually, although Judaism has both mystical and rationalistic
> elements, from my perspective it is less mystical than Christianity.
> But what is wrong with (b) or (c)?

The Spirit of Torah is the Holy Spirit of God. God is not mystical and
definitely not humanistic. Humanism is an ideology in which God has 
no place. And how could anyone think of being or becoming righteous 
by one's own works ? God is so powerfull compared to us that whatever 
we do is almost nothing in his eyes. Trying to reach God by one's own 
good (?) works is the same as trying to swim from California to Hawaii.
Good swimmers make it further than poor, but eventually all drown.

> |> 2) Rejection of Yeshua is the effect of Rabbinic principles which were
> |> designed to produce that effect.

> Please post one of the "Rabbinic principles" which you claim was *designed*
> to produce the effect of rejecting Jesus. 

Hillel Markowitz just did that.

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: (old) Question for Rob Levene
Date: 11 Oct 1992 01:58:36 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

RL>> Think of "Toldot Yeshu' in context: an oppressed people coping with
>> medieval Church persecution by making an internal satire of their
>> oppressor's faith.  Since those who persecuted Jews obviously weren't
>> True Christians (right?), then "Toldot Yeshu" couldn't be making fun
>> of Christianity, and there's no cause for concern.

BT> I understand your point, and yes, they weren't Christians, but the
> end result is that what true Christians believe is satirized.  So,
> while I understand how it came to pass, I still find such satire
> offensive.

Bill Carlson used expressions like "NO HUMOR ABOUT IT," "putrid," and
"indefensible" to describe Toldot Yeshu.  I don't understand all this
righteous indignation if the religion being satirized wasn't True
Christianity.

Should the writers of Toldot Yeshu have dropped their quills in a fit
of political correctness and said "Y'know, maybe these guys who kill
Jews in the name of Jesus aren't True Christians, and perhaps we'll
hurt the feelings of their righteous descendents a thousand years from
now?"

R
From: hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Very Old question for Rob Levene
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:30:49 GMT
Organization: AT&T Federal Systems

In article <LJMORLY.92Oct8101204@polaris.utu.fi> ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen) writes:
>In article <1992Oct05.202224.35571@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct2.084714.18025@pbs.org>, btiffany@pbs.org writes:
>
>
>> |> 2) Rejection of Yeshua is the effect of Rabbinic principles which were
>> |> designed to produce that effect.
>
>> Please post one of the "Rabbinic principles" which you claim was *designed*
>> to produce the effect of rejecting Jesus. 
>
>Hillel Markowitz just did that.

To clarify this statement which gives the wrong impression, I
posted a translation of the RAMBAM's Chapter's 11
and 12 Hilchos Melachim from the Mishne Tora.  Any claim that it
was "designed" to produce the effect of rejecting y"shu, shabtai
tzvi, or the great pumpkin is totally false.  It is part of an
analysis of the Torah which preexisted xianity and whose principles
have the effect of denying false messiahs.

This article was posted on s.c.j and was originally published by
Chabad.  I will repeat the header text.



            The Laws Concerning Mashiach

        Chapters 11 & 12 of Hilchos Melachim
        from the Mishneh Torah of the Rambam

              Published by:

                Sichos In English
                  788 Eastern Parkway
            Brooklyn, New York 11213
            (718)778-5436; FAX: (718)735-4139 

>
>- Laura
>--
>Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
>Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.

Torah Judaism is a relationship with Hashem

____________________________________________________________________
| Hillel Markowitz    |  Said the fox to the fish, join me ashore  |
| H_Markowitz@att.com |  The fish are the Jews, Torah is the water |
|_____________________|____________________________________________|
From: stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: The Harvest.
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:22:01 GMT
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department

hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes:

>Has anyone ever read this book?  One part tells of how during while the
>church is being persecuted, during a time of anti-Semetism, Jews will
>seek refuge among Christians, and how that there will be a synthesis of 
>the natural seed of Abraham, and the spiritual seed.  

I remember this book causing quite a stir in late '89, early '90.
I was so impressed with it that I bought extra copies and gave them
away to friends. The author, Rick Joyner, was intimately involved with
the Kansas City Fellowship and the "Prophetic Movement"; I lost track of
Joyner and the movement in general around the time John Wimber mediated
the Kansas City dispute. But I seem to recall asking Mike Brown about them
a few years ago and getting a tentatively positive response.
_______________________________________________________________________________

steven stovall
stovall@exeter.cs.ucla.edu
(310) 825-7307
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: Rabbinic Gymnastics
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:35:24

In article <9210150211.AA22292@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
> > BC> I'm still waiting to hear why a Midrash that calls The-Messiah by
> > BC> the VERY NAME OF HASHEM, (not a 'form' of the Name, nor a name
> > BC> 'qualified' by the verse in Tanakh; but a Name 'supported' by the
> > BC> verse in Tanakh), can exist in recognised Rabbinic lit.!
> >
> > RAL> I'm going to give you a Jewish response: "Why not?"
> >
> >     So I'm going to give you another 'Jewish repsonse': Why not-not?

> The burden of proof is upon Bill Carlson to produce either

> 1) a halacha forbidding a person from using the tetragrammaton as a name, or
> 2) proof that being named with the tetragrammaton means that one is G-d

Tell me, why do you (we) use the form 'Hashem' in the first place...

> What about the next few sentences where the messiah's name is
> given as "Menachem" or the aggada that the messiah was born
> on 9 Av?

There are many secret names for the Messiah, like Shiloh, Yinnon, Mimra,... 
About Yeshua being born on tisha b'Av, I don't know... ;-)

> How about the Christian gymnastics to explain why Jesus wasn't
> named Immanuel?

How about the Rabbinic gymnastics to explain the "context" for Is. 7:14:
first the king meets a girl who is pregnant, then marries her and
then the prophet's wife gives the son the name Immanuel, of whom we 
have no records anywhere...

Immanuel means 'God with us', just as from Is. 9:5 (9:6) we find other
ways to call Him: 'Wonderfull Councellor', 'Mighty God', 'Everlasting
Father', 'Prince of Peace'. 

> >     Sorry, that is not the question you were asked.  The question is
> >     NOT that one has a composite, nor a form, nor as included in their
> >     name, -the NAME of HaShem; BUT: THAT THE MIDRASH CALLS MESSIAH THE
> >     VERY NAME [Y-H-V-H] OF HASHEM!  It says of Messiah:
> >                    Y-H-V-H IS HIS NAME

> You still haven't said why this implies that the messiah is G-d.
> If that were the intent, the midrash could simply have said
> that he would be G-d.  Instead it goes through a series of 
> symbolic names for the messiah which describe his character
> and deeds.

RaDaK (R. David Kimchi, also called Jarchi) says the contemporaries of
the Messiah will call him El (God), because His origins are from ancient,
from the days of eternity... Don't you think it would be avodat zara to
call someone GOD without a good reason ?

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Very Old question for Rob Levene
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:05:27 GMT
Organization: University of Turku

In article <9210101500.AA02421@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
> Bruce Tiffany writes:
> RL >>OK, let's rephrase.  The term "good" is too vague:
> >>    "The only authentic Jew is a Christian Jew."  Well?
> >
> > I'd still say you sound like Tom Albrecht, and I'd still disagree.

> Great.  Since you disagree, please tell me who are
> the authentic Jews who reject Christianity?

Rob, Hillel, Paul, Dana, Yuval, ...

> > How about this one: "The only authentic Jew is a Rabbinic Jew."  Well?

> Accurate.

Please elaborate. Are you saying atheist Jews are not authentic Jews ?

> My first premise is the assertion that accepting Jesus makes one a
> Christian, therefore "Messianic Jews" are Christians.  Is this wrong?
> ( Don't answer with "they're completed/fulfilled Jews."  The question is
>  "Are they Christians?" )

Sure. No one ever claimed MJs aren't Christians, just that the label
"Christian" has such a burden of different memories and Gentile traditions.

> >  Biblical Christianity is not a different
> > religion from Biblical Judaism.  But it certainly is a different religion
> > from Rabbinic Judaism, and RJ's want us to believe that Rabbinic Judaism
> > is the only Judaism.

> 2. What forms of non-Christian "Biblical Judaism" exist today?

:-)  Yahadut Hatorah, for example. (At least they claim to represent it.)
BTW what do you think about the issue that R. Ovadiah Yosef and R. Eliezer 
Shach are ready to give Golan to Syria ? (This was in Israeline some 
time ago.)

[rest of the stuff deleted]

- Laura
--
Rabbinic Judaism is a relationship with Rabbis,
Messianic Judaism is a relationship with the Messiah Yeshua.
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Out Of Context Zohar Passage Clarified
Date: 15 Oct 1992 20:26:25 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu




I said:
>> Go ahead, post some examples of Jews whose hatred was such that they
>> nefariously altered texts and promulgated falsehoods.  If you do have
>> examples, let's see them, or at least pointers to them.  If you don't,
>> then why believe that it happened?

xerox@cs.vu.nl (J.A. Durieux) writes:

> I don't know if this counts, but after a Xian has posted in s.c.j.,
> there is generally a flurry of warning messages that one cannot trust
> Xians,

That's either being cautious or paranoid, but does not
illustrate intentional alteration of texts.

>  that they have hidden agendas, that - even though the question
> currently posed sounds innocent enough - the only thing the poster
> wants is convert uneducated Jews,

Again, this is either caution or paranoia, but does not 
illustrate intentional alteration of texts.

> that Xians aren't monotheistic,

Relative to a Jewish understanding of monotheism.


>  that Xianity teaches that people are worth less than scum (whatever
> that may be, but I suppose it's meant to be something of little
> value), etc.

I don't recall seeing anything like this.  Please send me the post.


> I suppose this is evidence enough.

All you've said is that many Jews are unenamored by Christianity,
which is a true statement.  How do you derive other behavior from this?


> Disclaimer:  I am far from saying a significant portion of the Jews does
> such things!  I only recognise that it happens, just like the original
> author did (actually, he specifically only *supposed* it happened).

If you recognize that it happens, please tell me where.

Rob