From: btiffany@pbs.org
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Very Old question for Rob Levene
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:23:49 GMT
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

From: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: Very Old question for Rob Levene
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:22:24 GMT

This was supposed to be old questions for Rob Levene, not Rob Strom.  When
are you going to answer the old questions I asked *you*?

>> 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?

Yes.  In the New Age sense, not the Biblical sense (divine spark, we can
make ourselves better, and all that).

>(b) humanistic?

Yes.

>(c) works righteousness?

Yes.

>Actually, although Judaism has both mystical and rationalistic
>elements, from my perspective it is less mystical than Christianity.

I could've been clearer, I guess.  The mystery of Tanakh was the plan God
had for pulling off our redemption (part of the reason it was a mystery
was to keep Shatan in the dark about it).  It's still a mystery to you,
but that's your fault, not HaShem's.  The mystical part of Rabbinism is that
New Age (really old Babylonian) twist.  It's nothing new.

By the way, if you want to argue about this with me, I'll tell you right up
front you can save your breath.  This is getting into a spiritual matter which
a person who only sees things intellectually cannot comprehend or grasp.  I
also would not argue with a blind man about whether the color of the sky is
blue or yellow.  It's plain enough for me to see.

>But what is wrong with (b) or (c)?

For you to ask, you must not know what they are.  What is humanism, Rob?
I don't suppose you'd be asking what's wrong with the Humanist Religion if
you'd read The Humanist Manifesto II.  (From another post of yours I get the
impression you confuse it with humanitarianism.  I didn't say there was any-
thing wrong with humanitarianism and helping one's fellow man.)  And I thought
you were opposed to Jews adopting a "different religion".  What do you
think humanism is?

>> 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.

Well, for example (and thanks to Hillel for doing the typing for me), from
Hilchos Melachim, chapters 11 and 12:

************************************************************************

3. One should not entertain the notion that the King Mashiach must work
miracles and wonders, bring about new phenomena within the world,
resurrect the dead, or perform other similar deeds. This is
[definitely] not true.

[...]

"Jesus of Nazareth who aspired to be the Mashiach and was executed by
the court was also spoken of in Daniel's prophecies [Daniel 11:14],
"The renegades among your people shall exalt themselves in an attempt
to fulfill the vision, but they shall stumble."

"Can there be a greater stumbling block than [Christianity]?  All the
prophets spoke of Moshiach as the redeemer of Israel and their savior,
who would gather their dispersed ones and strengthen their [observance
of] the mitzvos. In contrast [the founder of Christianity] caused the
Jews to be slain by the sword, their remnants to be scattered and
humiliated, the Torah to be altered, and the majority of the world to
err and serve a god other than the L-rd."

************************************************************************

Well, was that not designed to cause people not to believe Yeshua is Mashiach?

How about the liturgical curse?

>>>Use of the term Judaism to denote what I believe is more accurate,
>>>since placing Christianity within "Judaism" makes the
>>>term "Judaism" meaningless.
>>
>> Only if Judaism is characterized by rejection of Yeshua would it take away
>> the meaning of Judaism.  This is true for Rabbinic Judaism, not
>> Biblical Judaism.
> 
>No.

Yes.

>It's because Christianity differs from Judaism in dozens of essential
>ways, not just over who the Messiah was.  Every Jewish believer
>in Jesus whom I've met has also changed each of these dozens of
>essential beliefs to conform to the Christian understanding when
>he/she converted to Christianity.  That's why it's misleading
>to call such an individual anything other than a "Christian
>convert from Judaism".

I've already said Messianic Judaism differs from Rabbinic Judaism.  Certainly
a "convert" from Rabbinic to Messianic Judaism abandons many Rabbinic
beliefs, because they are wrong.  It doesn't mean he's not a Jew.

You can disagree with the rabbis (the "sages") about who the Messiah is,
and still be a Jew.

>Please summarize.

I'm not doing your legwork for you.  Ask Rob Levene -- he keeps long files
on all of us in hopes he kind find material to use against us.

>>>To prove your assertion, you would have to demonstrate that
>>>rejection of Jesus is unique.  The reality is that Judaism
>>>rejects all the other religions, too.

>> Again your falacious assumption that acceptance of Yeshua automatically
>> makes one a practitioner of a "different religion" -- the auto-rejection
>> Harvey was talking about.  But you are wrong, and no such "proof" is
>> required.  We're talking about RJ's rejecting the *Jewish* Messiah,
>> Yeshua.  Yeshua is not Southern Baptist.

>Jews have rejected other Jewish Messiah-claimants, not just Jesus.
>If he didn't restore the Jewish nation, he's not the Messiah.

Once again you assume He is dead.  I tell you He is alive, and He is coming
back as King.

>Christians had to come up with several ways around this:
>(1) The belief that Jesus isn't really dead,  (isn't this "mystical"?)
>(2) the belief that Jesus will come back,
>(3) a new definition of "restore" and "the Jewish nation".

1) You mean the Pharisees had to come up with the idea that He really was
dead, despite all the witnesses who saw Him alive.

2) The Bible says so.

3) I only know what I read in the Bible.  That's where I get my idea of
"restore" from.  If you're getting yours from anywhere else -- Talmud, for
example -- then I suggest that you have the new definitions.

>It's (1) - (3) above that we call the "different religion".

Among other things, it's 1-3 above that makes Rabbinic Judaism a "different
religion" from Biblical Judaism.

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